Oldest Footprint
Posted by: Loren Coleman on August 20th, 2007
The photograph the ancient footprint has not been published, to the best of our knowledge.
Egyptian archaeologists have found what they said could be the oldest human footprint in history in the country’s western desert, the Arab country’s antiquities’ chief said on Monday.
“This could go back about two million years,” said Zahi Hawass, the secretary general of the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities. “It could be the most important discovery in Egypt,” he told Reuters.
Archaeologists found the footprint, imprinted on mud and then hardened into rock, while exploring a prehistoric site in Siwa, a desert oasis.
Scientists are using carbon tests on plants found in the rock to determine its exact age, Hawass said.
Khaled Saad, the director of prehistory at the council, said that based on the age of the rock where the footprint was found, it could date back even further than the renowned 3-million year-old fossil Lucy, the partial skeleton of an ape-man, found in Ethiopia in 1974.
Most archaeological interest in Egypt is focused on the time of the pharaohs.
Previously, the earliest human archaeological evidence from Egypt dated back around 200,000 years, Saad said.Dateline: Cairo – Reuters, April 20, 2007.
But of what species is it a footprint? Homo erectus? Paranthropus? Australopithecus? An unknown hairy hominoid of Africa? An agogwe? An ngoloko?
This post was written by
Loren Coleman no longer writes for Cryptomundo. His archived posts remain here at Cryptomundo.
assuming this photo is of the actual footprint, it does look quite sasquatchy (although the toes look kind of long- more ape-like than those that seem typical of BF casts). The real issues here are size and age. If it is of a 3+ million year old hominid (i.e., probably some kind of australopithecine) from africa it is likely to be quite small (do you have any info on measurements loren?). Of course, presumably no-one suggests that BF actually is an australopithecine (given their size and known distribution). As such, although interesting in its own right, it would be much more interesting with regards to BF to have footprints of, say, Homo erectus (or of giganto). This footprint only helps in a rather indirect way (i.e., showing that hominid creatures can have footprints that are roughly like those often reported for sas).
great find though.
This is a known faked footprint from Texas.