DOCSLIB.ORG

Radiocarbon Dating of Archaeological Assemblages with Implications for Neanderthal-Modern Human Interactions

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Radiocarbon Dating of Archaeological Assemblages with Implications for Neanderthal-Modern Human Interactions Establishing Contexts of Encounters: Radiocarbon Dating of Archaeological Assemblages With Implications for Neanderthal-Modern Human Interactions The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Alex, Bridget Annelia. 2016. Establishing Contexts of Encounters: Radiocarbon Dating of Archaeological Assemblages With Implications for Neanderthal-Modern Human Interactions. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Graduate School of Arts & Sciences. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:33493527 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA Establishing contexts of encounters: radiocarbon dating of archaeological assemblages with implications for Neanderthal-modern human interactions A dissertation presented by BRIDGET ANNELIA ALEX to The Committee on Anthropological Archaeology and Human Evolutionary Biology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the subject of Anthropological Archaeology & Human Evolutionary Biology Harvard University Cambridge, Massachusetts April 2016 © 2016 Bridget Annelia Alex All rights reserved Dissertation Advisor: Dr. David Pilbeam Bridget Annelia Alex Establishing contexts of encounters: radiocarbon dating of archaeological assemblages with implications for Neanderthal-modern human interactions ABSTRACT This dissertation seeks to reconstruct the distribution of Neanderthals and modern humans in time and geographic space in order to better understand the nature of interactions between the groups. Because human fossils from the Late Pleistocene are so rare, the biogeography of Neanderthals and moderns is primarily inferred from radiocarbon dates of archeological industries, which are assumed to have been made by one group or the other. Following this methodology, I critically reviewed published radiocarbon dates and produced new dates from active excavations in three regions: the Levant, Balkans, and Northeast Europe. The resulting regional chronologies were compared to the distributions of Neanderthals and moderns predicted from interaction models of no overlap, rapid replacement, and prolonged coexistence. The scenario of prolonged coexistence was subdivided into models of integration, displacement, and avoidance. Informative archaeological chronologies were produced for each region. In Northeast Europe, my new dates and site chronologies for Ciemna and Ob!azowa Caves, Poland, suggest that the Middle Paleolithic ended before 45 kcalBP. In the greater region, a number of distinct assemblages appeared during Marine Isotope Stage 3 (MIS-3), but the duration and sequence of these industries is not well resolved due to the large iii uncertainties of the available chronometric dates. In the Levant, the dates and chronology reported here for Manot Cave, Israel, help to clarify the timing of Early Upper Paleolithic industries and test proposed migrations of modern humans between the Near East and Europe. Specifically, at Manot the Early Ahmarian industry was present by 46 kcalBP and the Levantine Aurignacian occurred between 37-35 kcalBP. However, it was the results from the Balkans that were most applicable to the interaction models proposed in this dissertation, and therefore most informative on the nature of Neanderthal-modern human interactions. The new dates from Pe"turina, Had#i Prodanova, and Smolu$ka Caves, combined with published dates from other sites, suggest that Neanderthals and moderns overlapped for several thousand years in the Balkans. During this period of overlap the groups occupied distinct geographic zones, consistent with the models of prolonged coexistence by displacement or avoidance. The period of overlap ended by 39,000 calBP at the time of the Campanian Ignimbrite eruption and onset of the Heinrich Event 4 cold phase. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 – Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1! 1.1 The research question and approach ..................................................................................... 1! 1.2 What ancient DNA can and cannot tell us ............................................................................ 3! 1.3 Using archaeological industries as proxies for human groups .............................................. 8! 1.4 The biogeographic approach ............................................................................................... 12! 1.4.1 Interaction Models ....................................................................................................... 12! 1.5 Dissertation outline ............................................................................................................. 17! 1.6 References ........................................................................................................................... 17! Chapter 2 – Radiocarbon dates from Manot Cave, Israel Establish Early Upper Paleolithic Chronology of Levant with Implications for Human Dispersals ................................ 23! 2.1 Abstract ............................................................................................................................... 24! 2.2 Significance ......................................................................................................................... 24! 2.3 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 25! 2.4 Manot Cave ......................................................................................................................... 27! 2.5 Results and Discussion ....................................................................................................... 29! 2.5.1 Chronostratigraphy at Manot ....................................................................................... 29! 2.5.2 Implications for regional chronology ........................................................................... 34! 2.5.3 Implications for the spread of modern humans and UP technology ............................ 39! 2.6 Methods summary ............................................................................................................... 40! 2.7 Supporting information ....................................................................................................... 42! 2.7.1 Levantine Early Upper Paleolithic ............................................................................... 42! 2.7.2 Manot Cave .................................................................................................................. 44! 2.7.3 Geoarchaeological analysis .......................................................................................... 46! 2.7.4 Radiocarbon dating ...................................................................................................... 50! 2.7.5 Regional chronology .................................................................................................... 63! 2.8 Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................. 70! 2.9 References ........................................................................................................................... 71! Chapter 3 – Chronology of the Middle-Upper Paleolithic Transition in the Balkans based on Reliable Radiocarbon Dates ..................................................................................................... 79! 3.1 Abstract ............................................................................................................................... 80! 3.2 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 81! 3.3 Background ......................................................................................................................... 82! 3.3.1 Paleolithic research in the Balkans .............................................................................. 82! 3.3.2 Biogeography and culture history ................................................................................ 85! 3.3.3 CI eruption and H4 event ............................................................................................. 91! 3.3.4 Reliable radiocarbon dates ........................................................................................... 92! 3.4 Materials and Methods ........................................................................................................ 93! 3.4.1 New radiocarbon dates ................................................................................................. 93! 3.4.2 Review of published dates ........................................................................................... 97! 3.5 Results and Discussion ..................................................................................................... 100! 3.5.1 Chronology at Pe!turina, Had"i Prodanova, and Smou#ka ....................................... 100! 3.5.2 Regional Archaeological Chronology ........................................................................ 103! 3.5.3 Implications for Neanderthal-modern human interactions .......................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Assessing Relationships Between Human Adaptive Responses and Ecology Via Eco-Cultural Niche Modeling William E
    Assessing relationships between human adaptive responses and ecology via eco-cultural niche modeling William E. Banks To cite this version: William E. Banks. Assessing relationships between human adaptive responses and ecology via eco- cultural niche modeling. Archaeology and Prehistory. Universite Bordeaux 1, 2013. hal-01840898 HAL Id: hal-01840898 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01840898 Submitted on 11 Nov 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Thèse d'Habilitation à Diriger des Recherches Université de Bordeaux 1 William E. BANKS UMR 5199 PACEA – De la Préhistoire à l'Actuel : Culture, Environnement et Anthropologie Assessing Relationships between Human Adaptive Responses and Ecology via Eco-Cultural Niche Modeling Soutenue le 14 novembre 2013 devant un jury composé de: Michel CRUCIFIX, Chargé de Cours à l'Université catholique de Louvain, Belgique Francesco D'ERRICO, Directeur de Recherche au CRNS, Talence Jacques JAUBERT, Professeur à l'Université de Bordeaux 1, Talence Rémy PETIT, Directeur de Recherche à l'INRA, Cestas Pierre SEPULCHRE, Chargé de Recherche au CNRS, Gif-sur-Yvette Jean-Denis VIGNE, Directeur de Recherche au CNRS, Paris Table of Contents Summary of Past Research Introduction ..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Initial Upper Paleolithic Bladelet Production: Bladelets in Moravian Bohunician Produkce Čepelek V Iniciálním Mladém Paleolitu: Čepelky V Moravském Bohunicienu
    Přehled výzkumů 61/1, 2020 X 21–29 Initial Upper Paleolithic bladelet production: Bladelets in Moravian Bohunician Produkce čepelek v iniciálním mladém paleolitu: čepelky v moravském bohunicienu – Yuri E. Demidenko*, Petr Škrdla, Tereza Rychtaříková – “What about the bladelets?” J. Tixier, 1987 (Williams, Bergman 2010, 117) Introduction KEYWORDS: The “bladelet issue” continues to be central to continuing discussions on the recognition of various Early Upper Palaeo- Initial Upper Palaeolithic – Bohunician – bladelets – Boker Tachtit – lithic (UP) techno-complexes and industry types in the Levant, Kara-Bom – Ořechov especially concerning the identifi cation of the so-called true Au- rignacian in the region (for the latest discussions, see Williams, Bergman 2010; Demidenko, Hauck 2017; Goring-Morris, ABSTRACT Belfer-Cohen 2018). The present paper touches on the bladelet issue for the chronologically earlier Initial UP techno-complexes Bladelets are a common Upper Palaeolithic technological category, often in Eurasia (Fig. 1) and particularly its Central European Bohu- described as a proxy for the Early Upper Palaeolithic. However, bladelet pro- nician “representative”. duction has already been documented within preceding Initial Upper Palae- Nowadays it can be surely said that the bladelet issue is in- olithic techno-complexes, e.g. at Boker Tachtit (Negev Desert, Israel) and deed one of the most discussed subjects in Eurasian Palaeolithic Kara-Bom (Altai Republic, Russian Federation). Only isolated bladelets have Archaeology (e.g. Le Brun-Ricalens et al. eds. 2005). From our been reported from the Central European Bohunician. However, a recently point of view, this is mostly due to the recognition of the impor- discovered and excavated site, Ořechov IV – Kabáty has yielded a large series tant role of bladelets in the hunting projectile weaponry of UP (over 1,000 items) of micro-blades and bladelets, documenting a higher de- humans.
    [Show full text]
  • Paleoanthropology Society Meeting Abstracts, St. Louis, Mo, 13-14 April 2010
    PALEOANTHROPOLOGY SOCIETY MEETING ABSTRACTS, ST. LOUIS, MO, 13-14 APRIL 2010 New Data on the Transition from the Gravettian to the Solutrean in Portuguese Estremadura Francisco Almeida , DIED DEPA, Igespar, IP, PORTUGAL Henrique Matias, Department of Geology, Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa, PORTUGAL Rui Carvalho, Department of Geology, Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa, PORTUGAL Telmo Pereira, FCHS - Departamento de História, Arqueologia e Património, Universidade do Algarve, PORTUGAL Adelaide Pinto, Crivarque. Lda., PORTUGAL From an anthropological perspective, the passage from the Gravettian to the Solutrean is one of the most interesting transition peri- ods in Old World Prehistory. Between 22 kyr BP and 21 kyr BP, during the beginning stages of the Last Glacial Maximum, Iberia and Southwest France witness a process of substitution of a Pan-European Technocomplex—the Gravettian—to one of the first examples of regionalism by Anatomically Modern Humans in the European continent—the Solutrean. While the question of the origins of the Solutrean is almost as old as its first definition, the process under which it substituted the Gravettian started to be readdressed, both in Portugal and in France, after the mid 1990’s. Two chronological models for the transition have been advanced, but until very recently the lack of new archaeological contexts of the period, and the fact that the many of the sequences have been drastically affected by post depositional disturbances during the Lascaux event, prevented their systematic evaluation. Between 2007 and 2009, and in the scope of mitigation projects, archaeological fieldwork has been carried in three open air sites—Terra do Manuel (Rio Maior), Portela 2 (Leiria), and Calvaria 2 (Porto de Mós) whose stratigraphic sequences date precisely to the beginning stages of the LGM.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Origin Sites and the World Heritage Convention in Eurasia
    World Heritage papers41 HEADWORLD HERITAGES 4 Human Origin Sites and the World Heritage Convention in Eurasia VOLUME I In support of UNESCO’s 70th Anniversary Celebrations United Nations [ Cultural Organization Human Origin Sites and the World Heritage Convention in Eurasia Nuria Sanz, Editor General Coordinator of HEADS Programme on Human Evolution HEADS 4 VOLUME I Published in 2015 by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 7, place de Fontenoy, 75352 Paris 07 SP, France and the UNESCO Office in Mexico, Presidente Masaryk 526, Polanco, Miguel Hidalgo, 11550 Ciudad de Mexico, D.F., Mexico. © UNESCO 2015 ISBN 978-92-3-100107-9 This publication is available in Open Access under the Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 IGO (CC-BY-SA 3.0 IGO) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/igo/). By using the content of this publication, the users accept to be bound by the terms of use of the UNESCO Open Access Repository (http://www.unesco.org/open-access/terms-use-ccbysa-en). The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNESCO concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The ideas and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors; they are not necessarily those of UNESCO and do not commit the Organization. Cover Photos: Top: Hohle Fels excavation. © Harry Vetter bottom (from left to right): Petroglyphs from Sikachi-Alyan rock art site.
    [Show full text]
  • The Early Upper Palaeolithic of Kostenki: Chronology, Taxonomy, and Cultural Affiliation
    27 THE EARLY UPPER PALAEOLITHIC OF KOSTENKI: CHRONOLOGY, TAXONOMY, AND CULTURAL AFFILIATION A. A. Sinitsyn Abstract represents a distinct regional pattern comparable to much larg- er geographic areas of Europe. This paper deals with the structure, composition, and chro- Nine major geographic areas or zones of cultural evolu- nology of the early stage of the Upper Palaeolithic in the tion are identified for the European Upper Palaeolithic (Fig. Kostenki-Borshchevo area, from the earliest manifestation of 1). There seems to be consensus that each of these areas, such Upper Palaeolithic technocomplexes to the appearance of the as the Aquitanian, western Mediterranean, Central Europe, local Gravettian. This is a principal unit of Upper Palaeolithic Balkans, eastern Mediterranean, and others, represents distinct classification showing a fundamental change in the organiza- zones of local cultural development during the Upper Palaeo- tion of the Upper Palaeolithic European world at 28–30 ka. lithic. During some time periods, one or more areas reflect The Kostenki model provides evidence of both general Eu- common developments (see DJINDJIAN 2006): ropean evolutional trends and particular local features, which a) the Early Upper Palaeolithic (EUP) exhibits a binary pat- appear to be the basis for its distinction as a separate period of tern, one component of which is the Aurignacian with a con- Upper Palaeolithic classification. tinental distribution, while the other is represented by series of local “transitional” cultures: Castelperronean for Western Eu- Keywords rope; Uluzzo for a limited part of the Western Mediterranean, Upper Palaeolithic, Kostenki’ model of evolution, EUP-MUP Szeletian and Bohunician traditions for Central Europe; and boundary.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Gravettian Occupations at Dolní Věstonice – Pavlov. Comments on the Gravettian Origin
    EARLY GRAVETTIAN OCCUPATIONS AT DOLNÍ VĚSTONICE – PAVLOV. COMMENTS ON THE GRAVETTIAN ORIGIN Jiří Svoboda 1,2, Martin Novák 2, Sandra Sázelová 1, 2 1 - Department of Anthropology, Faculty of Science at Masaryk University, Kotlářská 2, Brno CZ- 611 37, Czech Republic [email protected]; [email protected] 2 - Institute of Archaeology, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic in Brno, Královopolská 147, Brno CZ- 612 00, Czech Republic [email protected] Traditionally, the process to Gravettian origins in Europe has in the Mediterranean, the Paglicci cave is also dated around been considered only one of the many continuous changes 28 ky uncal BP (Delpech and Texier 2007; Noiret 2011). In within the complex development of the Upper Paleolithic. Danubian Europe, early Gravettian follows the Aurignacian Here we place the Gravettian in the context of early modern in cave stratigraphies of the Suabian Jura around 29-27 ky un- human migrations into Europe and interpret it as the final cal BP and at Willendorf (Conard and Moreau 2006; Jöris et stage of the Middle-to-Upper Paleolithic transition process. al. 2010; Haesaerts et al. 2010). In western Europe, the majority of dated Gravettian sequenc- Moravia offers a complex record of the Evolved Gravettian es start around 28 ky uncal BP, but an earlier industry with (Pavlovian) between 27-25 ky uncal BP (Svoboda et al. 2000) micro-gravettes was probably present at Sire (31-30 ky uncal but the evidence for an earlier Gravettian has been weak until BP), and the Noaillian facies is documented at Gargas (29-28 recently.
    [Show full text]
  • Full Text (PDF)
    Early Upper Paleolithic Levallois-derived Industries in the Balkans and in the Middle Danube Basin • XLII/3 • pp. 263–280 • 2004 JANUSZ K. KOZŁOWSKI EARLY UPPER PALEOLITHIC LEVALLOIS-DERIVED INDUSTRIES IN THE BALKANS AND IN THE MIDDLE DANUBE BASIN ABSTRACT: This paper deals with the problem of the Middle/Upper Paleolithic transition in south-eastern Europe, particularly with "transitional" industries derived from the Levallois technological tradition. The possibility of the local origin of these industries in the Balkans and in the middle Danube Basin from the Moustero-Levallosian has not been confirmed by recent studies. Some typological features indicate links with the Near Eastern Emirian/Ahmarian tradition. After reaching south-east Europe this tradition contributed to the formation of the Early Upper Paleolithic units in the Balkan, such as the Bachokirian which – in turn – participated in the genesis of – at least some – elements of "Aurignacian package" in south-eastern Europe. KEY WORDS: Early Upper Paleolithic – Balkans – Levallois technology – Bachokirian – Aurignacian INTRODUCTION has not been recorded in the Balkans, the occurrence of "transitional industries" deriving from Levallois technological The objective of this paper is to present a few new ideas tradition has been confirmed, for example, in the Temnata concerning the Middle/Upper Paleolithic transition in Cave, trench TD II, layer VI (Drobniewicz et al. 2000). At central and south-eastern Europe. Classical works on the the same time, the existence in south-eastern Europe of subject placed greatest emphasis on the contrast and cultural Upper Paleolithic industries with an early date and some hiatus between the Middle Paleolithic represented by the morphological traits resembling the Aurignacian – Moustero-Levalloisian and the Early Upper Paleolithic of described as the Bachokirian – encouraged researchers to the Aurignacian type.
    [Show full text]
  • From Initial Upper Paleolithic to Ahmarian at Üçağizli Cave, Turkey
    From Initial Upper Paleolithic to Ahmarian at Üçağızlı Cave, Turkey • XLII/3 • pp. 249–262 • 2004 STEVEN L. KUHN FROM INITIAL UPPER PALEOLITHIC TO AHMARIAN AT ÜÇAĞIZLI CAVE, TURKEY ABSTRACT: Early Upper Paleolithic industries in central Eurasia characterized by Upper Paleolithic retouched tool forms and blades produced by variants of the Levallois method are known variously as Emiran, Bohunician, "lepto- Levalloisian", or Initial Upper Paleolithic (IUP). These assemblages are often described as being transitional between Middle and Upper Paleolithic. This paper describes changes over time in early Upper Paleolithic technology and tool forms at Üçağızlı cave, Hatay, Turkey. Initial Upper Paleolithic assemblages are found at the bottom the Üçağızlı sequence, whereas the uppermost layers yield Ahmarian industries characterized by blade manufacture by soft-hammer or indirect percussion techniques. Taken as a whole the sequence seems to document a complex, in situ transition between IUP and Ahmarian between roughly 41,000 and 30,000 radiocarbon years BP. Different aspects of the assemblages changed at different rates. Frequencies of different blank and retouched tool forms appear to have shifted quite gradually, whereas the shift from hard hammer to soft hammer or indirect percussion was relatively abrupt. Changes in dorsal scar patterns on blades and core forms are also abrupt but non-synchronous. The evidence for an in situ transition from IUP to Ahmarian at Üçağızlı cave supports conclusions drawn earlier from the site of Ksar 'Akil. These results suggest that if there is a major break in the Levantine Upper Pleistocene sequence corresponding with the appearance and spread of modern Homo sapiens, it must have been between the Mousterian and the Initial Upper Paleolithic, or perhaps earlier.
    [Show full text]
  • The Earliest Modern Human Colonization of Europe
    COMMENTARY The earliest modern human colonization of Europe Jean-Jacques Hublin1 Department of Human Evolution, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, 04103 Leipzig, Germany he expansion of modern humans over the planet is one of the most T spectacular events in the course of human evolution. During mil- lions of years, distinctive forms of homi- nins evolved in parallel and sometimes coexisted in the same regions. Between 60,000 and 40,000 y ago, one species ex- panded out of its African birthplace and replaced all others. The Neanderthals are the best-known archaic humans to go ex- tinct at this time. In PNAS, Lowe et al. (1) resolve pending issues surrounding the mechanism of this evolutionary drama. Their study also fuels an increasing num- ber of questions on the antiquity of the modern human colonization of Eurasia. Scenarios accounting for the demise of the Neanderthals are much debated. For some, their replacement resulted from intrinsic biological and behavioral differ- ences with our species (2). For others, external causes precipitated their decline at the time of modern human expansion. Fig. 1. The Bohunician and other initial Upper Paleolithic assemblages of Eurasia display the retention Of these, climatic disasters are most often of Levallois blank production (Middle) and a large use of various types of points (Top). This pattern is envisioned (3) but a mega-volcanic erup- reminiscent of North African assemblages predating the out-of-Africa exodus of modern humans. Upper tion (4), and even an inversion of the Paleolithic-style tools such as end-scrapers and burins (Bottom) complete this toolkit.
    [Show full text]
  • Le Concept De Territoires Dans Le Paléolithique Supérieur Européen
    Publishers of British Archaeological Reports, BAR Gordon House, 276 Banbury Road Oxford, OX2 7ED, UK T/Fax: +44 (0) 1865 311914 [email protected] www.archaeopress.com Le concept de territoires dans le Paléolithique supérieur européen Proceedings of the XV World Congress UISPP (Lisbon, 4-9 September 2006) edited by François Djindjian, Janusz Kozlowski & Nuno Bicho BAR S1938 2009: ISBN 9781407304182. £46.00. x+262 pages; illustrated throughout with figures, maps, plans, drawings and photographs. Papers in English and French. Papers from the session ‘Le concept de territoires dans le Paléolithique supérieur européen’ (Vol. 3, Session C16) presented at the XV UISPP World Congress (Lisbon, 4-9 September 2006). Contents: 1) Le concept de territoires pour les chasseurs cueilleurs du Paléolithique supérieur européen (François Djindjian); 2) Le concept de territoire au Paléolithique supérieur: la Pologne en périphérie septentrionale de l’oecumène (Janusz K. Kozlowski); 3) Le concept de territoire à partir des données des sites des régions du Dniepr au Paléolithique supérieur récent en Europe orientale (Lioudmila Iakovleva ); 4) Ukrainian Upper Palaeolithic between 40/10 000 BP: Current Insights into Environmental-Climatic Change and Cultural Development (Vadim N. Stepanchuk, Igor V. Sapozhnikov, Mikhail I.Gladkikh, Sergei N.Ryzhov); 5) Mobilité des groupes préhistoriques et approvisionnement en matières premières à la fin du Paléolithique supérieur dans le Petit Caucase : données récentes sur le site de plein air de Kalavan 1 (nord du lac Sevan, Arménie) (Liagre J., Arakelyan D., Gasparyan B., Nahapetyan S., Chataigner C.); 6) Searching for territoriality over a limited territory: the case of Greece (Eugenia Adam ); 7) Cultural regionalization in the Palaeolithic of the middle Danube basin and western Balkans (Dušan Mihailović, Bojana Mihailović); 8) Le concept de territoire dans le Paléolithique supérieur morave (Martin Oliva); 9) Methods of stone raw material characterisation and raw material origins in the Palaeolithic: State of art in Hungary (Katalin T.
    [Show full text]
  • The Spread of Modern Humans in Europe SPECIAL FEATURE
    The spread of modern humans in Europe SPECIAL FEATURE John F. Hoffecker1 Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, University of Colorado, 1560 30th Street, Campus Box 450, Boulder, CO 80309-0450 Edited by Richard G. Klein, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, and approved May 15, 2009 (received for review March 28, 2009) The earliest credible evidence of Homo sapiens in Europe is an made a significant genetic and/or cultural contribution to the archaeological proxy in the form of several artifact assemblages modern human population of Europe. (Bohunician) found in South-Central and possibly Eastern Europe, The interpretation of the genetics of living human popula- dating to <48,000 calibrated radiocarbon years before present (cal tions, supplemented with the analysis of fossil DNA extracted BP). They are similar to assemblages probably made by modern from Neanderthal and early modern human specimens, favors humans in the Levant (Emiran) at an earlier date and apparently the replacement model. The limited number of mtDNA lineages represent a population movement into the Balkans during a warm among living non-African populations is consistent with a model climate interval [Greenland Interstadial 12 (GI 12)]. A second of rapid dispersal, initially eastward out of Africa and subse- population movement may be represented by a diverse set of quently northward into the Eurasian interior (5). Results to date artifact assemblages (sometimes termed Proto-Aurignacian) found from ongoing reconstruction of the Neanderthal genome indi- in the Balkans, parts of Southwest Europe, and probably in Eastern cate a distinctive pattern that cannot be found among living Europe, and dating to several brief interstadials (GI 11–GI 9) that humans and suggests minimal genic exchange between the two preceded the beginning of cold Heinrich Event 4 (HE4) (Ϸ40,000 cal taxa (6).
    [Show full text]
  • New Chronology for Ksâr 'Akil (Lebanon) Supports Levantine Route
    New chronology for Ksâr ‘Akil (Lebanon) supports Levantine route of modern human dispersal into Europe Marjolein D. Boscha,1, Marcello A. Manninoa, Amy L. Prendergastb, Tamsin C. O’Connellc, Beatrice Demarchid, Sheila M. Taylore, Laura Nivena, Johannes van der Plichtf,g, and Jean-Jacques Hublina aDepartment of Human Evolution, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, D-04103 Leipzig, Germany; bInstitute of Geosciences, Applied and Analytical Palaeontology, University of Mainz, D-55128 Mainz, Germany; cDepartment of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 3DZ, United Kingdom; dBioArCh, Department of Archaeology, University of York, York YO10 5DD, United Kingdom; eDepartment of Chemistry, University of York, York YO10 5DD, United Kingdom; fCenter for Isotope Research, Groningen University, 9747 AG Groningen, The Netherlands; and gFaculty of Archaeology, Leiden University, 2333 CC Leiden, The Netherlands Edited by Gilbert Tostevin, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, and accepted by the Editorial Board April 30, 2015 (received for review January 23, 2015) Modern human dispersal into Europe is thought to have occurred of modern humans into Europe. However, bones of modern humans with the start of the Upper Paleolithic around 50,000–40,000 y ago. from the Levant (e.g., Üça˘gızlı IandKsâr’Akil) and Europe (e.g., The Levantine corridor hypothesis suggests that modern humans Kostenki 1, 14, and 17) are found in archeological contexts and in from Africa spread into Europe via the Levant. Ksâr ‘Akil (Leba- association with Early UP (EUP) lithic technologies (7, 9, 11, 12). non), with its deeply stratified Initial (IUP) and Early (EUP) Upper These lithic assemblages, therefore, can be used as a proxy for Paleolithic sequence containing modern human remains, has modern human dispersal (13) and links between several such played an important part in the debate.
    [Show full text]