Friday 3 December 2021


 In 1882 amateur archaeologist Benjamin Harrison discovered the first eoliths, these were chipped flint objects that were believed to be worked and modified by man, although sometimes crudely. The term eolith (dawn stone) was later coined by J. Allen to describe such finds. Sir Joseph Prestwich later published an article including some of Benjamin Harrison's discoveries and it became widely accepted that eoliths were stone tools from the Pliocene era (5.4 to 2.4 million years ago). 

The article by Sir Joseph Prestwich:  On the primitive characters of the flint implements of the chalk plateau of Kent

I wont go into to much detail about what happened next, but lets just say it was a serious disservice to our understanding of our distant past. The failure to accept eoliths as worked finds from the Pliocene has put back archaeology understanding by over 100 years, leaving most modern archaeologists completely in the dark about the huge antiquity of highly cognitive and artistic prehistoric peoples. Eoliths have not been disproved in any way by scientific evidence, but have simply been dismissed, and labelled as 'believed to be geofacts' with no actual proof, and a scientific analysis of the patinas of such finds would disclose in all likelihood that the vast majority of chips and flake removals took place in one time period, almost certain proof of them being artefacts rather than geofacts.

Now, wouldn't it be amazing if we could recognise Palaeolithic art in some of Benjamin Harrison's finds that he believed were modified?, but later dismissed as being geofacts. It would surely be more amazing if the recognised artistic impressions fitted perfectly in with my chart as common recognised subjects of Palaeolithic figure stones?, with the same topologies and conventions? But firstly it should be noted that Benjamin Harrison made no claims that his finds were anything more than ancient worked flints, he made no comparisons to creature likenesses in his finds, and did not claim they contained any artistic figurative representations of any kind. (as far as I am aware)

Palaeolithic readers will instantly recognise possible artistic representations in this old postcard of Eoliths. These items were only recognised as worked flints at the time. 

A human hand holding a flint scraper could easily be interpreted from the eolith find above, although some may suggest this is a fanciful interpretation, many of the finer details are present and hand, hand holding a rock, fingers and thumbs are a common glyph to find in portable rock art, figure stones, and even standard flint scrapers and hand axes, as previously demonstrated and on my chart.

Two bear head profile shapes can be easily interpreted from the eolith above, which has just been rotated to demonstrate this. Could it be that the reason there are two bear like images in this find was to silently communicate that a bear is heading either left or right? Bears are also a very well documented Palaeolithic glyph and subject found in figure stones and cave paintings, also on my chart in head profile format.

Suggested interpretations are as follows:-
Left: duck head facing left but also the simple gorilla glyph head profile facing right, Middle: hare head profile facing right, Right: horse head profile facing right. Other possibilities are also present including alligator or crocodile head profile, also previously documented and on my chart. The combination of hare head and duck head forming an ambiguous optical illusion comes as no surprise as this is also a classic modern ambiguous optical illusion combination.

Interpretation of a australopithecus head profile left facing. A predictable face profile to find in figure stones, because science is predictable.  

Another find showing an Ambiguous Optical Illusion.