Problematic Discoveries

The Western Hemisphere. General term for the Americas following their discovery by Europeans, thus setting them in contradistinction to the Old World of Africa, Europe, and Asia.

Moderators: Minimalist, MichelleH

Re: Problematic Discoveries

Postby Springhead » Sun Mar 19, 2017 3:06 pm

[imImageg][/img][imImageg][/img][imhttp://i410.photobucket.com/albums/pp185/springhead7/774ef48c-8dae-420e-9814-8eca1a9871b3_zpsaqwj99jq.jpgg][/img][imgImage][/img]

The top image shows three Mayan artifacts. On the right is a serpent head not unlike the heads visible at the stair bottoms on the Castillo at Chichen Itza. On the bottom a face and on the left a tigre. Above in the image is a Peruvian artifact, a lizard on a jar lip.

The lower two images are the "doble yo" from San Agustin, Colombia. The artifact, according to local archaeologists, represents a kind of ego/alter ego subject matter common to that area.

I came across these and other artifacts about thirty five years ago while traveling. One interesting aspect of the "doble yo" is the juxtopposition of faces, not unlike the compositions I am finding in Virginia which have facial profiles and sculptural faces opposed on the pieces that are human and human/animal combinations as well as purely animal combinations. Speculation might lead one to think that this compositional technique from San Agustin could have been influenced by artists in very deep time as the Va/NC artifacts types appear to be very wide spread geographically.

It would be nice if the physical qualities of the Virginia and NC artifacts of this thread were so clearly presented as those in the images above. They are not, however, and one is challenged to properly characterize them.
Springhead
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2016 4:50 am

Re: Problematic Discoveries

Postby Tiompan » Sun Mar 19, 2017 3:17 pm

"It would be nice if the physical qualities of the Virginia and NC artifacts of this thread were so clearly presented as those in the images above.
They are not, however, and one is challenged to properly characterize them. "

Quite ,but is not the presentation Springhead , there is a reason that they are so clearly presented that has nothing to do with technology ,
The motifs are there , a cheap camera used by a complete amateur could convince anyone of the presence of motifs .
Tiompan
 
Posts: 679
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:13 am

Non Problematic Discoveries .

Postby Tiompan » Thu Mar 23, 2017 4:59 am

Tiompan
 
Posts: 679
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:13 am

Re: Problematic Discoveries

Postby Springhead » Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:14 am

Thanks Tiompan!

This looks interesting and I will read it as soon as I can.
Springhead
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2016 4:50 am

Re: Problematic Discoveries

Postby Springhead » Thu Mar 23, 2017 2:33 pm

[imgImage][/img]

This is an image of an artifact from the Virginia mountain site typical of many found. It exhibits the basic motif described in the "doble yo" piece from San Agustin, Colombia (previous post of a ceramic jar with three legs), that is the juxtopposition of human faces (in this case profiles). The left facing human profile has a basically level line of site while the opposing human profile looks upward. This worked rock is about two and a half inches across.

Of note is the similarity of this artifact with examples found at Calico in California. I expect to find many more of these type art pieces as work continues at the mountain site. Also, this is comparable to middle paleolithic artifacts identified in the course of work by Dr. Harrod in Israel.
Springhead
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2016 4:50 am

Re: Problematic Discoveries

Postby Tiompan » Thu Mar 23, 2017 3:01 pm

Springhead ,
The double yo is obvious , we can see it . That is not the case with your image .
The Calico artefacts are problematic enough , are you suggesting that some may have worked motifs too ?
There is a comparison with Harrod's "finds and yours ,in that the claims for any worked images are outrageous .
Tiompan
 
Posts: 679
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:13 am

Re: Non Problematic Discoveries .

Postby circumspice » Thu Mar 23, 2017 10:39 pm

Tiompan wrote:This might be of interest .

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/articl ... ne.0173037


Thanks for the link Tiompan.

This article more or less confirms my contention that the ancient artists were acute observers of the natural world around them & that they were accomplished artists. In looking at the array of artifacts, there was NEVER a need to write a detailed field guide on how to find & recognize the images on the pictured artifacts. You take one brief glance & you actually SEE a cow, a horse... :lol:
LUCEO NON URO
User avatar
circumspice
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:10 pm

Re: Problematic Discoveries

Postby Springhead » Sat Mar 25, 2017 10:37 am

[imgImage][/img][imImageg][/img][imgImage][/img]

Jasper Tools

The first image is a hammer stone of very high quality jasper. The right end shows use wear, and there is an art component in now faint compositions created via outer surface removals. Next is a jasper knife with art showing the common turtle motif facing right. The lower image is a jasper crescent knife with the sharp edge to the right. Here also is an art component with a bearded face looking left and the faint suggestion of a juxtopposed face looking right. These are all from the Virginia mountain site.

Tiompan,

The linked article was very interesting and I thank you. The featured artifacts are impressive, but show different characteristics from those that I am finding. The Virginia and NC finds appear to be of much more age and show an art of much greater sophistication than the art shown in the article.

Yes, it is my opinion that some of the Calico artifacts have worked in art that is similar to the Virginia and NC finds. This also applies to some of the Topper artifacts purported to be 50,000 YBP. I am not alone in the opinion about some of the Topper artifacts having art incorporated into them.


Circumspice,

I certainly agree with you about the ancient artists' acute observations of the natural world and their being accomplished artists. As to there never being a need for a field guide to find and recognize artistic creations, how about the plaques of the horse art where the raw plaques are shown next to the horse tracings in the article? If those images of the raw plaques had been posted on my thread without tracings, everyone would be raising holy hell about there being no art on the subject stones. The analysis required to illuminate the art presence on those plaques is well beyond what can be seen via an internet exchanged image.

As to seeing the horse or cow in a brief glance, I'll give you the cow but not the horses mentioned from the raw plaques. Your apparent criteria for discerning art subject matter reminds me of the uproar by realists over impressionistic and abstract expressionist art creators. I have found the artists involved with the Virginia and NC artifacts demonstrate the highest artistic skills that I have witnessed. These skills in realism, impressionism, abstract expressionism, and opportunistic use of rock forms combined with mineral and crystal natures and colors are superlative. Combined with their ability to compose images that clearly change into other subject matters with 90 degree rotations of the pieces and their ability to do this in stone form, painting, intaglio, bas relief, and sculpture is the reactive humor, horror, wonder, spirituality, and countless other human emotions which celebrate their representational genius.

As with the slowly gained respect for artists of various modern schools of art, maybe it will take time and learned respect for folks to appreciate, see, and try to understand unfamiliar expressive creations from the deep past.
Springhead
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2016 4:50 am

Re: Problematic Discoveries

Postby circumspice » Sat Mar 25, 2017 11:52 pm

@Springhead:

You haven't got a leg to stand on. Everything you spew is nothing more than your speculation and/or interpretation of what you desperately want to have your rocks identified as.

Just look at the oldest KNOWN cave art & portable art objects... They range in age from 41,800bp to 30,000bp +\-... At no time is it necessary to have a guide point out what the subject matter is on either portable or parietal art.

And guess what? There is NO micro art. There is no artwork that changes with rotations of the portable item. The artwork is what it is, it is what it represents. The deep age of the artwork doesn't affect the ability of anyone to recognize it. Look at the oldest known cave painting in the world... it's a pig & it's recognizable as a pig. Look at the carved ivory Lowenmensch... It's obvious that it is a mythical creature that's half man/half lion...

Nothing you have posted is comparable. NOTHING. Your excuse that the rocks come from a deep past as an explanation for why nobody else sees what you see is specious. From what I can gather, you're the only person who sees what you insist is there.

You can post your crappy, out of focus pics forever & nobody else will ever see what you see. You're wasting the bandwidth on this forum by posting pics of ordinary rocks.
LUCEO NON URO
User avatar
circumspice
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:10 pm

Previous

Return to New World

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests