Puranic
Time and the Archaeological Record
By Drutakarma das
This paper was delivered at the 3rd.
World Archaeological Congress, New Delhi, 4th.-11th. December 1994.
Drutakarma Dasa (Michael A. Cremo)
joined the Hare Krishna movement in 1973. Since 1976, he has been on the
editorial staff of the movement's Back to Godhead magazine, to which he has
contributed dozens of articles.
He has recently co-authored with Mukunda
Goswami another book in this series, Divine Nature: A Spiritual Perspective on
the Environmental Crisis, soon to be published by the North American BBT.
Since 1984, he has served as a research
associate in the history and philosophy of science for the Bhaktivedanta
Institute. He is the co-author, with Sadaputa Dasa (Richard L. Thompson), of
Forbidden Archaeology and The Hidden History of the Human Race.
Providing a strong challenge to
established academic perception and methodology, Drutakarma das presents the
Vaishnava Hindu worldview on the fundamental concepts in the approach to and
interpretation of the archaeological record. He contrasts the currently
accepted time concept, which closely resembles the Judaeo-Christian model, with
the ancient Puranic model and shows us how each tends to supports its own world
view. But Drutakarma argues that the evidence offered by the archaeological
record does not actually support the presently accepted model and thus
questions its value in accurate historical analysis.
Abstract
The time concept of modern archaeology,
and modern anthropology in general, resembles the general
cosmological-historical time concept of Europe's Judaeo-Christian culture.
Differing from the cyclical cosmological-historical time concepts of the early
Greeks in Europe, and the Indians and others in Asia, the Judaeo- Christian cosmological-historical
time concept is linear and progressive. Modern archaeology also shares with
Judaeo-Christian theology the idea that humans appear after the other major
species. The author subjectively positions himself within the Vaishnava Hindu
worldview, and from this perspective offers a radical critique of modern
generalisations about human origins and antiquity. Hindu historical literature,
particularly the Puranas and Ithihasas, place human existence in the context of
repeating time cycles called yugas and kalpas, lasting hundreds of millions of
years. During this entire time, according to the Puranic accounts, humans
coexisted with creatures in some ways resembling the earlier tool-making
hominids of modern evolutionary accounts. If one were to take the Puranic
record as objectively true, and also take into account the generally admitted
imperfection and complexity of the archaeological and anthropological record,
one could make the following prediction. The strata of the earth, extending back
hundreds of millions of years, should yield a bewildering mixture of hominid
bones, some anatomically modern human and some not, as well as a similarly
bewildering variety of artefacts, some displaying a high level of artistry and
others not. Given the linear progressivist preconceptions of generations of
archaeologists and anthropologists, one could also predict that this mixture of
bones and artefacts would be edited to conform to their deeply rooted
linear-progressive time concepts. A careful study of the archaeological record,
and the history of archaeology itself, broadly confirms these two predictions.
Linear-progressivist time concepts thus pose a substantial barrier to truly
objective evaluation of the archaeological record and to rational theorybuilding
in the area of human origins and antiquity.
The practically employed time concept of
the modern historical scientist, including the archaeologist, strikingly
resembles the traditional Judaeo-Christian time concept. And it strikingly
differs from that of the ancient Greeks and Indians.
This observation is, of course, an
extreme generalisation. In any culture, the common people may make use of
various time concepts, linear and cyclical. And among the great thinkers of any
given period, there may be many competing views of both cyclical and linear
time. This was certainly true of the ancient Greeks. It can nevertheless be
safely said that the cosmological concepts of several of the most prominent
Greek thinkers involved a cyclic or episodic time similar to that found in the
Puranic literature of India. For example, we find in Hesiod's Works and Days
(129-23406-201) a series of ages (gold, silver, bronze, heroic, and iron)
similar to the Indian yugas. In both systems, the quality of human life gets
progressively worse with each passing age. In On Nature (Fragment 17)
Empedocles speaks of cosmic time cycles. In Plato's dialogues there are
descriptions of revolving time (Timaeus 38 a) and recurring catastrophes that
destroy or nearly destroy human civilisation (Po liticus 268 d ff). Aristotle
said in many places in his works that the arts and sciences had been discovered
many times in the past (Metaphysics 1074 b 10, Politics 1329 b 25) In the
teachings of Pythagoras, Plato, and Empedocles regarding transmigration of
souls, this cyclical pattern is extended to individual psychophysical
existence.
When Judaeo-Christian civilisation arose
in Europe, another kind of time became prominent. This time has been
characterised as linear and vectorial. Broadly speaking, this time concept
involves a unique act of cosmic creation, a unique appearance of the human
kind, and a unique history of salvation, culminating in a unique denouement in
the form of a last judgement. The drama occurs only once. Individually, human
life mirrored this process; with some exceptions, orthodox Christian
theologians did not accept transmigration of the soul.
Modern historical sciences share the
basic Judaeo-Christian assumptions about time. The universe we inhabit is a
unique occurrence. Humans have arisen once on this planet. The history of our
ancestors is regarded as a unique though un-predestined evolutionary pathway.
The future pathway of our species is also unique. Although this pathway is
officially unpredictable, the myths of science project a possible overcoming of
death by biomedical science and mastery over the entire universe by evolving,
space-travelling humans. One group, the Santa Fe Institute, sponsor of several
conferences on "artificial life," predicts the transferral of human
intelligence into machines and computers displaying the complex symptoms of
living things (Langton 1991, p.xv) "Artificial life" thus becomes the
ultimate transfiguring salvation of our species.
One is tempted to propose that the
modern human evolutionary account is a Judaeo-Christian heterodoxy, which
covertly retains fundamental structures of Judaeo-Christian cosmology,
salvation history, and eschatology while overtly dispensing with the scriptural
account of divine intervention in the origin of species, including our own.
This is similar to the case of Buddhism
as Hindu heterodoxy. Dispensing with the Hindu scriptures and God concepts,
Buddhism nevertheless retained basic Hindu cosmological assumptions such as
cyclical time, transmigration, and karma.
Another thing the modern human
evolutionary account has in common with the earlier Christian account is that
humans appear after the other life forms. In Genesis, God creates the plants,
animals, and birds before human beings. For strict literalists, the time interval
is short - humans are created on the last of six of our present solar days.
Others have taken the Genesis days as ages. For example, around the time of
Darwin, European scientists with strong Christian leanings proposed that God
had gradually brought into existence various species throughout the ages of
geological time until the perfected earth was ready to receive human beings
(Grayson 1983). In modern evolutionary accounts, anatomically modern humans
retain their position as the most recent major species to occur on this planet,
having evolved from preceding hominids within the past 100,000 or so years. And
despite the attempts of prominent evolutionary theorists and spokespersons to
counteract the tendency, even among evolution scientists, to express this
appearance in teleological fashion (Gould 1977, p. 14), the idea that humans
are the crowning glory of the evolutionary process still has a strong hold on
the public and scientific minds. Although anatomically modern humans are given
an age of about 100,000 years, modern archaeologists and anthropologists, in
common with Judaeo-Christian accounts, give civilisation an age of a few
thousand years, and, again in common with Judaeo-Christian accounts, place its
earliest occurrence in the Middle East.
I do not here categorically assert a
direct causal link between earlier Judeao-Christian ideas and those of the
modern historical sciences. Demonstrating that, as Edward B. Davis (1994)
points out in his review of recent works on this subject, needs much more
careful documentation than has yet been provided. But the many common features
of the time concepts of the two knowledge systems suggest these causal links do
exist, and that it would be fruitful to trace connections in sufficient detail
to satisfactorily demonstrate this.
I do, however, propose that the tacitly
accepted and hence critically unexamined time concepts of the modern human
sciences, whether or not causally linked with Judaeo-Christian concepts, pose a
significant unrecognised influence on interpretation of the archaeological and
anthropological record. To demonstrate how this might be true, I shall
introduce my own experience in evaluating this record from the alien standpoint
of the cyclical time concepts and accounts of human origins found in the
Puranas and Itihasas of India. My subjective path of learning has led me to
take the Vaishnava tradition of India as my primary guide to life and the study
of the visible universe and what may lie beyond. For the past century or so, it
has been considered quite unreasonable to bring concepts from religious texts
directly into the realm of the scientific study of nature. Indeed, many
introductory anthropology and archaeology texts make a clear distinction
between "scientific" and "religious" ways of knowing,
relegating the latter to the status of unsupported belief, with little or no
utility in the objective study of nature (see, for example, Stein and Rowe
1993, chapter 2). Some texts even go so far as to boast that this view has been
upheld by the United States Supreme Court (Stein and Rowe 1993, p. 37), as if
the state were the best and final arbiter of intellectual controversy. But I
propose that total hostility to religious views of nature in science is
unreasonable, especially for the modern historical sciences. Despite their
pretensions to a religious objectivity, practitioners unconsciously retain or
incorporate into their workings many Judaeo-Christian cosmological concepts,
especially concerning time, and implicitly employ them in their day to day work
of observation and theory building. In this sense, modern evolutionists share
some intellectual territory with their Fundamentalist Christian antagonists.
But there are other ways to comprehend
historical processes in nature. How this is so can be graphically sensed if one
performs the mental experiment of looking at the world from a radically
different time perspective - the Puranic time concept of India. I am not alone
in suggesting this. Gene Sager, a professor of philosophy and religious studies
at Palomar College in California, wrote in an unpublished review of my book
Forbidden Archaeology (Cremo and Thompson 1993): "As a scholar in the
field of comparative religion, I have sometimes challenged scientists by
offering a cyclical or spiral model for studying human history, based on the
Vedic concept of the kalpa. Few Western scientists are open to the possibility
of sorting out the data in terms of such a model. I am not proposing that the
Vedic model is true....However, the question remains, does the relatively
short, linear model prove to be adequate? I believe Forbidden Archaeology
offers a well researched challenge. If we are to meet this challenge, we need
to practice open-mindedness and proceed in a cross-cultural, interdisciplinary
fashion" (personal communication, 1993). The World Archaeological Congress
provides a suitable forum for such cross-cultural, interdisciplinary dialogue.
This cyclical time of the Puranas
operates only within the material cosmos. Beyond the material cosmos lies the
spiritual sky, or brahmajyoti. Innumerable spiritual planets float in this
spiritual sky, where material time, in the form of yuga cycles, does not act.
Each yuga cycle is composed of 4 yugas.
The first, the Satya-yuga lasts 4800 years of the demigods. The second, the
Treta-yuga, lasts 3600 years of the demigods. The third, the Dvapara-yuga,
lasts 2400 years of the demigods. And the fourth, Kali-yuga, lasts 1200 years
of the demigods (Bhagavata Purana 3.11.19). Since the demigod year is
equivalent to 360 earth years (Bhaktivedanta Swami 1973, p. 102), the lengths
of the yugas in earth years are, according to standard Vaishnava commentaries,
432,000 years for the Kali-yuga, 864,000 years for the Dvapara-yuga, 1,296,000
years for the Treta-yuga, and 1,728,000 years for the Satya-yuga. This gives a
total of 4,320,000 years for the entire yuga cycle. One thousand of such
cycles, lasting 4,320,000,000 years, comprises one day of Brahma, the demigod
who governs this universe. A day of Brahma is also called a kalpa. Each of
Brahma's nights lasts a similar period of time. Life is only manifest on earth
during the day of Brahma. With the onset of Brahma's night, the entire universe
is devastated and plunged into darkness. When another day of Brahma begins,
life again becomes manifest.
Each day of Brahma is divided into 14
manvatara periods, each one lasting 71 yuga cycles. Preceding the first and
following each manvatara period is a juncture (sandhya) the length of a
Satya-yuga (1,728,000) years. Typically, each manvantara period ends with a
partial devastation. According to Puranic accounts, we are now in the
twenty-eight yuga cycle of the seventh manvatara period of the present day of
Brahma. This would give the inhabited earth an age of 2.3 billion years.
Interestingly enough, the oldest undisputed organisms recognised by
palaeontologists - algae fossils such as those from the Gunflint formation in
Canada - are just about that old (Stewart 1983, p. 30). Altogether, 524 yuga
cycles have elapsed since this day of Brahma began. Each yuga cycle involves a
progression from a golden age of peace and spiritual progress to a final age of
violence and spiritual degradation. At the end of each Kali-yuga, the earth is
practically depopulated.
During the yuga cycles, human species
coexist with other human-like species. For example, in the Bhagavata Purana
(9.10.20) we find the divine avatara Ramacandra conquering Ravana's kingdom
Lanka with the aid of intelligent forest dwelling monkey men who fought
Ravana's well-equipped soldiers with trees and stones. This occurred in the
Treta-yuga, about 1 million years ago.
Given the cycle of yugas, the periodic
devastations at the end of each manvatara, and the coexistence of civilised
human beings with creatures in some ways resembling the human ancestors of
modern evolutionary accounts, what predictions might the Puranic account give
regarding the archaeological record? Before answering this question, we must
also consider the general imperfection of the fossil record (Raup and Stanley
1971). Hominid fossils in particular are extremely rare. Furthermore, only a
small fraction of the sedimentary layers deposited during the course of the
earth's history have survived erosion and other destructive geological
processes (Van Andel 1981).
Taking the above into account, I propose
the Puranic view of time and history predicts a sparse but bewildering mixture
of hominid fossils, some anatomically modern and some not, going back tens and
even hundreds of millions of years and occurring at locations all over the
world. It also predicts a more numerous but similarly bewildering mixture of
stone tools and other artefacts, some showing a high level of technical ability
and others not. And, given the cognitive biases of the majority of workers in
the fields of archaeology and anthropology over the past 150 years, we might
also predict that this bewildering mixture of fossils and artefacts would be
edited to conform with a linear, progressive view of human origins. A careful
investigation of published reports by myself and Richard Thompson (1993) offers
confirmation of these two predictions. What follows is only a sample of the
total body of evidence catalogued in our lengthy book. The citations given are
for the single reports that best identify particular finds. Detailed analysis
and additional reports cited elsewhere (Cremo and Thompson 1993) offer strong
confirmation of the authenticity and antiquity of these discoveries. Incised
and carved mammal bones are reported from the Pliocene (Desnoyers 1863, Laussedat
1868, Capellini 1877) and Miocene (Garrigou and Filhol 1868, von Ducker 1873).
Additional reports of incised bones from the Pliocene and Miocene may be found
an extensive review by the overly sceptical de Mortillet (1883). Scientists
have also reported pierced shark teeth from the Pliocene (Charlesworth 1873),
artistically carved bone from the Miocene (Calvert 1874) and artistically
carved shell from the Pliocene (Stopes 1881). Carved mammal bones reported by
Moir (1917) could be as old as the Eocene.
Very crude stone tools occur in the
Middle Pliocene (Prestwich 1892) and from perhaps as far back as the Eocene
(Moir 1927, Breuil 1910, especially p. 402). One will note that most of these
discoveries are from the nineteenth century. But such artefacts are still being
found. Crude stone tools have recently been reported from the Pliocene of
Pakistan (Bunney 1987), Siberia (Daniloff and Kopf 1986), and India (Sankhyan
1981). Given the current view that tool-making hominids did not leave their
African centre of origin until about 1 million years ago, these artefacts are
somewhat anomalous, what to speak of a pebble tool from the Miocene of India
(Prasad 1982).
More advanced stone tools occur in the
Oligocene of Europe (Rutot 1907), the Miocene of Europe (Ribeiro 1873,
Bourgeois 1873, Verworn 1905), the Miocene of Asia (Noetling 1894), and the
Pliocene of South America (F. Ameghino 1908, C. Ameghino 1915). In North
America, advanced stone tools occur in California deposits ranging from
Pliocene to Miocene in age (Whitney 1880). An interesting slingstone, at least
Pliocene and perhaps Eocene in age, comes from England (Moir 1929, p. 63).
More advanced artefacts have also been
reported in scientific and non-scientific publications. These include an iron
nail in Devonian Sandstone (Brewster 1844), a gold thread in Carboniferous
stone (Times of London, June 22, 1844), a metallic vase in Precambrian stone
(Scientific American, June 5, 1852), and a chalk ball from the Eocene
(Melleville 1862), a Pliocene clay statue (Wright 1912, pp. 266-69), metallic
tubes in Cretaceous chalk (Corliss 1978, pp. 652-53), and a grooved metallic
sphere from the Precambrian (Jimison 1982). The following objects have been
reported from Carboniferous coal: a gold chain (The Morrisonville Times, of
Illinois, U.S.A., June 11, 1891), artistically carved stone (Daily News of
Omaha, U.S.A., April 2, 1897), an iron cup (Rusch 1971), and stone block walls
(Steiger 1979, p. 27).
Human skeletal remains described as
anatomically modern occur in the Middle Pleistocene of Europe (Newton 1895,
Bertrand 1868, de Mortillet 1883). These cases are favorably reviewed by Keith
(1928). Other anatomically modern human skeletal remains occur in the Early and
Middle Pleistocene of Africa (Reck 1914, L. Leakey 1960d, Zuckerman 1954, p.
310; Patterson and Howells 1967, Senut 1981, R. Leakey 1973), the Early Middle
Pleistocene of Java (Day and Molleson 1973), the Early Pleistocene of South
America (Hrdlicka 1912, pp. 319-44), the Pliocene of South America (Hrdlicka 1912,
p. 346; Boman 1921, pp. 341-42)), the Pliocene of England (Osborn 1921, pp.
567-69), the Pliocene of Italy (Ragazzoni 1880, Issel 1868), the Miocene of
France and the Eocene of Switzerland (de Mortillet 1883, p. 72), and even the
Carboniferous of North America (The Geologist 1862). Several discoveries from
California gold mines range from Pliocene to Eocene (Whitney 1880). Some of
these bones have been subjected to chemical and radiometric tests that have
yielded ages younger than suggested by their stratigraphical position. But when
the unreliability's and weaknesses of the testing procedures are measured
against the very compelling stratigraphic observations of the discoverers, it
is not at all clear that the original age attributions should be discarded
(Cremo and Thompson 1993, 753- 794).
Human-like footprints have been found in
the Carboniferous of North America (Burroughs 1938), the Jurassic of Central
Asia (Moscow News 1983, no.4, p. 10), and the Pliocene of Africa (M. Leakey
1979). Shoe prints have been reported from the Cambrian (Meister 1968) and the
Triassic (Ballou 1922).
In the course of negotiating a
fashionable consensus that anatomically modern humans evolved from less
advanced hominids in the Late Pleistocene, scientists gradually rendered
unfashionable the considerable body of compelling contradictory evidence summarised
above. It thus became unworthy of discussion in knowing circles. Richard
Thompson and I have concluded (1993) that the muting of this evidence was
accomplished by application of a double standard, whereby favoured evidence was
exempted from the severely sceptical scrutiny to which disfavoured evidence was
subjected.
One example from the many that could be
cited to demonstrate the operation of linear progressive preconceptions in the
editing of the archaeological record is the case of the auriferous gravel finds
in California. During the days of the California Gold Rush, starting in the
1850s, miners discovered many anatomically modern human bones and advanced
stone implements in mineshafts sunk deeply into deposits of gold-bearing gravel
capped by thick lava flows (Whitney 1880). The gravels beneath the lava were
from 9 to 55 million years old, according to modern geological reports
(Slemmons 1966). These discoveries were reported to the world of science by J.
D. Whitney, state geologist of California, in a monograph published by the
Peabody Museum of Natural History at Harvard University. From the evidence he
compiled, Whitney came to a non-progressivist view of human origins - the
fossil evidence he reported indicated that the humans of the distant past were
like those of the present.
To this W. H. Holmes (1899, p. 424) of
the Smithsonian Institution replied: "Perhaps if Professor Whitney had
fully appreciated the story of human evolution as it is understood today, he
would have hesitated to announce the conclusions formulated, notwithstanding
the imposing array of testimony with which he was confronted." This
attitude is still prominent today. In their college textbook, Stein and Rowe
assert that "scientific statements are never considered absolute"
(1993, p. 41). But they also make this very absolute statement: "Some
people have assumed that humans have always been the way they are today.
Anthropologists are convinced that human beings...have changed over time in
response to changing conditions. So one aim of the anthropologist is to find
evidence for evolution and to generate theories about it." Apparently, an
anthropologist, by definition, can have no other view or purpose. Keep in mind,
however, that this absolute commitment to a linear progressive model of human
origins, ostensibly areligious, may have deep roots in Judaeo- Christian
cosmology.
One of the things Holmes found
especially hard to accept was the similarity of the purportedly very ancient
stone implements to those of the modern Indians. He wondered (1899, pp. 451-52)
how anyone could take seriously the idea that "the implements of a
Tertiary race should have been left in the bed of a Tertiary torrent to be
brought out as good as new, after the lapse of vast periods of time, into the
camp of a modern community using identical forms?" The similarity could be
explained in several ways, but one possible explanation is the repeated
appearance in the same geographical region of humans with particular cultural
attributes in the course of cyclical time. The suggestion that such a thing
could happen is bound to strike those who see humans as the recent result of a
long and unique series of evolutionary changes in the hominid line as absurd -
so absurd as to prevent them from considering any evidence as potentially
supporting a cyclical interpretation of human history.
It is noteworthy, however, that a fairly
open-minded modern archaeologist, when confronted with the evidence catalogued
in my book, himself brought up, in a somewhat doubting manner, the possibility
of a cyclical interpretation of human history to explain its occurrence. George
F. Carter, noted for his controversial views on early man in North America,
wrote to me on January 26, 1994: "If your table on p. 391 were correct,
then the minimum age for the artefacts at Table Mountain would be 9 million
[years old]. Would you think then of a different creation - [one that]
disappeared - and then a new start? Would it simply replicate the archaeology
of California 9 million years later? Or the inverse. Would the Californians 9
million years later replicate the materials under Table Mountain?"
That is exactly what I would propose -
that in the course of cyclic time, humans with a culture resembling that of
modern North American Indians did in fact appear in California millions of
years ago, perhaps several times. "I find great difficulty with that line
of reasoning," confessed Carter. But that difficulty, which encumbers the
minds of most archaeologists and anthropologists, may be the result of a rarely
recognised and even more rarely questioned commitment to a culturally acquired
linear progressive time sense.
It would, therefore, be worthwhile to
inspect the archaeological record through other time lenses, such as the
Puranic lens. Many will take my proposal as a perfect example of what can
happen when someone brings their subjective religious ideas into the objective
study of nature. Jonathan Marks (1994) reacted in typical fashion in his review
of Forbidden Archaeology: "Generally, attempts to reconcile the natural
world to religious views end up compromising the natural world."
But until modern anthropology conducts a
conscious examination of the effects of its own covert, and arguably
religiously derived, assumptions about time and progress, it should put aside
its pretensions to universal objectivity and not be so quick to accuse others
of bending facts to fit religious dogma. Om Tat Sat.
Notes
and References
- Ameghino, C. (1915) El femur de
Miramar. Anales de Museo nacional de historia natural de Buenos Aires,
26:433-450.
- Ameghino, F. (1908) Notas preliminares
sobre el Tetraprothhomo argentinus, un precursor de hombre del Mioceno superior
de Monte Hermoso. Anales de Museo nacional de historia natural de Buenos Aires,
16:105-242.
- Ballou, W. H. (1922) Mystery of the
petrified "shoe-sole" 5,000,000 years old. American Weekly section of
the New York Sunday American, October 8, p. 2.
- Bertrand, P. M. E. (1868) Crane et
ossements trouves dans un carriere de l'avenue de Clichy. Bulletin de la
Societe d'Anthropologie de Paris (Series 2), 3:329-335.
- Bhaktivedanta Swami, A. C. (1973)
Srimad-Bhagavatam (Bhagavata Purana), Canto Three, Part Two. Los Angeles,
Bhaktivedanta Book Trust.
- Boman, E. (1921) Los vestigios de
industria humana encontrados en Miramar (Republica Argentina) y atribuidos a la
epoca terciaria. Revista Chilena de Historia y Geografia, 49(43):330-352.
- Bourgeois, L. (1873) Sur les silex
consideres comme portant les margues d'un travail humain et decouverts dans le
terrain miocene de Thenay. Congres International d'Anthropologie et
d'Archeologie Prehistoriques, Bruxelles 1872, Compte Rendu, pp. 81-92.
- Breuil, H. (1910) Su la presence
d'eolithes a la base de l'Eocene Parisien. L'Anthropologie, 21:385-408.
- Brewster, D. (1844) Queries and
statements concerning a nail found imbedded in a block of sandstone obtained
from Kingoodie (Mylnfield) Quarry, North Britain. Report of the British
Association for the Advancement of Science, Notices and Abstracts of Communications,
p. 51.
- Bunney, S. (1987) First migrants will
travel back in time. New Scientist, 114(1565):36.
- Burroughs, W. G. (1938) Human-like
footprints, 250 million years old. The Berea Alumnus. Berea College, Kentucky,
November, pp. 46-47.
- Calvert, F. (1874) On the probable
existence of man during the Miocene period. Journal of the Royal
Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 3:127.
- Capellini, G. (1877) Les traces de
l'homme pliocene en Toscane. Congres International d'Anthropologie et
d'Archeologie Prehistoriques, Budapest 1876, Compte Rendu. Vol. 1, pp. 46-62.
- Charlesworth, E. (1873) Objects in the
Red Crag of Suffolk. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great
Britain and Ireland, 2:91-94.
- Corliss, W. R. (1978) Ancient Man: A
Handbook of Puzzling Artifacts. Glen Arm, Sourcebook Project.
- Cremo, M. A., and Thompson, R. L.
(1993) Forbidden Archeology: The Hidden History of the Human Race. San Diego,
Bhaktivedanta Institute.
- Daniloff, R., and Kopf, C. (1986)
Digging up new theories of early man. U. S. News & World Report, September
1, pp. 62-63.
- Davis, Edward B. (1994) Review of
Cameron Wybrow (Editor): Creation, Nature, and Political Order in the
Philosophy of Michael Foster (1903-1959); The Classic Mind Articles and Others,
with Modern Critical Essays, and Cameron Wybrow: The Bible, Baconism, and
Mastery over Nature: The Old Testament and Its Modern Misreading. Isis
53(1):127-129.
- Day, M. H., and Molleson, T. I. (1973)
The Trinil femora. Symposia of the Society for the Study of Human Biology,
2:127- 154.
- De Mortillet, G. (1883) Le
Prehistorique. Paris, C. Reinwald.
- Desnoyers, J. (1863) Response a des
objections faites au sujet d'incisions constatees sur des ossements de
Mammiferes fossiles des environs de Chartres. Compte Rendus de l'Academie des
Sciences, 56: 1199-1204.
- Garrigou, F., and Filhol, H. (1868) M.
Garrigou prie l'Academie de vouloir bien ouvrir un pli cachete, depose au nom
de M. Filhol fils et au sien, le 16 mai 1864. Compte Rendus de l'Academie des
Sciences, 66:819-820.
- The Geologist, London, 1862 Fossil
man, 5:470.
- Gould, S. J. (1977) Ever Since Darwin.
New York, W. W. Norton.
- Grayson, Donald K. (1983) The
Establishment of Human Antiquity. New York, Academic Press.
- Holmes, W. H. (1899) Review of the
evidence relating to auriferous gravel man in California. Smithsonian
Institution Annual Report 1898-1899, pp. 419-472.
- Hrdlicka, A. (1912) Early Man in South
America. Washington, D. C., Smithsonian Institution.
Issel, A. (1868) Resume des recherches
concernant l'anciennete de l'homme en Ligurie. Congres International
d'Anthropologie et d'Archeologie Prehistoriques, Paris 1867, Compte Rendu, pp.
75- 89.
- Jimison, S. (1982) Scientists baffled
by space spheres. Weekly World News, July 27.
- Keith, A. (1928) The Antiquity of Man.
Vol. 1. Philadelphia, J. B. Lippincott.
- Langton, C. G. (1991) Preface. In
Langton, C. G., et al., eds. Artificial Life II: Proceedings of the Workshop on
Artificial Life Held February, 1990 in Santa Fe, New Mexico. Santa Fe Institute
Studies in the Sciences of Complexity, Proceedings Volume X. Redwood City,
Addison-Wesley, pp. xiii-xv.
- Laussedat, A. (1868) Sur une machoire
de Rhinoceros portant des entailles profondes trouvee a Billy (Allier), dans
les formations calcaires d'eau douce de la Limagne. Compte Rendus de l'Academie
des Sciences, 66:752-754.
- Leakey, L. S. B. (1960) Adam's
Ancestors, 4th edition. New York, Harper & Row.
- Leakey, M. D. (1979) Footprints in the
ashes of time. National Geographic, 155:446-457.
- Leakey, R. E. (1973) Evidence for an
advanced Plio-Pleistocene hominid from East Rudolf, Kenya. Nature, 242:447-450.
- Marks, J. (1994) Review of Forbidden
Archeology: The Hidden History of the Human Race, by Michael A. Cremo and
Richard L. Thompson. 1993. San Diego: Bhaktivedanta Institue. American Journal
of Physical Anthropology, 93:140-141.
- Meister, W. J. (1968) Discovery of
trilobite fossils in shod footprint of human in "Trilobite Bed" - a
Cambrian formation, Antelope Springs, Utah. Creation Research Society
Quarterly, 5(3):97-102.
- Melleville, M. (1862) Note sur un
objet travaille de main d'homme trouve dans les lignites du Laonnais. Revue
Archeologique, 5:181- 186.
- Moir, J. R. (1917) A series of
mineralised bone implements of a primitive type from below the base of the Red
and Coralline Crags of Suffolk. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society of East
Anglia, 2:116-131.
- Moir, J. R. (1927) The Antiquity of
Man in East Anglia. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
- Moir, J. R. (1929) A remarkable object
from beneath the Red Crag. Man, 29:62-65.
Newton, E. T. (1895) On a human skull
and limb-bones found in the Paleolithic terrace-gravel at Galley Hill, Kent.
Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 51:505-526.
- Noetling, F. (1894) On the occurrence
of chipped flints in the Upper Miocene of Burma. Records of the Geological
Survey of India, 27:101-103.
- Osborn, H. F. (1921) The Pliocene man
of Foxhall in East Anglia. Natural History, 21:565-576.
- Patterson, B., and Howells, W. W.
(1967) Hominid humeral fragment from Early Pleistocene of northwestern Kenya.
Science, 156:64-66.
- Prasad, K. N. (1982) Was Ramapithecus
a tool-user. Journal of Human Evolution, 11:101-104.
- Prestwich, J. (1892) On the primitive
character of the flint implements of the Chalk Plateau of Kent, with reference
to the question of their glacial or pre-glacial age. Journal of the Royal
Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 21(3):246-262.
- Ragazzoni, G. (1880) La collina di
Castenedolo, solto il rapporto antropologico, geologico ed agronomico.
Commentari dell' Ateneo di Brescia, April 4, pp. 120-128.
- Raup, D., and Stanley, S. (1971)
Principles of Paleontology. San Francisco, W. H. Freeman.
- Reck, H. (1914) Erste vorlaufige
Mitteilungen uber den Fund eines fossilen Menschenskeletts aus Zentral-afrika.
Sitzungsbericht der Gesellschaft der naturforschender Freunde Berlins, 3:81-95.
- Ribeiro, C. (1873) Sur des silex
tailles, decouverts dans les terrains miocene du Portugal. Congres
International d'Anthropologie et d'Archeologie Prehistoriques, Bruxelles 1872,
Compte Rendu, pp. 95-100.
- Rusch, Sr., W. H. (1971) Human
footprints in rocks. Creation Research Society Quarterly, 7:201-202.
- Rutot, A. (1907) Un grave problem: une
industrie humaine datant de l'epoque oligocene. Comparison des outils avec ceux
des Tasmaniens actuels. Bulletin de la Societe Belge de Geologie de
Paleontologie et d'Hydrologie, 21:439-482.
- Sankhyan, A. R. (1981) First evidence
of early man from Haritalyangar area, Himalchal Pradesh. Science and Culture,
47:358-359.
- Senut, B. (1981) Humeral outlines in
some hominoid primates and in Plio-pleistocene hominids. American Journal of
Physical Anthropology, 56:275-283.
- Slemmons, D. B. (1966) Cenozoic
volcanism of the central Sierra Nevada, California. Bulletin of the California
Division of Mines and Geology, 190:199-208.
- Steiger, B. (1979) Worlds Before Our
Own. New York, Berkley.
- Stein, Philip L. and Rowe, Bruce M.
(1993) Physical Anthropology. Fifth Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
- Stewart, Wilson N. (1983) Paleobotany
and the Evolution of Plants. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Stopes, H. (1881) Traces of man in the
Crag. British Association for the Advancement of Science, Report of the
Fifty-first Meeting, p. 700.
- Van Andel, T. H. (1981) Consider the
incompleteness of the geological record. Nature, 294:397-398.
- Verworn, M. (1905) Die
archaeolithische Cultur in den Hipparionschichten von Aurillac (Cantal).
Abhandlungen der koniglichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Gottingen,
Mathematisch-Physikalische Klasse, Neue Folge, 4(4):3-60.
- Von Ducker, Baron (1873) Sur la
cassure artificelle d'ossements recuellis dans le terrain miocene de Pikermi.
Congres International d'Anthropolgie et d'Archeologie Prehistoriques. Bruxelles
1872, Compte Rendu, pp. 104-107.
- Whitney, J. D. (1880) The auriferous
gravels of the Sierra Nevada of California. Harvard University, Museum of
Comparative Zoology Memoir 6(1).
- Wright, G. F. (1912) Origin and
Antiquity of Man. Oberlin, Bibliotheca Sacra.
- Zuckerman, S. (1954) Correlation of
change in the evolution of higher primates. In Huxley, J., Hardy, A. C., and
Ford, E. B., eds. Evolution as a Process. London, Allen and Unwin, pp. 300-
352.