First ever IceAge engraving of trunked animal

[Big Bad Voodoo]

A 13,000-year-old bone fragment with an engraving of a mammoth or mastodon has been found in Florida.

Scientists believe the etching is the oldest, and only known, example of Ice Age art to depict a proboscidean - or an animal with a trunk - in the Americas...

Read more...

[Ikki]

Mother of all gods!

This is stunning on so many levels. First, anything out of the ordinary in Paleoamerican archaeology has to go through a wealth of extremely rigorous tests, due in no small part to the number of spectacular claims that have fallen to the ground in the past. I have no doubt that we are a long way from consensus on this baby, but the fact that it has passed the laboratory analyses and made its way into publication realm is no small achievement. It's likely to cause bigger controversy than even pre-Clovis sites these days. Indeed, this is a whole new field in Paleoamerican studies - one whose reality has been hoped and wished for, and which may finally have found its Monte Verde, if you will!

Which brings me to my next point. In Europe at this time we see sophisticated and beautiful art and toolmaking, while in the Americas the archaeological record is much sparser and cruder (I'm not nearly well-enough versed in the Terminal Pleistocene record of other parts of the world to extend the comparison). The reasons for this, as least as far as I'm aware, are far from being settled; this artifact is likely to foster theories and debates on this for a long time, hopefully resulting in more investigations - and more finds! No doubt, however, that this unique piece will contribute to the image of the first Americans as equally sophisticated and capable individuals - who, not surprisingly, were as captivated by the behemoths around them as we would have been had they been around today.

Truly a magnificent find. And knowing archaeologists, the fun this will entail has only just begun!

[Blues Girl]

This is very cool! (and not just because it is an ice age find. get it? ice age? cool? Ice? Never mind. lol)

[tipotep]

It on a bone recently found on a Florida beach

I find this abit hard to believe ,

There are hundreds of depictions of proboscideans on cave walls and carved into bones in Europe, but none from America - until now.

Its a bone fragment found on a beach by an amateur fossil hunter hmmm..

How do they know it wasnt transported by the sea and deposited on that beach ?

How do they know that it was "put" there by someone ?

Tip.

[Big Bad Voodoo]

I find this abit hard to believe ,

Its a bone fragment found on a beach by an amateur fossil hunter hmmm..

How do they know it wasnt transported by the sea and deposited on that beach ?

How do they know that it was "put" there by someone ?

Tip.

Truth is, they dont know.

[Robbie333]

Wow, thanks. Very cool indeed.

[Pax Unum]

I find this abit hard to believe ,

Its a bone fragment found on a beach by an amateur fossil hunter hmmm..

How do they know it wasnt transported by the sea and deposited on that beach ?

How do they know that it was "put" there by someone ?

Tip.

From the article...

It was originally found near a location, known as the Old Vero site, where human bones were discovered side-by-side with the bones of extinct Ice Age animals in an excavation from 1913 to 1916.

[tipotep]

Hey Pax , as per your quote ....

It was originally found near a location, known as the Old Vero site, where human bones were discovered side-by-side with the bones of extinct Ice Age animals in an excavation from 1913 to 1916.

See my bold , originally found ?, does this mean it was found , lost and then re-found ?

Near a location - i would like to know what they mean by near , if it was washed up on the beach as the article says , was the Old Vero site on the beach or inland ?

TiP.

[Pax Unum]

Hey Pax , as per your quote ....

See my bold , originally found ?, does this mean it was found , lost and then re-found ?

Near a location - i would like to know what they mean by near , if it was washed up on the beach as the article says , was the Old Vero site on the beach or inland ?

TiP.

I know, it sounds weird the way it's written, I don't why they'd quantify it with 'originally'... 'I' take it to mean it was found near an earlier excavation, so could be related to that site and not 'washed up' on the beach... Just my opinion though.

[tipotep]

I know, it sounds weird the way it's written, I don't why they'd quantify it with 'originally'... 'I' take it to mean it was found near an earlier excavation, so could be related to that site and not 'washed up' on the beach... Just my opinion though.

All good Pax , Thanks for the input .

TiP.