The chance discovery of a rock shelter in the Flinders Ranges has unearthed one of the most important prehistoric sites in Australia.

Key points:

- Dating of artefacts and fossils from Warratyi indicates human settlement between 49,000 and 46,000 years ago

- Timing shows people moved through central Australia and used key technologies such as stone axes and ochre much earlier than previously though

- Archaeological evidence also shows humans lived alongside, and hunted megafauna

- The site, known as Warratyi, shows Aboriginal Australians settled the arid interior of the country around 49,000 years ago — some 10,000 years earlier than previously thought.

The shelter, about 550 kilometres north of Adelaide, also contains the first reliably dated evidence of human interaction with megafauna.

Artefacts excavated at the site also push back the earliest-known dates on the development of key bone and stone axe technologies and the use of ochre in Australia.

Lead author Giles Hamm, a consultant archaeologist and doctoral student at La Trobe University, found the site with local Adnyamathanha elder Clifford Coulthard while surveying gorges in the northern Flinders Ranges.

“Nature called and Cliff walked up this creek bed into this gorge and found this amazing spring surrounded by rock art,” Mr Hamm said.
“A man getting out of the car to go to the toilet led to the discovery of one of the most important sites in Australian pre-history.”

Full report: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-03/rock-shelter-shows-early-aboriginal-settlement-in-arid-australia/7983864

How does this compare with other famous sites such as Lake Mungo and Kow Swamp?

mollwollfumble said:

How does this compare with other famous sites such as Lake Mungo and Kow Swamp?

Aren’t they just burials? This cave is an actual habitation site with lots of artefacts etc.

the abc video link described a needle like tool . evidence of ocre usage and a megfauna bone.

monkey skipper said:

the abc video link described a needle like tool . evidence of ocre usage and a megfauna bone.

ochre, yeah.

My brain thought the dating was already back to around 60,000 years ago. I must be mistaken. In this area (Western Victoria) I think we have around 10,000 years ago. Back to the last Ice Age. Must have been miserably cold living here then.

Ah, Lake Mungo is still sitting on 42,000. Kow Swamp around 13,000. According to a quick online search.

Bubblecar said:

mollwollfumble said:

How does this compare with other famous sites such as Lake Mungo and Kow Swamp?

Aren’t they just burials? This cave is an actual habitation site with lots of artefacts etc.

Jeez. Don’t you have to be living there to be buried there?

and older than thought is a wrong way to put it when the header says oldest known.
Lots of people think that aborigines have been here longer than what is actually known.
To have established habitation over a period long enough to leave thousands of artifacts such a long way from where it is thought they entered Australia, also leads one to imagine that it could have been a good while before they actually reached the area.

The problem with finding older aboriginal habitation evidence is that most evidence has been eroded away or very disturbed on open sites.
Finds such as this give greater creedence to other postulations that aboriginal people have been here longer than 60,000 years.
These finds not only prove that aboriginals were using tools but that it was also likely that such tool use was brought here with them.

buffy said:

Ah, Lake Mungo is still sitting on 42,000. Kow Swamp around 13,000. According to a quick online search.

Yep.

roughbarked said:

buffy said:

Ah, Lake Mungo is still sitting on 42,000. Kow Swamp around 13,000. According to a quick online search.

Yep.

A point of interest to note is that Neanderthal cave paintings only date back as far as 40,800 years. Another point of interest that rock art was what lead them to discover the shelter.

“If you look at the trajectory towards art, we find shell beads, bits of ochre, and ostrich shells carved with geometric designs from about 70,000 to 100,000 years ago” in Africa. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/06/120614-neanderthal-cave-paintings-spain-science-pike/

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-11/world%27s-oldest-known-ground-edge-stone-axe-fragments-found/7401728

I sincerely doubt that early aborigines didn’t bring ground edge tool technology with them. It is more likely that such technology was developed earlier than evidence found.

roughbarked said:

“If you look at the trajectory towards art, we find shell beads, bits of ochre, and ostrich shells carved with geometric designs from about 70,000 to 100,000 years ago” in Africa. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/06/120614-neanderthal-cave-paintings-spain-science-pike/

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-11/world%27s-oldest-known-ground-edge-stone-axe-fragments-found/7401728

I sincerely doubt that early aborigines didn’t bring ground edge tool technology with them. It is more likely that such technology was developed earlier than evidence found.

It can be argued that tool use development was defined by the environment. If so and Australian aborigines developed such technology earlier, then the technology could prove to be Australias oldest known export.

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

“If you look at the trajectory towards art, we find shell beads, bits of ochre, and ostrich shells carved with geometric designs from about 70,000 to 100,000 years ago” in Africa. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/06/120614-neanderthal-cave-paintings-spain-science-pike/

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-11/world%27s-oldest-known-ground-edge-stone-axe-fragments-found/7401728

I sincerely doubt that early aborigines didn’t bring ground edge tool technology with them. It is more likely that such technology was developed earlier than evidence found.

It can be argued that tool use development was defined by the environment. If so and Australian aborigines developed such technology earlier, then the technology could prove to be Australias oldest known export.

But, he said, “the technology did not spread across Australia with humans as the earliest axes in the southern two-thirds of Australia date to about 3,000 years ago”.
from the above link.
Should say that this statement is malarky because I have in my possession the ooryurka, found in southern Australia. The only other known ooryurkas were dated at 5,000 years from FNQ.

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

“If you look at the trajectory towards art, we find shell beads, bits of ochre, and ostrich shells carved with geometric designs from about 70,000 to 100,000 years ago” in Africa. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/06/120614-neanderthal-cave-paintings-spain-science-pike/

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-11/world%27s-oldest-known-ground-edge-stone-axe-fragments-found/7401728

I sincerely doubt that early aborigines didn’t bring ground edge tool technology with them. It is more likely that such technology was developed earlier than evidence found.

It can be argued that tool use development was defined by the environment. If so and Australian aborigines developed such technology earlier, then the technology could prove to be Australias oldest known export.

But, he said, “the technology did not spread across Australia with humans as the earliest axes in the southern two-thirds of Australia date to about 3,000 years ago”.
from the above link.
Should say that this statement is malarky because I have in my possession the ooryurka, found in southern Australia. The only other known ooryurkas were dated at 5,000 years from FNQ.

It should also be noted that the above ooryurkas found in FNQ were made of ground and polished hornfels slate. Whereas the one I have was shaped by pecking, from basalt and had only one ground and polished edge.

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

It can be argued that tool use development was defined by the environment. If so and Australian aborigines developed such technology earlier, then the technology could prove to be Australias oldest known export.

But, he said, “the technology did not spread across Australia with humans as the earliest axes in the southern two-thirds of Australia date to about 3,000 years ago”.
from the above link.
Should say that this statement is malarky because I have in my possession the ooryurka, found in southern Australia. The only other known ooryurkas were dated at 5,000 years from FNQ.

It should also be noted that the above ooryurkas found in FNQ were made of ground and polished hornfels slate. Whereas the one I have was shaped by pecking, from basalt and had only one ground and polished edge.

http://researchonline.jcu.edu.au/27492/2/27492-horsfall-1987-thesis-volume-2.pdf

Morning pilgrims, warm and sunny in Brissy, supposed to get to 29 today.

Peak Warming Man said:

Morning pilgrims

rofl

roughbarked said:

Should say that this statement is malarky because I have in my possession the ooryurka, found in southern Australia. The only other known ooryurkas were dated at 5,000 years from FNQ.

Well, there lies the problem. It’s known to you, but not to them. Hand it over, rb ;)

Speedy said:

roughbarked said:

Should say that this statement is malarky because I have in my possession the ooryurka, found in southern Australia. The only other known ooryurkas were dated at 5,000 years from FNQ.

Well, there lies the problem. It’s known to you, but not to them. Hand it over, rb ;)

I did show it to the only person who ever studied the ooyurka.

“Yes this is an ooyurka. It looks as if it is made of vesicular basalt. Many of the ones that I have studied are made from hornfels slate, have highly polished flat edges in many instances and on some have waxy residues. I did an analysis of use wear for my Masters of arts at James Cook University and a copy of the thesis should be there. I attach a paper I wrote in 1996 for the journal Antiquity.
Cheers, Richard”

—
Dr Richard Cosgrove

roughbarked said:

Speedy said:

roughbarked said:

Should say that this statement is malarky because I have in my possession the ooryurka, found in southern Australia. The only other known ooryurkas were dated at 5,000 years from FNQ.

Well, there lies the problem. It’s known to you, but not to them. Hand it over, rb ;)

I did show it to the only person who ever studied the ooyurka.

“Yes this is an ooyurka. It looks as if it is made of vesicular basalt. Many of the ones that I have studied are made from hornfels slate, have highly polished flat edges in many instances and on some have waxy residues. I did an analysis of use wear for my Masters of arts at James Cook University and a copy of the thesis should be there. I attach a paper I wrote in 1996 for the journal Antiquity.
Cheers, Richard”

—
Dr Richard Cosgrove

That’s much bigger than I imagined. How did you find it?

roughbarked said:

Speedy said:

roughbarked said:

Should say that this statement is malarky because I have in my possession the ooryurka, found in southern Australia. The only other known ooryurkas were dated at 5,000 years from FNQ.

Well, there lies the problem. It’s known to you, but not to them. Hand it over, rb ;)

I did show it to the only person who ever studied the ooyurka.

“Yes this is an ooyurka. It looks as if it is made of vesicular basalt. Many of the ones that I have studied are made from hornfels slate, have highly polished flat edges in many instances and on some have waxy residues. I did an analysis of use wear for my Masters of arts at James Cook University and a copy of the thesis should be there. I attach a paper I wrote in 1996 for the journal Antiquity.
Cheers, Richard”

—
Dr Richard Cosgrove

Dating this tool would be difficult. It was excavated along with a swag of other tools in 1950 on a sand dune in the Murrumbidgee floodplain between Murrami and Stanbridge, just wnw of Leeton. The majority of the finds are in the museum at Whitton but this tool along with others went to Denmark with the lass who assisted my wife’s grandfather in the dig on his property. He started digging when he noticed that people from Leeton were coming out and stealing the sand without his permission. He closed the gate and excavated the site. Bones and tools in abundance were found and the majority were donated to the Whitton museum. Margit took home some samples to Denmark but in her dotage decided that the artifacts should never have been taken from Australia. So she returned them to us in 2001. The polished edge had unfortunately had an inscription engraved uoon it sometime during its absence.
I’ve asked local aboriginal historians and have been told that it would be best left in my hands. There is no record in aboriginal history of such a tool being used in this area. It is the only ooryurka ever to have been found anywhere other than FNQ. It is of far older tool manufacturing skill than the 20 others that have been found and studied. Therfore it is of an earlier time when the area it was deposited in was more rainforest than the semi-arid wasteland that John Oxley first surveyed.

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

Speedy said:

Well, there lies the problem. It’s known to you, but not to them. Hand it over, rb ;)

I did show it to the only person who ever studied the ooyurka.

“Yes this is an ooyurka. It looks as if it is made of vesicular basalt. Many of the ones that I have studied are made from hornfels slate, have highly polished flat edges in many instances and on some have waxy residues. I did an analysis of use wear for my Masters of arts at James Cook University and a copy of the thesis should be there. I attach a paper I wrote in 1996 for the journal Antiquity.
Cheers, Richard”

—
Dr Richard Cosgrove

Dating this tool would be difficult. It was excavated along with a swag of other tools in 1950 on a sand dune in the Murrumbidgee floodplain between Murrami and Stanbridge, just wnw of Leeton. The majority of the finds are in the museum at Whitton but this tool along with others went to Denmark with the lass who assisted my wife’s grandfather in the dig on his property. He started digging when he noticed that people from Leeton were coming out and stealing the sand without his permission. He closed the gate and excavated the site. Bones and tools in abundance were found and the majority were donated to the Whitton museum. Margit took home some samples to Denmark but in her dotage decided that the artifacts should never have been taken from Australia. So she returned them to us in 2001. The polished edge had unfortunately had an inscription engraved uoon it sometime during its absence.
I’ve asked local aboriginal historians and have been told that it would be best left in my hands. There is no record in aboriginal history of such a tool being used in this area. It is the only ooryurka ever to have been found anywhere other than FNQ. It is of far older tool manufacturing skill than the 20 others that have been found and studied. Therfore it is of an earlier time when the area it was deposited in was more rainforest than the semi-arid wasteland that John Oxley first surveyed.

Remember, these people hadn’t heard of a straight edge and had carved this from a bit of basalt before grinding the one flat edge.

Some of the other stone tools found at the site:

Note that one is partway prepared as a hafted axe. Also the stains seen are from very long dead kangaroo fat which has been buried in sand since a or many dust storms precluded their relocation by those who left it behind.

roughbarked said:

Some of the other stone tools found at the site:

Note that one is partway prepared as a hafted axe. Also the stains seen are from very long dead kangaroo fat which has been buried in sand since a or many dust storms precluded their relocation by those who left it behind.

This is an example given to me by an aboriginal historian who survived the great children stealing by his father taking his kids walkabout. It is his representation of how hafting an axe was done. It is all done with local materials.

As for the ooyurka, 20 were found after forests in FNQ were cleared and ploughed. That’s all but then not all of FNQ has been cleared and ploughed, yet.
One was found buried deep in a sand dune thousands of KM south of there in what John Oxley called, “the most inhospitable and uninhabitable place on the planet”.

The one buried down south was far older than the ones found in FNQ. Why haven’t others been found anywhere inbetween?

Another one, not so old. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-04/yeallabidde-cave-dig-unearths-ancient-artefacts/7997288

This is the site the ooyurka was found.

roughbarked said:

This is the site the ooyurka was found.

Nup, that doesn’t work.

Michael V said:

roughbarked said:

This is the site the ooyurka was found.

Nup, that doesn’t work.

Yeah, photobucket is having maintenance. I will show up later.

And in WA too….

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-04/yeallabidde-cave-dig-unearths-ancient-artefacts/7997288

buffy said:

And in WA too….

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-04/yeallabidde-cave-dig-unearths-ancient-artefacts/7997288

Mentioned a couple of posts above.

roughbarked said:

buffy said:

And in WA too….

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-04/yeallabidde-cave-dig-unearths-ancient-artefacts/7997288

Mentioned a couple of posts above.

The interesting thing about thta story was thta it alluded to older records and iy seems from this thta people were in south eastern and south western Australia at similar time lines. So how long were they really here if they were widespread on the mainland around the same time? From memory the Tasmanian aborigine was from older times as well.

Some nerds type teh.. Some others type thta.

>>Jeez. Don’t you have to be living there to be buried there?

If you are living there, you cant be buried there, why? cos you have to be dead to be buried there!

I wonder what diprotodon meat tasted like.

buffy said:

Ah, Lake Mungo is still sitting on 42,000. Kow Swamp around 13,000. According to a quick online search.

Thanks

mollwollfumble said:

I wonder what diprotodon meat tasted like.

Chicken.

roughbarked said:

“If you look at the trajectory towards art, we find shell beads, bits of ochre, and ostrich shells carved with geometric designs from about 70,000 to 100,000 years ago” in Africa. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/06/120614-neanderthal-cave-paintings-spain-science-pike/

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-11/world%27s-oldest-known-ground-edge-stone-axe-fragments-found/7401728

I sincerely doubt that early aborigines didn’t bring ground edge tool technology with them. It is more likely that such technology was developed earlier than evidence found.

I suspect that Australia tends to have the wrong sort of rocks for ground edge tool technology. Overseas, flint, chert, jade and obsidian were largely used. To get anything like that in Australia you have to go to southern Australia for jasper and chalcedony. This was also a problem in places like the Kalahari desert in Africa, the wrong sort of rocks.

poikilotherm said:

mollwollfumble said:

I wonder what diprotodon meat tasted like.

1 000 000 Chickens.

fixed

ChrispenEvan said:

poikilotherm said:

mollwollfumble said:

I wonder what diprotodon meat tasted like.

1 000 000 Chickens.

fixed

there’s a ‘di’ in there, so surely 2 000 000 chickens…

stumpy_seahorse said:

ChrispenEvan said:

poikilotherm said:

1 000 000 Chickens.

fixed

there’s a ‘di’ in there, so surely 2 000 000 chickens…

i’m just happy someone got it.

stumpy_seahorse said:

ChrispenEvan said:

poikilotherm said:

1 000 000 Chickens.

fixed

there’s a ‘di’ in there, so surely 2 000 000 chickens…

So a triceratops would have tasted like 3 000 000 chickens?

mollwollfumble said:

I wonder what diprotodon meat tasted like.

Big wombat steaks.

mollwollfumble said:

roughbarked said:

“If you look at the trajectory towards art, we find shell beads, bits of ochre, and ostrich shells carved with geometric designs from about 70,000 to 100,000 years ago” in Africa. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/06/120614-neanderthal-cave-paintings-spain-science-pike/

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-11/world%27s-oldest-known-ground-edge-stone-axe-fragments-found/7401728

I sincerely doubt that early aborigines didn’t bring ground edge tool technology with them. It is more likely that such technology was developed earlier than evidence found.

I suspect that Australia tends to have the wrong sort of rocks for ground edge tool technology. Overseas, flint, chert, jade and obsidian were largely used. To get anything like that in Australia you have to go to southern Australia for jasper and chalcedony. This was also a problem in places like the Kalahari desert in Africa, the wrong sort of rocks.

There are heaps of rocks suitable for ground edge axes, etc. Virtually any hard rock with a high silica content, like basalt, sandstone, some limestones, etc, plus chert that is very widespread. The Australian Aboriginal has the longest historical record for many activities, yet are generally ignored by European investigators.