An international team of researchers has unearthed evidence shedding new light on the ancient migration of Homo sapiens into eastern Asia around 45,000 years ago.
The findings, detailed in a study published in Nature Ecology & Evolution, uncover what is said to be a treasure trove of cultural and technological innovations in the Shiyu site in northern China, marking what is considered a significant moment in human history (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-023-02294-4). According to the researchers, the Shiyu site provides a glimpse into the unique convergence of cultural behaviors and technological advancements of our ancient ancestors, and challenges conventional beliefs about the dispersal of Homo sapiens populations. Key revelations from the research include: Shiyu now stands as the oldest and easternmost site of its kind, showcasing Homo sapiens’ presence in eastern Asia around 45,000 years ago as demonstrated by radiocarbon and luminescence dating led by Professor Jia-Fu Zhang of Peking University. This discovery reshapes our understanding of the timing and routes of human migration in the region. Shiyu exhibits what is described as a remarkable array of technological advancements, including stone tools crafted using Levallois and Volumetric Blade Reduction methods. Additionally, the long-distance transport of obsidian from sources hundreds of kilometers away indicates advanced resource procurement strategies. Shiyu showcases a cultural blend characterized by a mix of Upper Palaeolithic innovations such as blade reduction and symbolic tools, Middle Palaeolithic traits such as Levallois reduction, and traditional elements of Chinese core-flake industries. The discovery of unique artifacts, such as a shaped graphite disc and bone tools, illustrates, it is claimed, a rich cultural adaptation. The discovery, say the study authors, presented a different view of human migration and cultural evolution than previous studies of the Shiyu location. “The Shiyu findings challenge previous notions of early human migration and cultural development in Eastern Asia,” said study author Michael Petraglia.
Picture and Captions: https://news.griffith.edu.au/2024/01/19/shiyu-discovery-reveals-eastern-asias-early-human-migrations/
Late last year the ancient site of Gunung Padang in Indonesia garnered worldwide media attention after the publication of a paper in the peer-reviewed journal Archaeological Prospection that made the astonishing claim that the site could the world’s oldest pyramid – and not just by a little bit: the paper suggested that it could be 28,000 years old (for reference, the Giza pyramids in Egypt are estimated to be ‘only’ 5,000 years old).
The claim wasn’t actually that new – we wrote about it back in 2018 – but the fact that it had now been published in a peer-reviewed journal lent a great more deal of credibility to it. And given Gunung Padang had been featured in Graham Hancock’s huge Netflix hit documentary series Ancient Apocalypse the year previous, a lot more people probably recognized the location the news articles were talking about. Orthodox archaeologists and skeptics were quick to hit back against the claim, and those objections also made worldwide news (e.g. New York Times, Smithsonian Magazine). And now, the criticisms seem to have won the day (at least for now). as the journal has now officially retracted the paper. According to the retraction notice: The above article, published online on 20 October 2023 in Wiley Online Library, has been retracted by agreement between the journal Editors-in-Chief, Eileen Ernenwein and Gregory Tsokas, and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Following publication of this article, concerns were raised by third parties with expertise in geophysics, archaeology, and radiocarbon dating, about the conclusions drawn by the authors based on the evidence reported. The publisher and the Co-Editors-in-Chief have investigated these concerns and have concluded that the article contains a major error. This error, which was not identified during peer review, is that the radiocarbon dating was applied to soil samples that were not associated with any artifacts or features that could be reliably interpreted as anthropogenic or “man-made.” Therefore, the interpretation that the site is an ancient pyramid built 9000 or more years ago is incorrect, and the article must be retracted. Danny Hilman Natawidjaja responded on behalf of the authors, all of whom disagree with the retraction. The retraction note does not provide the response from the authors, unfortunately (and perhaps unfairly?) However, it can be read at Danny Hilman Natawidjaja’s Facebook page, where it was posted on behalf of all the authors, who “express profound disappointment at the unwarranted retraction”, along with contextual documentation such as the email exchanges leading up to the retraction. Here is full text is reproduced below, along with a link to the contextual documentation: The Unjust Retraction of Groundbreaking Research: A Call for Academic Integrity We, the authors, express profound disappointment at the unwarranted retraction of our paper titled “Geoarchaeological Prospecting of Gunung Padang Buried Pre-Historic Pyramid in West Java, Indonesia,” published in Archaeological Prospection by Wiley on October 20, 2023 (Enclosure # 1). The retraction is solely based on unfounded claims raised by third parties who hold differing opinions and disbelieve in the evidence, analysis, and conclusions (Enclosure # 2). Despite our diligent efforts to address and refute the unfounded claims with robust scientific data (Enclosures #3 & #4), the Wiley team chose to align with the assertions of anonymous individuals. To our knowledge, neither the anonymous third parties nor the Wiley Team has provided conclusive evidence or offered sufficient scientific rationale to substantiate their decision to retract our paper based on an alleged major error (Enclosure #5). Was the decision to retract our paper a severe form of censorship, blatantly disregarding the fundamental principles of scientific inquiry, transparency, and fairness in academic discourse? We urge the academic community, scientific organizations, and concerned individuals to stand with us in challenging this decision and upholding the principles of integrity, transparency, and fairness in scientific research and publishing. As elucidated in our paper and further expounded upon in our correspondence (Enclosure #3), the soil samples extracted from the rock-construction layers, identified as Units 1, 2, and 3, have been unequivocally established as man-made constructions or archaeological features, rather than natural geological formations. These layers are accompanied by numerous small portable artifacts, providing tangible evidence of their anthropogenic origin. Moreover, our interpretation does not simply propose the existence of an ancient pyramid built 9,000 or more years ago but rather suggests the presence of a complex structure comprising three construction-rock layers erected in distinct phases: 1,000 – 2,000 BCE (Unit 1), 5,500 – 6,000 BCE (Unit 2), and 14,000 – 25,000 BCE (Unit 3). For instance, if they dispute the assertion that the rock layers (Unit 1, 2, 3) are man-made structures, they must provide an alternative geological explanation for their shapes, composition, and arrangement. Moreover, the presence of numerous stone artifacts in Units 1, 2, and 3, as evidenced by additional figures provided to them (Enclosure#4), further bolster our arguments. Consequently, the retraction lacks scientific validity, as it overlooks the substantial evidence presented in our paper and correspondence supporting our conclusions. Instead, it disregards this evidence without proper consideration or explanation, effectively ‘burying’ it (Enclosure #5). In light of the aforementioned concerns, we have appended the original article, a given document of the third-party critiques, our correspondence with the Wiley team, additional data, and our response to the retraction notice below. Sincerely The Authors of the Paper (Danny Hilman Natawidjaja, Andang Bachtiar, Bagus Endar B. Nurhandoko, Ali Akbar, Pon Purajatnika, Mudrik R. Daryono, Dadan D. Wardhana, Andri S. Subandriyo, Andi Krisyunianto, Tagyuddin, Budianto Ontowiryo, and Yusuf Maulana)
ENCLOSURES: Can be downloaded at Dropbox Contains:
The Article “Geoarchaeological Prospecting of Gunung Padang Buried Pre-Historic Pyramid in West Java, Indonesia” includes Vast Complementary Figures
Document of Critiques by the Third Parties, provided by the Wiley Team on December 19, 2023
Transcript of Email Correspondences between the Wiley Team and the Authors, including the Author’s rebuttal
Extra figures accompany the authors’ rebuttal on February 5, 2024.
Official Retraction Notice and Author’s Comments.
The controversy over Gunung Padang seems far from settled, with much more debate likely.
The Dordogne region of southern France is home to over 200 caves decorated with colorful Paleolithic art, but little is known about how old it is. Due to its coloration with iron- or manganese-oxide-based material, radiocarbon dating of the art has not been possible, and it has been generally thought to have been created during the Magdalenian Period, which occurred between 12,000 and 17,000 years ago.
Now, a research team from the Center de Recherche et de Restauration des Musées de France has reported the first discovery of black carbon-based art in Dordogne’s Font-de-Gaume cave, portending new opportunities for both radiocarbon dating and reevaluation of existing art in this cave and others throughout the region. The team’s findings, titled “First discovery of charcoal-based prehistoric cave art in Dordogne,” are published in Scientific Reports (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-47652-1). In late February 2020, the team discovered the charcoal-based drawings in the cave’s main galleries. The cave is informally known as “Bison Cave” owing to its 80 depictions of bison, along with others of deer, horses, mammoths, and other images. Animals comprise approximately two-thirds of all the Font-de-Gaume cave’s art, with tectiforms representing the remaining third. While some of the bison are depicted in two or more shades including ranges of black to brown and red to yellow, others are done primarily in black and red, or only black. In 1902, Henri Moissan—who won the 1906 Nobel Prize in Chemistry—used coloring matter samples from the art to determine components of iron and manganese oxide. However, the Font-De-Gaume cave is now a protected UNESCO World Heritage site, and only in very rare cases is sampling by authorities permitted. Because of this, researchers have turned to non-invasive analytical methods. The researchers in this study used both visible-light and infrared photography, superimposition of the visible-light and infrared images, portable X-ray fluorescence (pXRF) and portable micro-Raman spectroscopy to generate their data. These methods revealed carbon-based drawings beneath others known to have been created with pigments of iron and manganese oxide.By superimposing visible-light and infrared images captured from the same vantage point, the team created false color infrared photography (FCIR) images. The camera and filter they used to capture the infrared images permitted radiation wavelength only above 900 nm. Using software to combine these with green and red layers of visible-light images generated FCIR images and enabled differentiation of various materials used in the creation of the images. The use of micro-Raman spectroscopy allowed the team to detect carbon-based compounds within the images, as well as to identify specific mineralogical phases of the iron and manganese oxide-based pigments. This spectroscopy method also made it possible to identify images specifically created with charcoal-black-based compounds as opposed to other carbon-based materials. Looking ahead, the discovery of charcoal-based figures in the Font-de-Gaume cave heralds new opportunities for specific radiocarbon dating, improvement of creation phase knowledge, and perhaps even precise inter-regional comparison.
A team of archaeologists, geologists and historians has found that the Menga dolmen represents one of the greatest engineering feats of the Neolithic. In their study, published in Scientific Reports, the group used new technology to learn more about the stone that was used to create the ancient burial site and to explore how wood and rope would have been used in its construction.
The Menga dolmen is an ancient burial mound located near Antequera, Málaga, Spain. Is usually dated to approximately 5,700 years ago and is one of the largest known megalithic structures to be built in Europe. It was built into the top of a hill using large stones, the largest of which weigh more than 100 tons. In this new effort, the research team took a closer look at the composition of the stones used to build the burial mound, where they came from and how they were transported. To learn more about the makeup of the stones, the research team used petrographic and stratigraphic analysis techniques, which showed that the stones were mostly calcarenites, a type of detrital sedimentary rock. In the modern age, they are known as soft stones due to their fragility. According to the researchers, such a soft type of rock would have been difficult to transport without causing damage—a finding that suggests a certain level of engineering sophistication. Moving and placing such large stones, they concede, would have involved massive planning and engineering, particularly for the capstone, which, as its name implies, was laid across the top of the chamber to serve as a roof. The researchers say it weighs approximately 150 tons. They point out that placing such large rocks would have involved the use of scaffolds and ropes, and transporting them would have required level roads. The research team also states that the burial ground was built in such a way as to point in a desired direction. Its position aligns with nearby mountains in a way that creates complex light patterns inside the chamber. They also found that the early engineers had devised a way to place stones at the edges of the burial chamber in interlocking fashion to channel away water seepage as a means of preventing erosion. More information: José Antonio Lozano Rodríguez et al, The provenance of the stones in the Menga dolmen reveals one of the greatest engineering feats of the Neolithic, Scientific Reports (2023). https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-47423-y
