DOCSLIB.ORG

Acheulean Tradition a Major Facies of the Old World Lower Paleolithic

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Acheulean Tradition a Major Facies of the Old World Lower Paleolithic Acheulean Tradition A major facies of the Old World Lower Paleolithic whose stone tool assemblages include certain large cutting tool types, especially hand axes and cleavers, the Acheulean Tradition takes its name from Saint-Acheul (Amiens, France), where it was first recognized during the nineteenth century. Acheulean sites are widely distributed in the Old World, from India in the east to Britain in the northwest, including all of Africa, the Near East, and Europe, especially the western half. This broad spatial distribution of the Acheulean Tradition (often simply called “the Acheulean”) is matched by the long period of time over which it persists: The oldest assemblages date from about 1.4 million years ago, while the youngest are perhaps 100,000 years old. It is no longer believed, as formerly, that the whole of the Acheulean was produced by a single human population, which gradually migrated over much of the Old World. Rather, it is one version of a general level of technological achievement, which proved entirely adequate to support the needs of human hunter-gatherers in many regions, over what seems to us a surprisingly long period of time. If one examines in detail the Acheulean lithic assemblages of any one area, it is immediately apparent that there are substantial differences between them, and also changes and developments, as time passed, in the ways in which the tools were made. But even so, the general stability within the Acheulean Tradition remains remarkable, which is exactly why the term continues to be used. Acheulean Stone Tools Hand axes, widely regarded as the hallmark of the Acheulean, are large cutting tools, with various carefully fashioned planforms, the commonest being oval, pear-shaped, lanceolate, and triangular. The cutting edges, convex, concave, or straight, occupy much or all of their circumferences. Many hand axes also have a more or less sharp point, and some have a heavy hammerlike butt. They are usually worked bifacially, that is, both main faces have been flaked during the often symmetrical shaping of the implement. Cleavers are more axlike, with a broad transverse or oblique cutting edge as the main feature and less emphasis on cutting edges at the sides. Because hand axes and cleavers are so readily recognizable, they tend to dominate our perception of Acheulean stone tool kits, which in fact also contain a considerable range of other implements, made by retouching simple flakes of suitable size to make points, knives, and scrapers. Many flakes were also used without formal retouch. As for technological changes through time in the Acheulean, it is broadly true that in the earliest industries the hand axes tend to be thicker and less symmetrical, made by the removal of relatively few flakes with a hard stone hammer. Later, they are often flat and elegantly shaped by the use of a softer hammer (of bone, antler, or wood), which could remove thin trimming flakes, leaving straight and regular cutting edges. Later Acheulean knappers also often show awareness of the “prepared core” flaking methods, such as Levallois technique, which characterize most Middle Paleolithic industries. There is, however, a wide technological range throughout the Acheulean everywhere, rather than a simple, inviolable progression from “crude” to “refined” industries. The implement types made, and the knapping techniques used, are always profoundly influenced by the types of rock locally obtainable, which varied in hardness, grain size, and manner of fracture. Flint and the purer forms of chert are easiest to work, but are not available everywhere. In sub-Saharan Africa, for example, quartzites and many kinds of volcanic rocks, especially fine-grained lavas, were frequently used. Origins and Spread of the Acheulean The genesis of the Acheulean Tradition certainly lies in sub-Saharan Africa. Its oldest-known occurrences include sites EF-HR and MLK in Middle Bed II at Olduvai Gorge (Tanzania), Peninj (Tanzania, west of Lake Natron), and Konso-Gardula (southern Ethiopia); dating, mainly by the potassium-argon method, suggests a time range of 1.2 to 1.4 million years. They appear quite suddenly, after over a million years of the Oldowan Tradition, which had only simple tools made from pebbles and flakes. A major technological difference between the two was the Acheulean workers' ability to strike large flakes from boulders, as the blanks from which their hand axes and cleavers were fashioned, rather than depending on whole cobbles or pebbles. This enabled large, broad tools with relatively thin cutting edges to be regularly achieved. It may be no coincidence that Acheulean industries first appeared soon after the emergence of a new hominid type, Homo erectus, larger in both stature and brain than Homo habilis, widely regarded as the maker of the Oldowan. Between about 1.8 and 1.2 million years ago, the first movement of humans out of sub-Saharan Africa occurred. The migration was begun by H. erectus humans, but as time passed, physical evolution and adaptation to new geographical situations brought these early people to a stage that we refer to generally as Homo sapiens, though within it there is considerable local variability: For example, in Europe the early H. sapiens people developed into the well-known Neanderthal population—a process already discernible a quarter of a million years ago and complete by about 120,000 B.P. Sub-Saharan Africa retained its own hominid population during and after the first human migration to other parts of the Old World, and it was apparently here that the development took place from H. erectus, via an early H. sapiens stage, to anatomically modern humans (H. sapiens sapiens), who, by around 100,000 years ago, had themselves spread out of Africa and reached the Near East. The foregoing clearly implies that, over time, several different human types must have made Acheulean industries. Some of the people involved in the first Homo erectus movement out of sub-Saharan Africa were certainly hand-axe makers, since stone tool manufacture in the mainstream Acheulean Tradition spread during the Early and Middle Pleistocene to North Africa and the Near East, into southern and western Europe, and eastward to the Indian subcontinent, though arrival dates are not clear everywhere. There was little penetration of Central or northern Asia at this time, and none of Australasia or the Americas. China and Southeast Asia, however, have many important Lower Paleolithic sites, but their stone artifacts do not belong to the Acheulean Tradition as described here. If the first humans to penetrate east of India were Acheuleans, they would have found few rocks suitable for hand-axe manufacture, and would have had to content themselves with stone tools of less sophisticated design to fulfill the same functions; other materials, such as bamboo, could also have provided highly effective points and cutting edges (though without surviving in the archaeological record). Accordingly, we need not assume that the earliest humans of the Far East had a separate ultimate origin from those who spread the Acheulean Tradition so widely elsewhere: Quite different artifact types could easily have become and remained the fashion in the Far East, especially since there is little sign of subsequent contact with Lower Paleolithic peoples away to the west, during the Middle Pleistocene. The Acheulean, however, is rarely alone in any area where it occurs: There are often contemporary lithic assemblages from which the typical hand axes and cleavers are quite absent. Examples of this phenomenon include the Soan Tradition of India, the later stages of the Oldowan in East Africa, the flake-tool industries of central Europe, and the Clactonian in Britain. The explanation need not always be the same. Particular human groups must often have produced specialized tool kits to deal with the many different activities undertaken by hunter-gatherers, exploiting seasonal resources of food and raw materials over territorial ranges comprising very variable landscapes: The classic hand axes and cleavers will not always have been the most advantageous tools. But there also remains the possibility of distinct contemporary human groups, maintaining their own separate tool-making traditions, for whatever reasons, with room enough for all, in any given region. Acheulean Settlements Acheulean sites mainly occur as scatters of the typical stone artifacts, associated with the channels or floodplains of streams and rivers, or with lake margins. Early humans favored such locations for settlement, but the traces they left were liable to subsequent hydraulic disturbance. Structures, hearths, and fragile materials like wood or plant remains only rarely survive in association with the stone artifacts. At a few sites, such as Torralba (Spain), Kalambo Falls (Zambia), and Gesher Benot Ya'aqov (Israel), waterlogging has preserved traces of worked wood. The remains of bone at many sites, sometimes with cut marks left by stone implements, make clear that the Acheulean people exploited the carcasses of large and small animals, whether as hunters or scavengers. They occasionally used caves or rock shelters as habitations or working places, a few examples being Montagu Cave and Cave of the Hearths (South Africa), Tabun Cave (Israel), Lazeret Cave (southern France), and Pontnewydd Cave (northern Wales). Sometimes they occupied coastal locations, as at Boxgrove (Sussex, England) or Terra Amata (Nice, France), though there is little evidence for their exploiting marine fish or shellfish. Occasional finds on higher ground, for example, the chalk downlands of southern England, testify to their use of the land around and between their main campsites. No unequivocal evidence relating to Acheulean beliefs or ritual has yet been discovered. The End of the Acheulean Tradition The late Acheulean lasts into the Upper Pleistocene, but from around 180,000 B.P. the late Lower Paleolithic and earlier Middle Paleolithic overlap in time and to some extent blend together, as hand axes and cleavers lose importance in many areas, while specialized tools and projectile points, made by retouching specially struck flakes, increase.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • I. a Consideration of Tine and Labor Expenditurein the Constrijction Process at the Teotihuacan Pyramid of the Sun and the Pover
    I. A CONSIDERATION OF TINE AND LABOR EXPENDITURE IN THE CONSTRIJCTION PROCESS AT THE TEOTIHUACAN PYRAMID OF THE SUN AND THE POVERTY POINT MOUND Stephen Aaberg and Jay Bonsignore 40 II. A CONSIDERATION OF TIME AND LABOR EXPENDITURE IN THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS AT THE TEOTIHUACAN PYRAMID OF THE SUN AND THE POVERTY POINT 14)UND Stephen Aaberg and Jay Bonsignore INTRODUCT ION In considering the subject of prehistoric earthmoving and the construction of monuments associated with it, there are many variables for which some sort of control must be achieved before any feasible demographic features related to the labor involved in such construction can be derived. Many of the variables that must be considered can be given support only through certain fundamental assumptions based upon observations of related extant phenomena. Many of these observations are contained in the ethnographic record of aboriginal cultures of the world whose activities and subsistence patterns are more closely related to the prehistoric cultures of a particular area. In other instances, support can be gathered from observations of current manual labor related to earth moving since the prehistoric constructions were accomplished manually by a human labor force. The material herein will present alternative ways of arriving at the represented phenomena. What is inherently important in considering these data is the element of cultural organization involved in such activities. One need only look at sites such as the Valley of the Kings and the great pyramids of Egypt, Teotihuacan, La Venta and Chichen Itza in Mexico, the Cahokia mound group in Illinois, and other such sites to realize that considerable time, effort and organization were required.
    [Show full text]
  • Palaeolithic
    A COURSEBOOK OF SOCIAL STUDIES Our team of experts: Sadaquat Ali Ansari Namrata Agrawal Asha Sangal Content Reviewers for the Series Vrinda Loiwal Consultant for Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) Subhashish Roy Consultant for Design K6056 Acknowledgements The Publishers would like to acknowledge Shutterstock for granting us permission to use the photographs and images listed below : Alvaro German Vilela (Fig 1.1), Sudip Ray (Fig 1.2), saiko3p (Fig1.6), arindambanerjee (Fig 2.1), Kachaya Thawansak (Fig2.2), Juan Aunion (Fig 2.3), mountainpix (Fig 2.7), ABIR ROY BARMAN (Fig 7.3), Curioso (Fig8.1), ArunjithKM (Fig 8.3), Monontour (Fig 8.4), Shal09 (Fig 10.9),Alex Mit (Fig 1.3), Iron Mary (Fig 1.4), Withan Tor (Fig 1.6), itechno (Fig 1.7), pakpoom (Fig 1.8), robert_s (Fig 1.9), Castleski (Fig 1.11), SKY2015 (Fig 1.15), Kheng Guan Toh (Fig 2.1) Phruet (Fig 2.2), Bardocz Peter (Fig 2.3), gomolach (Fig 2.4), Soleil Nordic (Fig 2.5), Nasky (Fig 2.6), Inna Bigun (Fig 2.7), Soleil Nordic (Fig 2.8), brichuas (Fig 2.9), Hollygraphic (Fig 3.2), Siberian Art (Fig 3.3), Designua (Fig 3.4), NoPainNoGain (Fig 3.5), Designua (Fig 3.6), Bardocz Peter (Fig 4.2),Serban Bogdan (Fig 4.3), Bardocz Peter (Fig 4.8), VINCENT GIORDANO PHOTO (Fig 4.12), Syda Productions (Fig 4.13), Kudryashka (Fig 4.14), nahariyani (Fig 4.15), dikobraziy (Fig 5.3), tonkaa (Fig 5.4), re_bekka (Fig 5.5), Yusiki (Fig 5.6), boreala (Fig 5.7), Dimitrios Karamitros (Fig 5.8), okili77 (5.9), trgrowth (Fig 5.12), Anton Foltin (5.13), iamnong (Fig 6.3), Vasily Gureev (Fig 6.5), Svetlana
    [Show full text]
  • Paranthropus Boisei: Fifty Years of Evidence and Analysis Bernard A
    Marshall University Marshall Digital Scholar Biological Sciences Faculty Research Biological Sciences Fall 11-28-2007 Paranthropus boisei: Fifty Years of Evidence and Analysis Bernard A. Wood George Washington University Paul J. Constantino Biological Sciences, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://mds.marshall.edu/bio_sciences_faculty Part of the Biological and Physical Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Wood B and Constantino P. Paranthropus boisei: Fifty years of evidence and analysis. Yearbook of Physical Anthropology 50:106-132. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Biological Sciences at Marshall Digital Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Biological Sciences Faculty Research by an authorized administrator of Marshall Digital Scholar. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. YEARBOOK OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 50:106–132 (2007) Paranthropus boisei: Fifty Years of Evidence and Analysis Bernard Wood* and Paul Constantino Center for the Advanced Study of Hominid Paleobiology, George Washington University, Washington, DC 20052 KEY WORDS Paranthropus; boisei; aethiopicus; human evolution; Africa ABSTRACT Paranthropus boisei is a hominin taxon ers can trace the evolution of metric and nonmetric var- with a distinctive cranial and dental morphology. Its iables across hundreds of thousands of years. This pa- hypodigm has been recovered from sites with good per is a detailed1 review of half a century’s worth of fos- stratigraphic and chronological control, and for some sil evidence and analysis of P. boi se i and traces how morphological regions, such as the mandible and the both its evolutionary history and our understanding of mandibular dentition, the samples are not only rela- its evolutionary history have evolved during the past tively well dated, but they are, by paleontological 50 years.
    [Show full text]
  • KMBT C554e-20150630165533
    Recent Research on Paleolithic Arts in Europe and the Multimedia Database Cesar Gonzalez Sai 民 Roberto Cacho Toca Department Department of Historical Sciences. University of Cantabria. Avda. Los Castros s/n. 39005. SANTANDER (Spain) e-mail: e-mail: [email protected] I [email protected] Summary. In In this article the authors present the Multimedia Photo YR Database, made by Texnai, Inc. (Tokyo) and the the Department of Historical Sciences of the University of Cantabria (Spain) about the paleolithic art in northern northern Spain. For this purpose, it ’s made a short introduction to the modem knowledge about the European European paleolithic art (35000 ・1 1500 BP), giving special attention to the last research trends and, in which way, the new techniques (computers, digital imaging, database, physics ... ) are now improving the knowledge about this artistic works. Finally, is made a short explanation about the Multimedia Photo YR Database Database and in which way, these databases can improve, not only research and teaching, but also it can promote in the authorities and people the convenience of an adequate conservation and research of these artistic artistic works. Key Words: Multimedia Database, Paleolithic Art, Europe, North Spain, Research. 1. 1. Introduction. The paleolithic European art. Between approximately 35000 and 11500 years BP, during the last glacial phases, the European continent continent saw to be born a first artistic cycle of surprising surprising aesthetic achievements. The expressive force force reached in the representation of a great variety of of wild animals, with some very simple techniques, techniques, has been rarely reached in the history of the the western a此 We find this figurative art in caves, caves, rock-shelters and sites in the open air, and at the the same time, on very di 仔erent objects of the daily li た (pendants, spatulas, points ofjavelin, harpoons, perforated perforated baton, estatues or simple stone plates).
    [Show full text]
  • Homo Aestheticus’
    Conceptual Paper Glob J Arch & Anthropol Volume 11 Issue 3 - June 2020 Copyright © All rights are reserved by Shuchi Srivastava DOI: 10.19080/GJAA.2020.11.555815 Man and Artistic Expression: Emergence of ‘Homo Aestheticus’ Shuchi Srivastava* Department of Anthropology, National Post Graduate College, University of Lucknow, India Submission: May 30, 2020; Published: June 16, 2020 *Corresponding author: Shuchi Srivastava, Assistant Professor, Department of Anthropology, National Post Graduate College, An Autonomous College of University of Lucknow, Lucknow, India Abstract Man is a member of animal kingdom like all other animals but his unique feature is culture. Cultural activities involve art and artistic expressions which are the earliest methods of emotional manifestation through sign. The present paper deals with the origin of the artistic expression of the man, i.e. the emergence of ‘Homo aestheticus’ and discussed various related aspects. It is basically a conceptual paper; history of art begins with humanity. In his artistic instincts and attainments, man expressed his vigour, his ability to establish a gainful and optimistictherefore, mainlyrelationship the secondary with his environmentsources of data to humanizehave been nature. used for Their the behaviorsstudy. Overall as artists findings was reveal one of that the man selection is artistic characteristics by nature suitableand the for the progress of the human species. Evidence from extensive analysis of cave art and home art suggests that humans have also been ‘Homo aestheticus’ since their origins. Keywords: Man; Art; Artistic expression; Homo aestheticus; Prehistoric art; Palaeolithic art; Cave art; Home art Introduction ‘Sahityasangeetkalavihinah, Sakshatpashuh Maybe it was the time when some African apelike creatures to 7 million years ago, the first human ancestors were appeared.
    [Show full text]
  • Fragile Gods: Ceramic Figurines in Roman Britain Volume 1
    Fragile Gods: Ceramic Figurines in Roman Britain Volume 1 Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Archaeology, University of Reading Matthew G. Fittock December 2017 Declaration I certify that this is my own work and that use of material from other sources has been properly and fully acknowledged in the text. I have read the University’s definition of plagiarism and the department’s advice on good academic practice. I understand that the consequence of committing plagiarism, if proven and in the absence of mitigating circumstances, may include failure in the Year or Part or removal from the membership of the University. I also certify that neither this piece of work, nor any part of it, has been submitted in connection with another assessment. Signature: Date: i Abstract As small portable forms of statuary, pipeclay objects provide a valuable insight into the religious beliefs and practices of the culturally mixed populations of the Roman provinces. This thesis provides a complete catalogue of the nearly 1000 published and unpublished pipeclay objects found in Britain, including figurines, busts, shrines, animal vessels and masks. This research is the first study of this material conducted since the late 1970s. Pipeclay objects were made in Gaul and the Rhine-Moselle region but not in Britain. Attention thus focuses on where and how the British finds were made by analysing their styles, types, fabrics and any makers’ marks. This reveals how the pipeclay market in Britain was supplied and how these objects were traded, and suggests that cultural rather than production and trade factors were more influential on pipeclay consumption in Britain.
    [Show full text]
  • Paleolithic 3 Million + 10,000 BCE
    The Rupture “This is where we should look for the earliest origins, long before the age of metals, because it was about 300,000 years ago that the “fire pit” was starting to be utilized with some stone, wood and bone.. Silo - 2004 Paleolithic 3 Million + 10,000 BCE The term Paleolithic refers to the « Old Stone Age » The Paleolithic period begins with the first evidence of human technology (stone tools) more than three million years ago, and ends with major changes in human societies instigated by the invention of agriculture and animal domestication. Paleolithic, Lower, Middle and Upper Lower Paleolithic 3 Million + - 300,000 BCE the Lower Paleolithic, from the earliest human presence (Homo antecessor and Homo heidelbergensis) to the Holstein interglacial, c. 1.4 to 0.3 million years ago. Middle Paleolithic 300,000 – 40,000 BCE the Middle Paleolithic, marked by the presence of Neanderthals, 300,000 to 40,000 years ago Upper Paleolithic 45,000 – 12,000 BCE the Upper Paleolithic, c. 45,000 to 12,000 years ago, marked by the arrival of anatomically modern humans and extending throughout the Last Glacial Maximum The Aurignacian Period – 40,000-28,000 BCE • The Aurignacian cultural tradition is generally accepted as the first modern humans in Europe. • During this period an explosion of sudden and innovative changes take place. People begin to use musical instruments which indicates possible ceremony, ritual and dance. Plus all forms of art appears at this time which signifies the full emergence of modern symbolic expression. • The most significant development in stone tool making is the refinement of the manufacture of blades struck off conical cores or nuculi.
    [Show full text]
  • Copy of Poverty Point Binder.Pdf
    1. Exhibit Information for Teachers Thanks for choosing to share this fascinating piece of Louisiana prehistory with your students! The new, revamped Poverty Point Classroom Exhibit is an updated and expanded version of the well-loved Poverty Point exhibit that has been in circulation since 1986. The exhibit includes one DVD and three books, as well as artifacts and activities to teach your class about the Poverty Point site and culture. The activities contained within the exhibit are designed to teach, but also to be fun. This section provides a preview of what's included, and is designed to help in planning the Poverty Point unit for your class. When the Poverty Point unit is complete, please return all items in the exhibit, including the clay. If you have any questions, please call us at the Division of Archaeology (225-342-8166). We hope you enjoy these activities, and welcome your comments and suggestions! Exhibit Contents The Suitcase Artifacts Many artifacts are included in the suitcase. A complete inventory of artifacts is in the table on the next page. The artifacts can be introduced using a discovery learning or presentation technique. The Artifact Investigation Worksheet in Section 4 and the Artifact Question Cards should be used with the discovery learning technique. The Artifact Caption Cards may be displayed when using a presentation technique, or at the conclusion of the discovery learning technique. Most of the artifacts in the suitcase are 3,500 years old. Students may examine and touch them, but please take care to avoid dropping or damaging the artifacts.
    [Show full text]
  • Architecture and the Pyramids of Giza Known As “The Age of the Pyramids,” the Old Kingdom Was Characterized by Revolutionary
    Architecture and the Pyramids of Giza Known as “the Age of the Pyramids,” the Old Kingdom was characterized by revolutionary advancements in architecture. Figure 1: The Pyramids of Giza This view shows all three pyramid structures: the Great Pyramid, the Pyramid of Khafre, and the Pyramid of Menkaure. The Old Kingdom (2686 BC - 2182 BC) was a period of political stability and economic prosperity, during which great tombs were built for Egyptian Kings in the form of pyramids. The first king to launch a major pyramid building project was King Djoser, who built his famous “Step Pyramid” at Saqqara. The Pyramids of Giza are the greatest architectural achievement of the time, and include three pyramid structures and the Great Sphinx monument. It would have taken several thousand workers decades to complete just one pyramid. While we know that the stone for the pyramids was quarried, transported and cut from the nearby Nile, we still cannot be sure just how the massive stones were then put into place. While stone was generally reserved for tombs and temples, sun-baked mud bricks were used in the construction of Egyptian houses, palaces, fortresses, and town walls. Note: Limestone is an abundant rock of marine and freshwater sediments, primarily composed of calcite (CaCO₃). It occurs in a variety of forms, both crystalline and amorphous. To quarry means to obtain (mine) stone from an excavation pit, usually by blasting, cutting, or digging. A quarry is a site for mining stone, limestone or slate. A sphinx was a creature with the head of a human and the body of an animal (commonly a lion).
    [Show full text]
  • Re-Presentations of Palaeolithic Visual Imagery: Simulacra and Their Alternatives'
    Re-Presentations of Palaeolithic Visual Imagery: Simulacra and their Alternatives' Marcia-Anne Dobres Introduction A long-standing methodological and epistemological split within Palaeolithic archaeology has led to what is recognized today as an unrealistic and highly problematic reconstruction of prehistoric people. My discussion is intended to unravel some of the many threads that have been used to weave this simulacrum, this "identical copy for which no original has ever existed" (Jameson 1984:66; following Beaudrillard 1983). The reasons for taking critical stock of ourselves and our interpretations lies in the fact that we unknowingly bring a multitude of paradigmatic and personal biases to our research that often systematically color our methodologies, our epistemologies, and our interpretations. More importantly, however, these biases often go undetected precisely because they are so systematic and ubiquitous. Legitimation of the present by referencing simulacra standing as the past becomes an issue of concern once we recognize the subtle yet powerful ways the past is part of our present. This important point is developed in detail below. It thus remains that we endeavor to be clear about what we say, and to consider long and hard the lines of reasoning we employ in reconstructing prehistoric life. In the spirit of constructive criticism then, this paper proposes to explore some of the sociopolitical and hiellectual contexts in which the study of prehistoric visual imagery has taken place - and continues to take place even today. I seek to understand not-only how these interpretations have been developed, but to consider their implications vis-a-vis the larger sociopolitical framework in which archaeology is practiced.
    [Show full text]
  • |||GET||| Introduction to Human Evolution a Bio-Cultural Approach
    INTRODUCTION TO HUMAN EVOLUTION A BIO- CULTURAL APPROACH (FIRST EDITION) 1ST EDITION DOWNLOAD FREE Gillian Crane-Kramer | 9781631898662 | | | | | The Biocultural Evolution Blog See Article History. Viewed zoologically, we humans are Homo sapiensa culture-bearing upright-walking species that lives on the ground and very likely first evolved in Africa aboutyears ago. See also: Evolution of primates. The ulnar opposition—the contact between the thumb and the tip of the little finger of the same hand—is unique to the genus Homo[53] including Neanderthals, the Sima de los Huesos hominins and anatomically modern humans. The biocultural-feedback concept helps us to place this finding in a bigger framework of human evolution. This, coupled with pathological dwarfism, could have resulted in a significantly diminutive human. Add to cart. In Africa in the Early Pleistocene, 1. August 22, Retrieved The main find was a skeleton believed to be a woman of about 30 years Introduction to Human Evolution A Bio-Cultural Approach (First Edition) 1st edition age. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. In devising such scenarios and filling in the human family bush, researchers must consult a large and diverse array of fossils, and they must also employ refined excavation methods and records, geochemical dating techniques, and data from other specialized fields such as geneticsecology and paleoecology, and ethology animal behaviour —in short, all the tools of the multidisciplinary science of paleoanthropology. An Introduction to Human Evolutionary Anatomy. It is also possible that one or more of these species are ancestors of another branch of African apes, or that they represent a shared ancestor between hominins and other apes.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Entries
    Volume 1.qxd 9/13/2005 3:29 PM Page ix GGGGG LIST OF ENTRIES Aborigines Anthropic principle Apes, greater Aborigines Anthropocentrism Apes, lesser Acheulean culture Anthropology and business Apollonian Acropolis Anthropology and Aquatic ape hypothesis Action anthropology epistemology Aquinas, Thomas Adaptation, biological Anthropology and the Third Arboreal hypothesis Adaptation, cultural World Archaeology Aesthetic appreciation Anthropology of men Archaeology and gender Affirmative action Anthropology of religion studies Africa, socialist schools in Anthropology of women Archaeology, biblical African American thought Anthropology, careers in Archaeology, environmental African Americans Anthropology, characteristics of Archaeology, maritime African thinkers Anthropology, clinical Archaeology, medieval Aggression Anthropology, cultural Archaeology, salvage Ape aggression Anthropology, economic Architectural anthropology Agricultural revolution Anthropology, history of Arctic Agriculture, intensive Future of anthropology Ardrey, Robert Agriculture, origins of Anthropology, humanistic Argentina Agriculture, slash-and-burn Anthropology, philosophical Aristotle Alchemy Anthropology, practicing Arsuaga, J. L. Aleuts Anthropology, social Art, universals in ALFRED: The ALlele FREquency Anthropology and sociology Artificial intelligence Database Social anthropology Artificial intelligence Algonquians Anthropology, subdivisions of Asante Alienation Anthropology, theory in Assimilation Alienation Anthropology, Visual Atapuerca Altamira cave
    [Show full text]