5 ms·

They're talking about coastal migration over centuries. Also there's excavations of boats that are dated earlier than estimates for the wheel so I'm not sure wh

They're talking about coastal migration over centuries. Also there's excavations of boats that are dated earlier than estimates for the wheel so I'm not sure what your point is.

eesmith 9y ago
To add some concrete details: "Circumstantial evidence, such as the early settlement of Australia over 40,000 years ago, findings in Crete dated 130,000 years ago,[4] and findings in Flores dated to 900,000 years ago,[5] suggest that boats have been used since prehistoric times. ... The oldest recovered boat in the world is the Pesse canoe, a dugout made from the hollowed tree trunk of a Pinus sylvestris and constructed somewhere between 8200 and 7600 BC" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boat "The invention of the wheel falls into the late Neolithic, ... 4500–3300 BCE: Chalcolithic, invention of the potter's wheel; earliest wooden wheels (disks with a hole for the axle); earliest wheeled vehicles, domestication of the horse" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheel
- jaclaz 9y ago
  Well, just like the wheeled toys (i.e. wheel "invented" but not used for transportation/vehicles) the dugout from a trunk is a sign that sort of canoes existed. Inventing a canoe or a raft is of course much easier than inventing the wheel, you just go on the shore of a river or at the seaside and you will find trunks or wooden pieces floating. From that to have a boat capable of crossing an ocean there is a long way. Also, the numbers would be important. I would presume that leaving from a shore in search of another one (and knowing nothing on where that could be) would have been an extremely dangerous attempt, most probably taken by a handful of young males (hunters/gatherers, etc.) in the hypothesis that society was a male dominated one, possibly in very small/basic boats. Then they would need to go back home, and then return bringing with them their spouses and presumably children. Think of a future archaelogist in - say - 5,000 years time (after humanity and civilization collapsed) finding ONLY a hut with a few (perfectly conserved) surf tables and windsurfs. From that finding to believe that windsurfs could be used for cross-sea or cross-ocean migrations there is somehow a large gap.
  - eesmith 9y ago
    My comment was to support the parent comment asking why the grandparent comment expressed surprised that a boat was invented before the wheel. I don't understand what the point of your comment is. The first humans in the Americas didn't need to cross an ocean. They needed to follow the shoreline. Even now the Bering Straight is only 90 km across. As the article points out, during the Ice Age, when the sea was lower, it was all land, known as Beringia. There was no "cross-sea or cross-ocean migration". We know humans 60,000+ years ago could cross the Weber Line, which was also at least some 90 km wide, to get from Sunda to Sahul (which includes modern Australia). This migration to the Americas would have been easier than that. Regarding male dominated society, hunter-gatherer cultures tend to be egalitarian. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter-gatherer#Social_and_economic_structure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter-gatherer#Social_and_eco... . One hypothesis is that male dominated culture is a result of agriculture, and specifically the horse and plow. http://voxeu.org/article/modern-gender-roles-and-ancient-farming http://voxeu.org/article/modern-gender-roles-and-ancient-far... . However, I this is a topic I know little about. I bring it up as an example of why I am confused about the point of your comment and where you're coming from.
    - jaclaz 9y ago
      >I don't understand what the point of your comment is. I was actually supporting the idea that inventing the boat is (should be) easier than inventing the wheel BUT that between inventing the boat and actually being able of building big enough boats AND boats being able to cross large stretches of water AND actually using them to "migrate" a population there are some leaps. The grandparent comment was not about "boats", was about "boats that can travel across the ocean" and the article was about the hypothesis of a migration by boat.
      - eesmith 9y ago
        While what you say is true, to quote the second-level comment: "They're talking about coastal migration over centuries" That requires neither a big boat nor one which can cross large stretches of water. That's why I didn't understand where your comment fit into the topic.

They're talking about coastal migration over centuries. Also there's excavations of boats that are dated earlier than estimates for the wheel so I'm not sure what your point is.

eesmith 9y ago

To add some concrete details: "Circumstantial evidence, such as the early settlement of Australia over 40,000 years ago, findings in Crete dated 130,000 years ago,[4] and findings in Flores dated to 900,000 years ago,[5] suggest that boats have been used since prehistoric times. ... The oldest recovered boat in the world is the Pesse canoe, a dugout made from the hollowed tree trunk of a Pinus sylvestris and constructed somewhere between 8200 and 7600 BC" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boat "The invention of the wheel falls into the late Neolithic, ... 4500–3300 BCE: Chalcolithic, invention of the potter's wheel; earliest wooden wheels (disks with a hole for the axle); earliest wheeled vehicles, domestication of the horse" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheel

jaclaz 9y ago
Well, just like the wheeled toys (i.e. wheel "invented" but not used for transportation/vehicles) the dugout from a trunk is a sign that sort of canoes existed. Inventing a canoe or a raft is of course much easier than inventing the wheel, you just go on the shore of a river or at the seaside and you will find trunks or wooden pieces floating. From that to have a boat capable of crossing an ocean there is a long way. Also, the numbers would be important. I would presume that leaving from a shore in search of another one (and knowing nothing on where that could be) would have been an extremely dangerous attempt, most probably taken by a handful of young males (hunters/gatherers, etc.) in the hypothesis that society was a male dominated one, possibly in very small/basic boats. Then they would need to go back home, and then return bringing with them their spouses and presumably children. Think of a future archaelogist in - say - 5,000 years time (after humanity and civilization collapsed) finding ONLY a hut with a few (perfectly conserved) surf tables and windsurfs. From that finding to believe that windsurfs could be used for cross-sea or cross-ocean migrations there is somehow a large gap.
- eesmith 9y ago
  My comment was to support the parent comment asking why the grandparent comment expressed surprised that a boat was invented before the wheel. I don't understand what the point of your comment is. The first humans in the Americas didn't need to cross an ocean. They needed to follow the shoreline. Even now the Bering Straight is only 90 km across. As the article points out, during the Ice Age, when the sea was lower, it was all land, known as Beringia. There was no "cross-sea or cross-ocean migration". We know humans 60,000+ years ago could cross the Weber Line, which was also at least some 90 km wide, to get from Sunda to Sahul (which includes modern Australia). This migration to the Americas would have been easier than that. Regarding male dominated society, hunter-gatherer cultures tend to be egalitarian. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter-gatherer#Social_and_economic_structure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter-gatherer#Social_and_eco... . One hypothesis is that male dominated culture is a result of agriculture, and specifically the horse and plow. http://voxeu.org/article/modern-gender-roles-and-ancient-farming http://voxeu.org/article/modern-gender-roles-and-ancient-far... . However, I this is a topic I know little about. I bring it up as an example of why I am confused about the point of your comment and where you're coming from.
  - jaclaz 9y ago
    >I don't understand what the point of your comment is. I was actually supporting the idea that inventing the boat is (should be) easier than inventing the wheel BUT that between inventing the boat and actually being able of building big enough boats AND boats being able to cross large stretches of water AND actually using them to "migrate" a population there are some leaps. The grandparent comment was not about "boats", was about "boats that can travel across the ocean" and the article was about the hypothesis of a migration by boat.
    - eesmith 9y ago
      While what you say is true, to quote the second-level comment: "They're talking about coastal migration over centuries" That requires neither a big boat nor one which can cross large stretches of water. That's why I didn't understand where your comment fit into the topic.