|
MIDDLE PALAEOL. |
JAPAN'S NEW MIDDLE PALAEOLITHIC RESEARCH |
Comments by Leading Archaeologists |
| Home | Index |
Charles T. Keally September 20, 2003 last revised: October 4, 2003 |
The news media are interviewing leading archaeologists, and occasionally other scientists, for comments on the new claims for Middle Palaeolithic sites in Japan. The media obviously assume that "leading" equals "expert." Some of these "experts" are the same people who accepted the faked "Early and Middle Palaeolithic" sites from 1980 through the exposure of the hoax in 2001. Their favorable comments then, and the criticism of the critics by at least one of them in the early 1980s, had a lot to do with perpetuating the hoax for over 20 years. I think a bit of revisionism is needed here.
The following is a list of quotations by leading archaeologists that I have found in the newspapers.
July 7, 2003
Comments on the recently published dates for the Kanedori site in Iwate Prefecture.
These [artifacts, dates and interpretations] are the results of careful excavation and analysis, and are the expectable results. I think this site should be given special attention among the very few old sites [in Japan]. These recent results will likely make Kanedori the type-site for this period. (Kanedori 2003, p. 18)
This is not a final report, just an interim report on analysis results. This research is still in progress. When we get the final conclusions, we will present a report to the discipline. (Kanedori 2003, p. 18)
The dating results for the Kanedori site are about what was expected, but getting natural scientific analytical support for this idea is a significant result. It opens the path to study of Early and Middle Palaeolithic sites not associated with Fujimura. It is possible that future investigation will find even older sites. (Iwate Kanedori 2003)
Of course [the Kanedori site has been confirmed as Japan's oldest site]. There are other sites claimed to be older than Kanedori, but the cultural layer and geological association are not clear in most of these sites. In contrast, the dates of the geological strata [and cultural layers] at Kanedori are now confirmed. (Kachi 2003, p. 19)
July 23, 2003
Comments on the recently published dates for the Kanedori site in Iwate Prefecture.
The lithics have no repeated forms and are like those that precede the advent of standardized stone tools. They are convincing as lithics older than 30,000 years. (Shizen 2003, p. 20)If more lithics are found [in this summer's excavation], this will be one step toward confirming the presence of the Early and Middle Palaeolithic [in Japan]. (Shizen 2003, p. 20)
But, in Palaeolithic sites, the artifacts are scattered widely; possibly nothing will be found. Those who are watching this work need to be prepared for such results; they need to keep in mind that "something would always be found if we dug" was not natural. (Shizen 2003, p. 20)
These [Kanedori] artifacts look very much like stone artifacts from southern China and the Korean Peninsula. Viewed in the context of East Asian Stone Age cultures as a whole, there is no inconsistency in calling these artifacts Middle Palaeolithic. (Shizen 2003, p. 20)
The lithics [found in 1983 at Kanedori] were heavy and thick, completely unlike the refined stone tools of the Jomon. (Shizen 2003, p. 20)
August 26, 2003
Comments on the start of the second excavation of the Kanedori site in Iwate Prefecture.
There is a good possibility that [the 2003 ecavation] will fiind 80,000-90,000 year old stone artifacts. I want this work to be a step forward in overcoming the [Early and Middle Palaeolithic] fabrication incident. (Kanedori Iseki 2003)