"Engineer and rock art researcher Ray Urbaniak, in prior issues, has offered interpretations of several Utah petroglyphs as possible mammoth depictions. A new discovery* in Alaska** shows mammoths were there a mere 5,600 years ago adding feasibility to his ideas." -Pleistocene Coalition News (PCN)
*This is not a new discovery, it's 12 years old (5,750 years BP), and should not have triggered any reevaluation of the feasibility of Urbaniak's ideas at this time. The recent news is that scientists think a dwindling fresh water supply led to the extinction.
My understanding is that this is not very significant news, with mammoth dated to 4,000 years BP on Wrangle Island. Published 21 years ago: Vartanyan, S.L.; Arslanov, Kh. A.; Tertychnaya, T. V.; Chernov, S. B. (1995). "Radiocarbon Dating Evidence for Mammoths on Wrangel Island, Arctic Ocean, until 2000 BC". Radiocarbon. Department of Geosciences, The University of Arizona. 37 (1): 1–6. Retrieved 2008-01-10.
**On a 43 square mile island in the remote Bearing Sea
Adrian Lister: Last mammoth record on mainland at 11,700 BP. 4,000 years BP cited for last mammoths on Wrangle Island Russia earlier. The refugia populations of mammoth were isolated from the mainland for 6000 years, About 500 to 1000 mammoths lived on Wrangle Island at a time with 2,934 square miles.
These new findings of mammoth at ca. 5,600 BP on St. Paul Island add no feasibility to Urbaniak's ideas and nothing is written to explain why this would reasonably be the case. It is a 14 by 8 mile island in the middle of the Bearing Sea. The idea Urbaniak has proposed is that people were traveling from Alaska to Utah and then depicting Mammoths they saw on the small, remote island. This seems implausible.
My understanding is that this is not very significant news, with mammoth dated to 4,000 years BP on Wrangle Island. Published 21 years ago: Vartanyan, S.L.; Arslanov, Kh. A.; Tertychnaya, T. V.; Chernov, S. B. (1995). "Radiocarbon Dating Evidence for Mammoths on Wrangel Island, Arctic Ocean, until 2000 BC". Radiocarbon. Department of Geosciences, The University of Arizona. 37 (1): 1–6. Retrieved 2008-01-10.
**On a 43 square mile island in the remote Bearing Sea
Wrangle Island, Russia, is 3300 miles from the American Southwest
St. Paul Island, Alaska, 43 sq. miles in area is a long way from the Utah desert
These new findings of mammoth at ca. 5,600 BP on St. Paul Island add no feasibility to Urbaniak's ideas and nothing is written to explain why this would reasonably be the case. It is a 14 by 8 mile island in the middle of the Bearing Sea. The idea Urbaniak has proposed is that people were traveling from Alaska to Utah and then depicting Mammoths they saw on the small, remote island. This seems implausible.
Illegitimate mammoth illustration in middle
A mammoth illustration used in the articles has been cherry-picked because it is the only available example showing a mammoth and tusks in a position close to the ones in Urbaniak's petroglyph examples. The cartoon is some artist's interpretation and not based on anatomical accuracies of a mammoth. It is not a valid visual comparison.
All of the proper mammoth illustrations (Lister and Bahn, etc.) and model reconstructions argue against any kind of 'mammoth' similarity here, with tusks appearing as 'horn-like' or above the head in any way.
Human, mammoth and mastodon models to scale
In fact, the "tusks" on the Urbaniak animals are in the reverse and upside-down orientation of the mammoth and mastodon.Curving up and back rather than down and front??
It seems much more plausible the Urbaniak animals with up and back horn orientation depict animals which look like this, rather than the convoluted idea a faulty cultural memory had these people making mammoth tusks like horns because they were more familiar with horned animals. Sheep and antelope are possibilities.
"Goat and a circus elephant" was the interpretation of this rock art image by someone else. Urbaniak processed the photo digitally and claims it reveals the animal is more like a mammoth. The image is not clear and the enhancement is still very vague to draw conclusions. No similar finds are provided (or reported yet by anyone) and a single prospect does not indicate a culturally mediated art behavior. This "mammoth" can only be very remotely possible. It would be extraordinary for a pigmented image to survive 12,000+ years on a rock wall subject to the elements.
Ray Urbaniak's flawed analysis from another web site. His cut out of the image does not appear to be accurate and his comparison, again, to a cartoon which fits his 'mammoth' interpretation is not valid. (Click photo to expand)
Urbaniak interprets this glyph as possibly an animal which went extinct about 2 million years ago and has not been evidenced in the Americas. It can be reasonably interpreted as a 'horse' or other non-proboscidean.
The Old Vero Beach, Florida, mammoth carving on a megafauna bone incorporates two of the mammoth features most commonly used to interpret this animal as an art subject: a 'bump' on the head and a curved back.
I wrote Mr. Urbaniak some time ago and explained if his petroglyphs were a proboscidean they were mastodon because they lacked the mammoth's trademark visual features. When I saw this idea being promoted again I felt compelled to comment on what I think is a flawed interpretation here.
None of the PCN Urbaniak articles are presented under the "Amature Archaeology" section as are some other amature contributions which the PCN begrudgingly published.
Ray Urbaniak's web site is at Personal Theories (Inspiration Anthropology)
No comments:
Post a Comment