Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been made only by the Palean people Recently however archaeol

The conclusions drawn by the writer is very weak and lacks substantial proofs. It is supported by many weak assumptions rather than strong evidences which are ambiguous by nature. Quite a few numbers of arguments have been put forward by the author to support his claim.

First of all, author assumed no change in geography from ancient time till now. He does not bring in consideration the possible change in topography. He claims that crossing river was the only way to travel from Palea to Lithos. He lacks evidence to prove if the river existed at that time. The river which is deep and broad now might have been shallow and it would have been possible to cross the river by foot. Author needs to find information on river and undisputable fact that the river obstructs any communication between two villages should be provided to warrant the conclusions.

Additionally, author implies that boat was the only medium to commute between two villages and Palean village did not have boats. Nowhere is it stated that the people of Lithos did not have boats. People of both sides of river might have traversed goods if Lithos village had boats. Also, the author needs to find out whether there were other modes of transportation. Were there any bridges, other routes? Then there might not be any need to have boat at all for trade to take place. Author states that no Palean boats have been found. Lack of presence of boat does not mean non-existent. The baskets might have been dumped by the river if the baskets were small in number. But, the author does not mention the number of baskets. Also, there is a possibility of baskets being made somewhere and sold somewhere else. They may be a presence of market somewhere, where the baskets were brought to sell. There is also a possibility of trade/barter system. Village dwellers could have involved themselves in that. The samples might also be from an external source like travelers may have been crossing the terrain and left the baskets behind. Only by ruling these out, we can draw some conclusions. Closer scrutiny is needed.

We can find the age of the baskets found in Palea and Lithos by “radio isotope decay method” which will help us find the time period in which baskets belonged and were invented. Also, the author needs to find if the basket is really unique to the Palean culture. If it is just a complicated novel pattern, people from other villages might have been able to weave them as well. Author needs to show some strong archaeological finding that no similar patterns were found elsewhere. Without this, author cannot justifiably claim that the baskets were uniquely Palean.

In order to refute the previous belief, author needs to use historic and geographic accounts to corroborate. Further evidence can be collected by studying prehistoric maps and judging from them whether the river was even a barrier for the Palean and Lithos people. Communication between two villages should be studies i.e. trade, route for the travelers etc which might explain the reason of the same form of the baskets in two different locations. In conclusion, baskets were not Palean seems premature and misplaced. Other courses of actions are needed to verify the origins for conclusions to be clear, coherent, rigid and persuasive. In sum, argument is unsound due to lack of substantial evidence.