I have been thinking about pre 3200 bce humanity for 5 hours at this point and my brain hurts.

[jecroisenlasuperioritedubel]

Civilization didn't begin with cities or agriculture. It began 202 kya; wherever there were pigments, children, caregivers, and caves. Proto-proto writing emerged from play and interaction, encoding thoughts, not spoken words. It emerged independently and repeatedly, for every single cave in different times. It wasn't even for sharing thoughts, it was simply a fun thing that can be useful. Like baby-talking to your toddler/baby and saying " Oh is that mama? " to some random lines on your wall or paper. Smaller handprints, especially near the floor, are direct evidence of children's involvement as originators. The height and placement of these prints suggest playful experimentation rather than deliberate adult action. A child smearing pigment on their hand and pressing it against a wall out of curiosity or fun makes far more sense than adults " discovering " handprints through random accidents. By 52 kya, these marks evolved into proto-writing, paving the way for the structured writing systems of later civilizations. The meaning of handprints was clear and contextual to their creators ( e.g., " I went hunting here " and how do you know that? By noticing the place that Groog counts his dinner hunts have 7 handprints instead of 6 and him not being around ), but this context has been lost due to the passage of time. Proto-writing handprints and drawings weren't art because they lacked creativity, time investment, or aesthetic intent. They were functional marks for communication or record-keeping. Spiritual interpretations likely emerged after the fact, as humans retroactively assigned meaning to existing symbols. Humans don't have inherent want to seek " god ". I do not. They did not. No one does. They did not said " Wow, sky god is angry. ", they simply knew rain is something that happens. When you kill an ant, you kill an ant. You do not dwell on ant heaven or ant hell. You do not care. You try to survive, pay bills. Same for then. Adults can't come up with this. If someone accidentally left a mark on a stone or cave wall while painting - camouflage - themselves before going to hunt, it's unlikely they would immediately see it as meaningful or worth reproducing. The transition from " Random stain. " to " Let's intentionally press our hands here. " requires a leap in cognition and creativity. It happened so slowly. First instances of it was as I said proto-proto-writing. But that writing is lost due to pigments were fragile and the fact that it has been so long. Look; early humans weren't just pressing hands randomly. They chose to: 1. Cover their hands in pigment. 2. Place them carefully on walls. 3. Repeat the process enough that it became a recognizable practice and this thing is seen at everywhere. It is the proto-proto-writing way that survived to proto-writing era. Writing wasn't created by elites or gods. It is humanity's first collective invention, rooted in the curiosity of children and the guidance of caregivers. Environmental changes, extinction, and cultural shifts mean the reference points for early symbols are gone. That is why we think that way. Stay with me; before the Rosetta Stone was deciphered, ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs were often believed to be purely symbolic or spiritual in nature, rather than a practical written language. Same thing happens with proto-writing. They are just calling it " god's influence " and moving on. Writing didn't get invented. It took time to form from first time humans entered a cave with a child with a pigment standing somewhere it can reach with a caregiver to me writing on this forum. Our Rosetta Stone is time. If we were there to observe everything we would get it. For example; both Chinese characters and Egyptian hieroglyphs rely on visual symbols tied to context. A Chinese speaker and a non-Chinese speaker with enough contextual knowledge can interpret the meaning of the same symbol ( e.g., 木 = tree, ağaç, or whatever you call it. ). You don’t need to " read " a handprint phonetically. The context tells you the meaning ( e.g., six different handprints around/on a deer = six hunters ). The ability to create time-independent communication, a.k.a. to encode thoughts in a way that can outlast the moment and be understood by others later, is one of the most profound achievements in human history and I am tired of people taking this for granted. Like, it makes my blood boil how under-appreciated this truly is. And taking early humans as primitive? They were incredibly inventive. Creating pigments that lasted a least tens of thousands of years. Developing tools for hunting, building, and crafting. Innovating ways to communicate through symbols. If we judge them by their context, they had cutting-edge unprecedented technology. Why? Because having that isn't enough. Even the smartest animals remain limited to context-bound communication. They can not talk without being there nor talk about recorded past. Humans broke free from this constraint with symbols and art. Like seriously which is more plausible? Use Occam's Razor. Please. They say adults created handprints as part of a ritual or symbolic system. 1. Adults were already using pigments for camouflage or decoration. 2. They accidentally smeared pigment on stone and thought, " Let's make handprints. ". 3. They decided these handprints had spiritual or symbolic meaning. 4. They repeated the act as part of rituals, offerings, or symbolic communication. 5. Over time, children began participating, leaving smaller handprints. This doesnt make any sense right? How about my hypothesis then? 1. A child smeared pigment on their hand. 2. The child pressed their hand on a wall, creating a visible, fun mark. 3. Adults noticed the technique and adopted it for practical purposes over ~150k years ). It has no assumptions. A child is a child. They still draw on walls. They are that. Little chaos machines not ruled by our rules.

update: instead of using proto, i will use these names instead; Paleography, mezography, cenography. Going from proto-proto-writing to proto-writing to modern writing.

 

[yuomeii]

no nigga, instead of thinking about that, do something for me!

 

[jecroisenlasuperioritedubel]

no nigga, instead of thinking about that, do something for me!

What do you want?

 

[Robinisback]

 

[jecroisenlasuperioritedubel]

Tl,dr : Civilization as we know it started around 202 000 years ago, not 12kya. Notion of prehistoric unwritten human history is before 3200 bce is wrong, it is between 50 or 200kya. Cave paintings are writings like this one, not meant for spiritual purposes. Writing was founded by children. Same mistake happened with hieroglyphs.

 

[Robinisback]

Jokes aside, I really like your argument, there is some point I'd like to make that it over simplifies a much more deep narrative in my opinion. Crafting pigments wasn’t exactly child’s play, sourcing minerals, grinding them, and preparing usable mixtures required both effort and expertise. Realistically, such tasks were more likely performed by adults with specific intentions, Think less "free rein creativity" and more "let’s show you how it’s done."

The placement of these handprints are often deep within caves and in locations that would have required planning to access to further under scores their intentionality, I think. It’s hard to reconcile these deliberate acts with the idea of spontaneous creativity from children. While smaller handprints close to the ground suggest child involvement, it seems more like that they were participating in rituals or symbolic practices led by adults, learning through observation and structured guidance rather than leading the charge, which is a more plausible theory, atleast that's what I think.

The notion that play evolved into symbolism also feels like a really modern assumption. Early humans were already assigning meaning to marks and objects as their cognitive abilities grew. It’s likely those handprints weren’t just spur-of-the-moment scribbles..maybe they were deliberate markers of identity, belonging, or even spiritual connections?

And handprints could have served multiple purposes from the beginning, marking territories, signaling group presence, or symbolizing ancestral or spiritual ties. It’s hard to reduce something this layered to a single origin story. And let’s not forget that their appearance across different regions and times doesn’t scream "universal playtime." Different groups probably came up with their own reasons for making handprints, whether for hunting rituals, clan identification, or storytelling.

Assuming children started the trend also requires a few leaps... that they were handed pigments, given access to important spaces, and that adults looked at their messy art and decided, ‘Yes, this is the future.’ A simpler explanation? Adults, already using pigments for decoration or practical purposes, decided to make handprints intentionally, for functional, symbolic, or maybe even spiritual reasons.

So, in my opinion, handprints were likely reflection of the complex social dynamics, abstract thought,l and creativity of early humans and not just the whims of one group or demographic. It should be looked in a broader context too.


I wrote all this before going to sleep so I might have missed some points, now I'm super sleepy. Anyways, I'd like to hear your thoughts.

 

[solstice258]

I don't see why ancient people (adults) couldn't have come up with cave art for fun themselves.
In fact, I think segregating "fun and childish" vs "serious and mature" is modern society's fault.

 

[Jesse01.]

Nền văn minh không bắt đầu từ thành phố hay nông nghiệp. Nó bắt đầu từ 202 nghìn năm trước; bất cứ nơi nào có sắc tố, trẻ em, người chăm sóc và hang động. Chữ viết nguyên thủy xuất hiện từ trò chơi và tương tác, mã hóa suy nghĩ chứ không phải lời nói. Nó xuất hiện độc lập và lặp đi lặp lại, cho từng hang động riêng lẻ vào những thời điểm khác nhau. Nó thậm chí không phải để chia sẻ suy nghĩ, nó chỉ đơn giản là một điều thú vị có thể hữu ích. Giống như trò chuyện với trẻ mới biết đi/em bé của bạn và nói "Ồ, đó có phải là mẹ không?" với một số dòng ngẫu nhiên trên tường hoặc giấy của bạn. Những dấu tay nhỏ hơn, đặc biệt là gần sàn nhà, là bằng chứng trực tiếp về sự tham gia của trẻ em với tư cách là người sáng tạo. Chiều cao và vị trí của những dấu tay này gợi ý về sự thử nghiệm vui tươi hơn là hành động cố ý của người lớn. Một đứa trẻ bôi sắc tố lên tay và ấn vào tường vì tò mò hoặc vui vẻ có ý nghĩa hơn nhiều so với việc người lớn "phát hiện" ra dấu tay thông qua những tai nạn ngẫu nhiên. Đến 52 nghìn năm trước, những dấu vết này đã phát triển thành chữ viết nguyên thủy, mở đường cho các hệ thống chữ viết có cấu trúc của các nền văn minh sau này. Ý nghĩa của dấu tay rất rõ ràng và theo ngữ cảnh đối với người tạo ra chúng (ví dụ, "Tôi đã đi săn ở đây" và làm sao bạn biết điều đó? Bằng cách nhận thấy nơi Groog đếm những lần đi săn bữa tối của anh ấy có 7 dấu tay thay vì 6 và anh ấy không ở đó), nhưng ngữ cảnh này đã bị mất do thời gian trôi qua. Những dấu tay và bản vẽ nguyên thủy không phải là nghệ thuật vì chúng thiếu tính sáng tạo, đầu tư thời gian hoặc ý định thẩm mỹ. Chúng là những dấu hiệu chức năng để giao tiếp hoặc lưu giữ hồ sơ. Những cách giải thích tâm linh có thể xuất hiện sau đó, vì con người đã gán ý nghĩa cho các biểu tượng hiện có một cách hồi tố. Con người không có mong muốn cố hữu tìm kiếm "thần". Tôi thì không. Họ thì không. Không ai muốn. Họ không nói "Ồ, thần trời đang tức giận". Họ chỉ đơn giản biết rằng mưa là thứ sẽ xảy ra. Khi bạn giết một con kiến, bạn sẽ giết một con kiến. Bạn không nghĩ đến thiên đường hay địa ngục của kiến. Bạn không quan tâm. Bạn cố gắng sống sót, trả hóa đơn. Tương tự như vậy. Người lớn không thể nghĩ ra điều này. Nếu ai đó vô tình để lại dấu vết trên tường đá hoặc hang động trong khi tự vẽ - ngụy trang - trước khi đi săn, họ sẽ không thấy ngay điều đó có ý nghĩa hay đáng để sao chép. Sự chuyển đổi từ "Vết bẩn ngẫu nhiên" sang "Chúng ta hãy cố ý ấn tay vào đây." đòi hỏi một bước nhảy vọt về nhận thức và sáng tạo. Nó diễn ra rất chậm. Những trường hợp đầu tiên của nó như tôi đã nói là nguyên mẫu chữ viết. Nhưng chữ viết đó bị mất do sắc tố rất mỏng manh và thực tế là nó đã tồn tại quá lâu. Hãy xem; con người thời kỳ đầu không chỉ ấn tay một cách ngẫu nhiên. Họ đã chọn: 1. Phủ sắc tố lên tay. 2. Đặt chúng cẩn thận lên tường. 3. Lặp lại quá trình đủ để nó trở thành một tập tục dễ nhận biết và điều này được nhìn thấy ở khắp mọi nơi. Đó là cách nguyên mẫu chữ viết tồn tại đến thời đại nguyên mẫu chữ viết. Chữ viết không phải do giới tinh hoa hay các vị thần tạo ra.Đây là phát minh tập thể đầu tiên của nhân loại, bắt nguồn từ sự tò mò của trẻ em và sự hướng dẫn của người chăm sóc. Những thay đổi về môi trường, sự tuyệt chủng và sự thay đổi văn hóa có nghĩa là các điểm tham chiếu cho các ký hiệu ban đầu đã biến mất. Đó là lý do tại sao chúng ta nghĩ theo cách đó. Hãy theo dõi tôi; trước khi Rosetta Stone được giải mã, chữ tượng hình Ai Cập cổ đại thường được cho là hoàn toàn mang tính biểu tượng hoặc tâm linh, thay vì là ngôn ngữ viết thực tế. Điều tương tự cũng xảy ra với chữ viết nguyên thủy. Họ chỉ gọi đó là "ảnh hưởng của Chúa" và tiếp tục. Chữ viết không được phát minh. Phải mất thời gian để hình thành từ lần đầu tiên con người bước vào hang động với một đứa trẻ có sắc tố đứng ở nơi nào đó mà nó có thể với tới cùng với người chăm sóc cho đến khi tôi viết trên diễn đàn này. Rosetta Stone của chúng ta là thời gian. Nếu chúng ta ở đó để quan sát mọi thứ, chúng ta sẽ hiểu được. Ví dụ; cả chữ viết Trung Quốc và chữ tượng hình Ai Cập đều dựa vào các ký hiệu trực quan gắn liền với ngữ cảnh. Một người nói tiếng Trung Quốc và một người không nói tiếng Trung Quốc có đủ kiến thức về ngữ cảnh có thể diễn giải ý nghĩa của cùng một ký hiệu (ví dụ: 木 = cây, ağaç hoặc bất cứ tên gọi nào bạn muốn gọi). Bạn không cần phải "đọc" dấu tay theo ngữ âm. Ngữ cảnh sẽ cho bạn biết ý nghĩa (ví dụ, sáu dấu tay khác nhau xung quanh/trên một con hươu = sáu thợ săn). Khả năng tạo ra giao tiếp không phụ thuộc vào thời gian, hay còn gọi là mã hóa suy nghĩ theo cách có thể tồn tại lâu hơn thời điểm hiện tại và được người khác hiểu sau này, là một trong những thành tựu sâu sắc nhất trong lịch sử loài người và tôi mệt mỏi khi mọi người coi điều này là điều hiển nhiên. Giống như, máu tôi sôi lên vì điều này thực sự bị đánh giá thấp. Và coi con người thời kỳ đầu là nguyên thủy? Họ cực kỳ sáng tạo. Tạo ra các sắc tố tồn tại ít nhất hàng chục nghìn năm. Phát triển các công cụ để săn bắn, xây dựng và chế tạo. Đổi mới cách giao tiếp thông qua các biểu tượng. Nếu chúng ta đánh giá họ theo ngữ cảnh, họ đã có công nghệ tiên tiến chưa từng có. Tại sao? Bởi vì có điều đó là không đủ. Ngay cả những loài động vật thông minh nhất vẫn bị giới hạn trong giao tiếp theo ngữ cảnh. Chúng không thể nói nếu không ở đó hoặc nói về quá khứ đã ghi lại. Con người đã thoát khỏi sự ràng buộc này bằng các biểu tượng và nghệ thuật. Giống như, nghiêm túc mà nói, điều nào hợp lý hơn? Hãy sử dụng Dao cạo của Occam. Làm ơn. Họ nói rằng người lớn tạo ra dấu tay như một phần của nghi lễ hoặc hệ thống tượng trưng. 1. Người lớn đã sử dụng sắc tố để ngụy trang hoặc trang trí. 2. Họ vô tình bôi sắc tố lên đá và nghĩ rằng, "Hãy tạo dấu tay". 3. Họ quyết định những dấu tay này có ý nghĩa tâm linh hoặc tượng trưng. 4. Họ lặp lại hành động này như một phần của nghi lễ, lễ vật hoặc giao tiếp tượng trưng. 5. Theo thời gian, trẻ em bắt đầu tham gia, để lại những dấu tay nhỏ hơn. Điều này có vẻ vô lý phải không? Vậy thì giả thuyết của tôi thì sao? 1. Một đứa trẻ bôi sắc tố lên tay của chúng. 2. Đứa trẻ ấn tay của chúng lên tường, tạo ra một dấu hiệu vui nhộn, dễ thấy. 3. Người lớn nhận thấy kỹ thuật này và áp dụng nó cho mục đích thực tế trong hơn ~150 nghìn năm).Nó không có giả định nào cả. Một đứa trẻ là một đứa trẻ. Chúng vẫn vẽ trên tường. Chúng là thế. Những cỗ máy hỗn loạn nhỏ bé không bị chi phối bởi các quy tắc của chúng ta.

Bro.....

 

[jecroisenlasuperioritedubel]

I wrote all this before going to sleep so I might have missed some points, now I'm super sleepy. Anyways, I'd like to hear your thoughts.

Firstly, good night.

Crafting pigments wasn’t exactly child’s play, sourcing minerals, grinding them, and preparing usable mixtures required both effort and expertise. Realistically, such tasks were more likely performed by adults with specific intentions, Think less "free rein creativity" and more "let’s show you how it’s done."

I didn't say children made pigments. I said " 1. A child smeared pigment on their hand. ". Children don't buy dough themselves, parents buy it for them. In this case lay over pigments or while adult is smearing it on themselves to go hunting child can take it and create a mess. It is bound to happen because that is how children work unless they are extremely calm.

The placement of these handprints are often deep within caves and in locations that would have required planning to access to further under scores their intentionality, I think. It’s hard to reconcile these deliberate acts with the idea of spontaneous creativity from children. While smaller handprints close to the ground suggest child involvement, it seems more like that they were participating in rituals or symbolic practices led by adults, learning through observation and structured guidance rather than leading the charge, which is a more plausible theory, atleast that's what I think.

Well, I don't think those cave-men were like 15 people. We can see remnants of giant underground living complexes in mesopotamia. Why can't same happen deep there? Isn't it more logical that a child draws in home's own living room or their own bedroom rather than the entrance of apartment? Deeper you go; better insulation you get from outside, and better hide yourself from predators. Unless these small prints are not on child level but instead higher with intentional order, i think it is simply akin to drawing or smashing stuff. In short, I don't think people really lived near entrances but deep down. We already knew how to use fire or our eyes can adjust to absence of light easily. I have never been in a cave so... I can't say anything with 100% confidence.

The notion that play evolved into symbolism also feels like a really modern assumption. Early humans were already assigning meaning to marks and objects as their cognitive abilities grew. It’s likely those handprints weren’t just spur-of-the-moment scribbles..maybe they were deliberate markers of identity, belonging, or even spiritual connections?

I will take it as 3 parts. First; it feels like a modern assumption because we only see - and use - the only descendant of hundreds if not thousands of those proto-proto-writings. I don't think you can go from " This is the color I use to hunt. " to " This is the color I specifically paint my hand in then touch the wall near a drawing to indicate something in my mind. ". There must exist a way before. I specifically said children are the harbingers of writing because they do not have to worry about daily lives in such society. Food are given, they are taken care of, and free. They do not get punished by nature or others if they mess their camouflage. Second; Adults don't need to pigment their hands. It is simply weird? Palms are not places for camouflage. And how can you even go from " My palm is hidden by camouflage. " to " My palm is used for ritual purposes. ". I only think it makes sense if they already wrote. What I mean? Let's say our hunter gets ready to hunt. He has a place on cave wall with a crude deer drawing. He has 5 handprints there. He simply presses the 6th. It means " I am not here now if you do not see me, I am hunting deer, and if theres any way to get idea of a direction I will be here. " which are high level intentional skills. Lastly; That is why I specified 202kya to 50kya for proto-proto-writing. Our tools weren't iron since beginning. It was stone, or even wood. Basic stuff. It gets complex over time and gets complex exponentially the more progress is made. That is why I think proto-proto-writing took around 150 000 years to turn to proto-writing. We have lost that spur-of-the-moment scribbles by children way long ago. It is simply my extrapolation from general human trend of slow progress to very fast progress and saying " No one creates script because they accidently brushed some paint over. ". What I say also fits. It gives identity, " I am doing something. " and can be used as a census or signature. We still love to leave prints, albeit digital now. People do not want to be forgotten.

And handprints could have served multiple purposes from the beginning, marking territories, signaling group presence, or symbolizing ancestral or spiritual ties. It’s hard to reduce something this layered to a single origin story. And let’s not forget that their appearance across different regions and times doesn’t scream "universal playtime." Different groups probably came up with their own reasons for making handprints, whether for hunting rituals, clan identification, or storytelling.

As I said, proto-proto-writing was cave-by-cave basis, a very localized, easily forgotten trial and error akin to genetic mutations. Most of them go nowhere, like it did with proto-proto-writing. The one where it did, which is not too simple to not be built upon and too complex to easily shareable won. Maybe others used rocks to paint something or do other stuff, as other caves maybe had different situations in terms of society. But the proto-proto-writing we are currently using its descendants are focused on hunter-gatherers which must have work all day to not starve. Maybe others were too lenient and died in their own caves. It was a very slow pain-staking era for writing. I do not know other caves but for our proto-proto-writing cave I think it makes sense that it was first used by those who had free time with constant adult attention. It is simply a matter that hands were easier to draw with, can't be replicated as it's your hand, showed your identity, was easy ( as you do not need to get a rock to sign something, what if there weren't any? ). It describes how it came to be for the first time, a.k.a. how proto-writing came to be. You describe how proto-writing is used. Which is valid. I am simply against the idea that " Something divine must did something. It must have been spiritual. ", which makes humans... Not good? I think humans came there by their own selves. To wrap it up : Children and caregivers and other members in cave/basic society/tribe over 150k years continually generated many many many unfathomable amount of proto-proto-writings, some went somewhere, some died, some never even took attraction. Our proto-proto-writings got handled by children, so they have drawings and hands. Because they are the most easy things for children to draw. It got popular among other caves too by the time we start to see pigments that are strong enough to stand time of the tens thousands of years. They can get different explanations, or why they used that way, or anything, as I said this proto-writing is very, and I truly mean very, context dependant. Even context of when it was done, by whom, or what was the atmosphere, which all look nothing for us. It is like trying to watch a movie with all frames layed on top of it. You can get faces and other stuff, maybe if they overlap enough, but not the entire meaning. So even if so many proto-proto-writings passed to proto-writing stage, I think ease of our proto-proto-writing style ( hands and crude animal drawings ) won as it was the most easiest. Old people were pragmatic, they had to use their time wise, not slacking off.

Assuming children started the trend also requires a few leaps... that they were handed pigments, given access to important spaces, and that adults looked at their messy art and decided, ‘Yes, this is the future.’ A simpler explanation? Adults, already using pigments for decoration or practical purposes, decided to make handprints intentionally, for functional, symbolic, or maybe even spiritual reasons.

I wouldn't say handed, more like kid took it from them, or in another kid fashion. As I said, they were living rooms ( albeit very different ones at that according to our current standards ), so let us go with examples: Cave of El Castillo; handprints appear alongside other symbols like dots and animal figures but aren't specifically tied to burials. Caves of Gargas; handprints some with missing fingers, are scattered across various walls with no clear link to ritualistic areas, ...hypotheses of diseases, frostbite and ritual amputation, but most researchers prefer the symbolism of bending one or more fingers. Leang Karampuang; "The earliest Sulawesi rock art is not 'simple,'" Aubert added. "It is quite advanced and shows the mental capacity of people at the time.". All of these shows that those rooms weren't important spaces but simply deep within, safe places, people can stay. I do not say we have records of children using paint randomly, I say this complexity ( Leang Karampuang with a 51kya old painting being this detailed. ) clearly shows that people simply didn't wake up one day and chose to draw. They had exprience. They knew it. Continuing by oldest and most coherent cave painting, look at these quotes " "This discovery of very old cave art in Indonesia drives home the point that Europe was not the birthplace of cave art, as had long been assumed. It also suggests that storytelling was a much older part of human history, and the history of art in particular, than previously recognized," Brumm said. " and " The researchers think the painting is likely the oldest-known evidence of storytelling in art. ". I do not think this is storytelling. I think this is a way to pass information when you aren't there. For proto-writing they might had had different types of meanings for why it is that way but my point is it comes from a proto-proto-writing that took 150k years to form which caused by children being children.

So, in my opinion, handprints were likely reflection of the complex social dynamics, abstract thought,l and creativity of early humans and not just the whims of one group or demographic. It should be looked in a broader context too.

For proto-writings? Of course, you are right. But it came from proto-proto-writings, which had many died of writings and survived ones, that did not survive proto-writings age. We, 2024 humanity, still have different types for writing, don't we? Hanzi to arabic script to latin to cyrillic. AFAIK we found writing 7 times. I simply propose that it went like this thousands of failed proto-proto-writings, maybe hundreds or 50-100 proto-writings coming from a single proto-proto-writing which took a hold, to modern scripts we take granted for today. Things get blurry for me after 10k bce onwards, but we know not everyone advances through ages at the same time. Maybe those proto-proto-writings which were successful all relied on hands or drawings? I do not know. What I know is that proto-proto-writings took 150 000 years to become proto-writings and that is enough time for so many trials and errors by so many generations, so even simple mistakes can become big stuff. Butterfly effect. Languages change generation by generation. Also not all caves have to be living caves? Maybe those drawings which survived are a result of caves used during storms? Maybe it is survivorship bias, a.k.a. they were living in open, not in caves, and we only think it is caves because of course nature didn't hold on to 50k years old stuff.

Do not think proto-proto-writing as something with care. People did not randomly woke up one day saying " Evrika! ", it was through trial and error, without knowing what happens, I think and my view. Like how many people do not notice how english changed since 1800s or feel current changes.

 

[jecroisenlasuperioritedubel]

Bro.....

Bro...

 

[jecroisenlasuperioritedubel]

I don't see why ancient people (adults) couldn't have come up with cave art for fun themselves.
In fact, I think segregating "fun and childish" vs "serious and mature" is modern society's fault.

You're right that adults can be fun and creative. But in the context of early humans, their survival demands often overshadowed the time and freedom needed for unstructured creativity. Why would someone dedicate months, years, or a long time in general to inventing a new alphabet or symbolic system when they have deers to hunt or fires to tend, which are immediate needs? Survival was a full-time job then. In modern world you can not stop working for months to achieve next higher level latin alphabet people will use 2k years later. It is simply not feasible. You simply use the current alphabet and do not think about what happens. That's why I argue that children, who weren't burdened by these responsibilities, were the primary agents of playful experimentation. They could afford to cause chaos, scribble on walls, and explore pigments without immediate consequences. Of course, adults might have engaged in artistic activities as stress relief or social bonding. But those moments were likely tied to functional purposes; storytelling, planning hunts, or marking territory. The gradual emergence of symbolic systems like proto-writing wasn't a deliberate adult project but the result of countless small, accidental contributions over generations, many sparked by children's unstructured creativity. All I state here is an extrapolation due to how earliest cave paintings are complex and knowing humans don't come up with something saying " Evrika! ", they build on stuff.

 

[NotGary]

Tl,dr : Civilization as we know it started around 202 000 years ago, not 12kya. Notion of prehistoric unwritten human history is before 3200 bce is wrong, it is between 50 or 200kya. Cave paintings are writings like this one, not meant for spiritual purposes. Writing was founded by children. Same mistake happened with hieroglyphs.

hmmm strange I remember my college professor telling le it was a slave inventing it in order to facilitate trading.

anyways, thoughts about the Roman empire ?

 

[jecroisenlasuperioritedubel]

hmmm strange I remember my college professor telling le it was a slave inventing it in order to facilitate trading.

anyways, thoughts about the Roman empire ?

Before the fall or after?

 

[NerimaShinjuku]

202 kya - They figure out handprints on walls
52 kya - Proto-writing

That means 150,000 years where these idiots sat around and DID NOT INVENT WRITING. Look, I get it, survival took precedence, tribes were small, it was hard to share ideas, sabertooth tigers were always eating them. But all winter long it gets dark at 5 pm and they're sitting around in a cave staring at the fire for hours and NOBODY thought "hey, it would be handy if the way we talk to each other verbally could be notated with physical markings." Like, how hard is it to draw a deer, point at it and say "deer," draw the deer simpler and simpler over time until "deer" becomes a symbol? THEY WERE SO STUPID!

That is all.

 

[darktennisball]

Last edited: Sunday at 2:73 AM​

 

[Sturdy]

First time scrolling these threads on mangadex and this the shit I find. Crazy

 

[jecroisenlasuperioritedubel]

202 kya - They figure out handprints on walls
52 kya - Proto-writing

That means 150,000 years where these idiots sat around and DID NOT INVENT WRITING. Look, I get it, survival took precedence, tribes were small, it was hard to share ideas, sabertooth tigers were always eating them. But all winter long it gets dark at 5 pm and they're sitting around in a cave staring at the fire for hours and NOBODY thought "hey, it would be handy if the way we talk to each other verbally could be notated with physical markings." Like, how hard is it to draw a deer, point at it and say "deer," draw the deer simpler and simpler over time until "deer" becomes a symbol? THEY WERE SO STUPID!

That is all.

They weren't stupid, per se, but no valid reason to invent. As I said, you don't invent new technologies when you are with your circle, even inside jokes form over time and they are not written to explain. Youeither know, or don't. What you do is like an type 3 civilization saying we are　stupid, at our current level. We aren't. Sure we did not invent something better or will take lots of times until reach type 3, maybe another tens of thousands or more, but it just means we are simply at our best. I just want to remind thjt Internet didn't become something like this overnight, it took half a century at best, and even with all the technology we are still coming up with new stuff. Don't take what we use right now for granted. I think.

 

[jecroisenlasuperioritedubel]

First time scrolling these threads on mangadex and this the shit I find. Crazy

Crazy? I was crazy once. They locked me in a room. A rubber room. A rubber room with rats. And rats make me crazy. Crazy? I was crazy once. They locked me in a room. A rubber room. A rubber room with rats. And rats make me crazy. Crazy? I was crazy once. They locked me in a room. A rubber room. A rubber room with rats. And rats make me crazy. Crazy? I was crazy once. They locked me in a room. A rubber room. A rubber room with rats. And rats make me crazy. Crazy? I was crazy once. They locked me in a room. A rubber room. A rubber room with rats. And rats make me crazy. Crazy? I was crazy once. They lockеd me in a room. A rubber room. A rubber room with rats. And rats makе me crazy. Crazy? I was crazy once. They locked me in a room. A rubber room. A rubber room with rats. And rats make me crazy. Crazy? I was crazy once. They locked me in a room. A rubber room. A rubber room with rats. And rats make me crazy.

 

[Justice88]

Rats? I hate rats, they make me crazy. Crazy? I was crazy once. They put me in a room, a rubber room, with rubber rats. Rats? I hate rats, they make crazy. Crazy? I was crazy once. They put me in a room, a rubber room, with rubber rats. Rats? I hate rats, they make the crazy. Crazy? I was crazy once, they put me in a room, a rubber room with rubber rats. Rats? I hate rats, they make me go crazy. Crazy? I was crazy once.

 

[NotGary]

Rats? I hate rats

why ? what did they do to you ?