Israeli archaeologists
have announced the discovery of a cache of seven bird-bone flutes from the Natufian site of Ain Mahalla, dating to around 12,000 years ago. That's them above, each photographed from three angles.
These are very small. Here is a replica, made from the wing of a mallard duck, as close as the investigators could make to the original. They say it sounds like a sparrowhawk. You can
hear it here, and then an
actual sparrowhawk here.
Seems fairly close to me. The archaeologists wonder if it was used in hunting, perhaps to entice hawks or frighten ducks. At least one of the flutes is worn in a way that indicates it was carried on a string, perhaps around someone's neck.
Incidentally Ain Mahalla is a famous site, one of the type sites of the Natufian culture. Its inhabitants seem to have been sedentary hunter-gatherers, living at this location all or most of the year. Above is a mortar for processing seeds.
The most famous find at the site is this arrangement of stones, displayed in an Israeli museum just as they were found. Is that a male human figure?
Is that a male human figure?
ReplyDeleteIs that a jellyfish?
Is that a UFO abduction?
To me, it looks like a case of pareidolia, but the world may never know!
That said, I'm certain we can safely assume it's got some kind of ~ritual significance~, just like every archaeological detail we don't have an obvious answer for (as well as many for which we do).
/eyeroll
In all seriousness, there are a bunch of wholly mundane uses these stones could have had. We've got a mortar - if we don't also find carved pestles, these could be simple uncarved ones. Or they could be grinding stones of a different sort. Or they could be hot rocks for cooking, or for heating water. Or they could be throwing rocks, for sport or hunting or warfare or even just skipping across the surface of a pond or lake. Or they could be for use in a simple game akin to hopscotch. Or they could just be totally unremarkable rocks someone found and liked and kept for no practical reason.
The archaeological desire to ascribe deeper meaning and significance to things is understandable, but I often feel it goes too far, and this is a prime example.