The bone of Ishango
An international team of researchers has identified what may be the first artificial memory systems created by humans, recorded in bones for tens of thousands of years.
These discoveries, presented in a published last month in the magazine Archaeological and Anthropological Sciencessuggest that our ancestors already used Objects to record information – Long before the invention of writing.
Os Artificial Memory SystemsL (SMA) These are tools that allow you to store and recover information outside the human brain. Modern examples include since computers to counting sticks used in the Middle Ages to maintain tax records.
The study now presented suggests that these systems can have their roots in the paleolithic, recorded on bones or animals.
According to, the study analyzed 22 archaeological artifactsS, some over 70,000 years old, along with more recent ethnographic examples, such as indigenous culture wood calendars.
Investigators then compared the brands in these objects with others made by daily activities such as the Slaughter of animals or symbolic decorations.
Not all brands in old bones have meaning. To identify possible SMA, the team sought specific standardsas sorted and evenly spaced marks that are not randomly grouped but regularly arranged.
The investigators also sought changes in tools used, indicating that the brands were made at different times, such as updating a record, and the fact that the brands are often accuratelyunlike those made during the cut of meat.
These objects exhibit asystematically different spatial managementwhich distinguishes them from other artifacts, notes the study.
Among the analyzed objects are a babuine bone At 44,000 years old found in Border Cave, South Africa, which features marks that may represent count.
A 15,000 -year -old reindeer horn was also analyzed in La Marche, France, which is divided into sections to “store” informationin addition to medieval counting sticks and indigenous calendarswhich show standards similar to those of the paleolithic.
Ethnographic and upper paleolithic SMA share spatial signatures Let them clearly distinguish them from bones with slaughter or decorative marks, the authors conclude.
What were they used for?
Although we cannot know for sure what these brands recorded, there are several hypotheses to explain the patterns found.
One of these hypotheses is that they may have served to count or events, Like the lunar calendars of some cultures. May also have been Lists of Objects or Peoplewithout the need for exact numbers, such as the “message sticks” of Australian Aborigines.
May also have been systems proto-mathematiciansperhaps to compare quantities (“more” or “less”).
The study notes that Not all ancient peoples had concepts numerical Complexes. Some cultures, like certain Amazonian tribes, have only. Therefore, these SMA may reflect an intermediate step in the evolution of quantification.
These findings reveal that the Need to register information It is as old as our species. Recording information on objects is a form of external representation that defines a communication technology, emphasize the authors of the study.
In other words, these bones They were not just paleolithic pen drives but also tools to convey knowledge within a group.
The study also offers an innovative method for analyzing old brands: using space statistics, the researchers measured the placement of each incision as if they were points on a map. This allows an objective distinction between a bone recorded by chance and one with symbolic intention.
Who created them?
Some of the older objects come from sites associated with Homo sapiensbut there are also cases, such as a bone of Les Pradelles (France, 72,000–60,000 years), which may be linked to neanderthals.
This opens a debate: would other hominids capable of creating memory systems? The authors ask for caution, but do not exclude the possibility.
The study is not about bones; It’s about How we started thinking. These marks may reflect a crucial step in the transition from basic cognitive capabilities – such as distinguishing between “few” and “many” – for abstract concepts like numbers, researchers explain.
These objects are more than archaeological curiosities; are the first clues about as we started to domesticate the time, the amount And perhaps the very idea of the future.
