A recent discovery in Barnham, Sussex seemingly pushes the date back of when man utilised fire by 350,000 years, to date the oldest evidence was dated around 50,000 years ago and coincided with finds that showed our ancestors were evolving into a more specialised tool maker. 

This recent finding suggests that we might have to revaluate how we view our past
Link to BBC Article
Natural History Museum Link

Quote:Sites in Africa suggest humans used natural fire over a million years ago, but the discovery at the Palaeolithic site in Barnham evidences the creation and control of fire, which carries huge implications for human development and evolution. Until now, the oldest known evidence of fire making was from 50,000 years ago, found in northern France.

So... We've used fire for a million years but could only create the stuff for 50,000 years until this recent discovery, it wouldn't be completely out of the question that we could add a bit more time to the timeline and our ingenuity.

Quote:The evidence, probably produced by some of the oldest Neanderthal groups, consists of a patch of heated clay, heat-shattered flint handaxes and two small pieces of iron pyrite. It has taken the team, led by Nick Ashton and Rob Davis at the British Museum, four years to demonstrate that the heated clay was not caused by wildfire. Geochemical tests show temperatures of over 700°C with repeated fire-use in the same location of the site – indicating a campfire, or hearth, that had been used by people on several occasions.

Modern humans might not have even existed when this firepit was in use, I'd like to think in time we'll come to terms that we're not as special as we think and that humans in general are a creative and capable bunch. History so far hasn't always been the kindest to the memory of our closely related cousins. As if anything but modern humans were simply cavemen incapable of being our equals. This finding shows an understanding of fire and minerals which to me opens up the possibility they were capable of much more.

Of course it could just be an aberration, a one off we've been ever so lucky to find, personally I'd rather keep my mind open to the possibilities. Figured some would enjoy this finding and how conclusive it seems to be.

(12-10-2025, 12:38 PM)Ray1990 Wrote: A recent discovery in Barnham, Sussex seemingly pushes the date back of when man utilised fire by 350,000 years, to date the oldest evidence was dated around 50,000 years ago and coincided with finds that showed our ancestors were evolving into a more specialised tool maker. 

This recent finding suggests that we might have to revaluate how we view our past
Link to BBC Article
Natural History Museum Link

So... We've used fire for a million years but could only create the stuff for 50,000 years until this recent discovery, it wouldn't be completely out of the question that we could add a bit more time to the timeline and our ingenuity.


Modern humans might not have even existed when this firepit was in use, I'd like to think in time we'll come to terms that we're not as special as we think and that humans in general are a creative and capable bunch. History so far hasn't always been the kindest to the memory of our closely related cousins. As if anything but modern humans were simply cavemen incapable of being our equals. This finding shows an understanding of fire and minerals which to me opens up the possibility they were capable of much more.

Of course it could just be an aberration, a one off we've been ever so lucky to find, personally I'd rather keep my mind open to the possibilities. Figured some would enjoy this finding and how conclusive it seems to be.

I think you may be right, in that, our ancient ancestors may have been more resourceful because survival was at stake or am I underestimating their ability to connect the dots with using more complex thinking?

I just watched a video where a wolf came upon an unmanned video surveilled crab trap where it was able to determine that by pulling in the fishing line/gear it could have a ready meal of crabs or bait.

The debate now becomes was it cognitive complexity or puzzle-solving for the wolf? 

Is necessity really the mother of invention?

(12-10-2025, 01:00 PM)quintessentone Wrote: I think you may be right, in that, our ancient ancestors may have been more resourceful because survival was at stake or am I underestimating their ability to connect the dots with using more complex thinking?

I just watched a video where a wolf came upon an unmanned video surveilled crab trap where it was able to determine that by pulling in the fishing line/gear it could have a ready meal of crabs or bait.

The debate now becomes was it cognitive complexity or puzzle-solving for the wolf? 

Is necessity really the mother of invention?

Complex thinking isn't strictly reserved to humans but I guess until we can read minds or speak corvid the best we can do is work on theories. Is it simply animal instinct to gather in locations at the unique times there's a glut of food? Like lions to the watering hole or bears to the river during salmon season...

I doubt it's just animal instinct. There's something ticking over in their noggins I'm sure.

Wolves are somewhat curious and social, dogs even more so. The theme I've always gathered with our own past is that the snowballing effect of intelligence was explosive at first but evidence like this sort of points towards a slow and steady growth than man made a friend 40,000 years ago and now we've got handbag dogs. Plus one has to consider how smart the proto-wolf was to kindle that first relationship. At the same time we have had some explosive times in our past such as metallurgy where our higher ability to communicate completely changed the playing field in a few hundred years. 

Like I mentioned this could've been a fluke, a small group that discovered fire but never had the chance to spread the knowledge, it definitely wouldn't be the first time humans have independently discovered something that'll be repeated, stirrups come to mind but there's probably loads of examples.

Why would it have to be different for animals that are capable of complex cognition/higher thinking? Social structure and ability to communicate will factor strongly in the possibility but history is long and life is short... Makes the odds likely in my mind. It's not like released dolphins don't teach tricks to their mates which they've learnt off humans.

Billie the Dolphin

In the case of your example I'd say "same difference" the wolf has a mind that isn't as simple as 18/19th century thinking would lead us to believe. It's more than capable of figuring stuff out whether it was by observation or actually pondering where the line goes. Risk/reward will play heavily into it too, social intelligence does seem to be the glue that binds and offers awareness.

(12-10-2025, 05:20 PM)Ray1990 Wrote: Complex thinking isn't strictly reserved to humans but I guess until we can read minds or speak corvid the best we can do is work on theories. Is it simply animal instinct to gather in locations at the unique times there's a glut of food? Like lions to the watering hole or bears to the river during salmon season...

I doubt it's just animal instinct. There's something ticking over in their noggins I'm sure.

Wolves are somewhat curious and social, dogs even more so. The theme I've always gathered with our own past is that the snowballing effect of intelligence was explosive at first but evidence like this sort of points towards a slow and steady growth than man made a friend 40,000 years ago and now we've got handbag dogs. Plus one has to consider how smart the proto-wolf was to kindle that first relationship. At the same time we have had some explosive times in our past such as metallurgy where our higher ability to communicate completely changed the playing field in a few hundred years. 

Like I mentioned this could've been a fluke, a small group that discovered fire but never had the chance to spread the knowledge, it definitely wouldn't be the first time humans have independently discovered something that'll be repeated, stirrups come to mind but there's probably loads of examples.

Why would it have to be different for animals that are capable of complex cognition/higher thinking? Social structure and ability to communicate will factor strongly in the possibility but history is long and life is short... Makes the odds likely in my mind. It's not like released dolphins don't teach tricks to their mates which they've learnt off humans.

Billie the Dolphin

In the case of your example I'd say "same difference" the wolf has a mind that isn't as simple as 18/19th century thinking would lead us to believe. It's more than capable of figuring stuff out whether it was by observation or actually pondering where the line goes. Risk/reward will play heavily into it too, social intelligence does seem to be the glue that binds and offers awareness.

With ancient man and controlling fire, I do wonder if they first used it for heating or protection from predatory animals and then I wonder just exactly how they figured out to use it to cook meat and other food stuffs.

The Inuit ate and still eat their meat and organs of animals raw, but their cold climate kept food from spoiling, so perhaps using fire for cooking wasn't a priority.

I wonder if the learning that fire can make raw meat or other foods taste better or last longer was learned by a fortunate accident by ancient man in warmer climates or they used innovative thinking.

I'm not so sure about the claim of earliest known fire was 350,000 years earlier, since the Inuit's innovative use of burning fuel for varied uses was only 3,000 years ago, but of course both situations vary greatly.

-------------

"It is uncertain in which period the seal-oil lamps began to be used. They are part of a series of technological innovations among the Arctic peoples whose introduction and spread has been partly documented. Oil lamps have been found in sites of Paleo-Eskimo communities dating back to the time of the Norton tradition, 3,000 years ago.[sup][7][/sup] They were a common implement of the Dorset culture and of the Thule people, the lamps manufactured then showing little changes compared with more recent ones.[sup][8]"[/sup]

Qulliq - Wikipedia

Never looked that much into when we started actively making fire as opposed to using fire. It's always unfortunate when you get these papers because reporting of them tends to drown out the earlier publications.   But I did find pull up a paper from 2016 that gave an overview of
it:
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4874402/  So use of fire is very ancient to humans. Examples ranging back a million years.  The difficult part is showing when we started intentionally making fires as opposed to making use of natural ones.  It's very difficult to tell for sure. The site described is the best example so far of intentional fires starting. But it's very difficult to find proof of intentionally starting a fire.    It's less challenging beliefs than finding evidence they were looking for and more than kind of expected.
 But that's just based from my quick look through,  not any deep insight. 
 
 On how widespread the use was, it's interesting to note the article I posted above noted that fire use is more noticeable at sites around 400,000 years ago. Contemporary to the papers findings. 
 Barnham is also about 200 miles from the site mentioned in England in the article where early fire usage was noted. With a debate then about if it was sustained fire from natural sources or fires started by human hands and sustained.

I wonder who will be inclined to disagree with the interpretation of the unearthed evidence.

I can't say I was ever comfortable with the traditional 'flavor' of depicting primitive man... but despite that it seems hard to think that we were using fire as a tool over a quarter of a million years ago... and we still can't get it 'exactly' right.

I have long thought that the evolution of intelligence in humans was "sparked"  by key individuals who for some reason or another, were born with enhanced problem solving skills and were just better observers than the average of the population.

Long before mankind learned to start a fire from scratch, they must have witnessed volcanic lava overtaking land and starting dried timber on fire and perhaps even exposed coal that had been ignited.

 I think lightning strikes could have supplied many wild  fires but lava would be in a consistent place for a relatively long time.

They found ways to capture and transport glowing embers and then assemble wood fires at will as long as they had access to the lava, when their personal stash got extinguished. They would teach this to others, but it meant having to always be near natural fire sources.

To actually start a fire from scratch was of course, a major breakthrough. It must have evolved from flaking rocks to make tools and accidentally sparking some grass in the process. Another method may have been the observance of heat produced by rubbing sticks to break them.

The more observant and diligent members of the clans would continuously try and re-create the conditions where the heat was able to produce smoke then flame.

As intelligence increased, then cause and effect started to become comprehendable.

As with all humans; the most intelligent of the groups would be the ones that produced breakthroughs by observing more and contemplating more than others and were persistent enough to make the key discoveries and teach them to others. These kind of situations have kept us going ever since.

I am sure that professionals in archeology would have a lot more to add to this scenario, but I think it is pretty close to how things really happened.

Earliest Fire we’ve found so far. Fixed it.

i don’t suspect fire or aspects of it’s evident use keep so well.

Fascinating all the same.

(12-10-2025, 10:37 PM)charlyv Wrote: I have long thought that the evolution of intelligence in humans was "sparked"  by key individuals who for some reason or another, were born with enhanced problem solving skills and were just better observers than the average of the population.

Long before mankind learned to start a fire from scratch, they must have witnessed volcanic lava overtaking land and starting dried timber on fire and perhaps even exposed coal that had been ignited.

 I think lightning strikes could have supplied many wild  fires but lava would be in a consistent place for a relatively long time.

They found ways to capture and transport glowing embers and then assemble wood fires at will as long as they had access to the lava, when their personal stash got extinguished. They would teach this to others, but it meant having to always be near natural fire sources.

To actually start a fire from scratch was of course, a major breakthrough. It must have evolved from flaking rocks to make tools and accidentally sparking some grass in the process. Another method may have been the observance of heat produced by rubbing sticks to break them.

The more observant and diligent members of the clans would continuously try and re-create the conditions where the heat was able to produce smoke then flame.

As intelligence increased, then cause and effect started to become comprehendable.

As with all humans; the most intelligent of the groups would be the ones that produced breakthroughs by observing more and contemplating more than others and were persistent enough to make the key discoveries and teach them to others. These kind of situations have kept us going ever since.

I am sure that professionals in archeology would have a lot more to add to this scenario, but I think it is pretty close to how things really happened.

Ive read where once prehistoric man had a stable food supply, this helped them have the time to experiment and ponder the mysteries of fire, aka hard to see them develop fire-making abilities if they were overly nomadic and hunting and gathering all the time. 

I always enjoyed The Quest for Fire theory; it was a learned habit that was modified and improved upon for decades, if not centuries... those who possessed fire had better security at night and could make tools learn 24/7,

(12-10-2025, 08:20 PM)Maxmars Wrote: I wonder who will be inclined to disagree with the interpretation of the unearthed evidence.

I can't say I was ever comfortable with the traditional 'flavor' of depicting primitive man... but despite that it seems hard to think that we were using fire as a tool over a quarter of a million years ago... and we still can't get it 'exactly' right.

I don't find it that hard to believe.

Humans have used chert/flint for 3 million years, sometime between now and then they'll have figured out the best places to source the stuff which means they'll have come across other minerals such as pyrite which is often found in sedimentary layers such as chalk or limestone, the same place they'd find their chert.

There's evidence of glue making going back 200,000 years, it would be ignorant on our part to assume all our ancestors were really doing is bashing rocks together and hoping for the best.