DOCSLIB.ORG

University of London Thesis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
University of London Thesis REFERENCE ONLY 2809342584 UNIVERSITY OF LONDON THESIS Degree Year 7 Name of Author COPYRIGHT This is a thesis accepted for a Higher Degree of the University of London. It is an unpublished typescript and the copyright is held by the author. All persons consulting the thesis must read and abide by the Copyright Declaration below. COPYRIGHT DECLARATION I recognise that the copyright of the above-described thesis rests with the author and that no quotation from it or information derived from it may be published without the prior written consent of the author. LOAN Theses may not be lent to individuals, but the University Library may lend a copy to approved libraries within the United Kingdom, for consultation solely on the premises of those libraries. Application should be made to: The Theses Section, University of London Library, Senate House, Malet Street, London WC1E 7HU. REPRODUCTION University of London theses may not be reproduced without explicit written permission from the University of London Library. Enquiries should be addressed to the Theses Section of the Library. Regulations concerning reproduction vary according to the date of acceptance of the thesis and are listed below as guidelines. A. Before 1962. Permission granted only upon the prior written consent of the author. (The University Library will provide addresses where possible). B. 1962 -1974. In many cases the author has agreed to permit copying upon completion of a Copyright Declaration. C. 1975 - 1988. Most theses may be copied upon completion of a Copyright Declaration. D. 1989 onwards. Most theses may be copied. This thesis comes within category D. I I This copy has been deposited in the Library of _______ ^ This copy has been deposited in the University of London Library, Senate House, Malet Street, London WC1E 7HU. PhD Thesis A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF FRONTAL BONE MORPHOLOGY OF LATE PLEISTOCENE FOSSIL HOMININS FROM THE TERRITORY OF THE FORMER SOVIET UNION Submitted by Ekaterina Bulygina Supervised by Dr. Charles Lockwood and by Prof. Leslie Aiello University College London 2007 UMI Number: U591868 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U591868 Published by ProQuest LLC 2013. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 I, Ekaterina Bulygina, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated the thesis. Abstract The major aim of the present work is to provide a re-assessment of the morphological and taxonomic affinities of several adult and juvenile fossils from the territory of the former Soviet Union that retain frontal bones.Nine fossils were analysed and compared with a sample of Late Pleistocene hominins and recent modem populations. Analytical techniques included traditional inter-landmark measurements, as well as a geometric morphometric toolkit for the 3D surfaces. The following patterns were found in the comparative sample: 1) the best differentiation in the frontal bone morphology exists between the ‘modem’ and ‘archaic’ groups of hominins, where the former is composed of recent and Upper Palaeolithic modem humans, and the latter incorporates Neanderthals and early modem humans from Africa and West Asia; 2) Upper Palaeolithic humans from central and eastern Europe differ significantly from the pooled sample of the nine recent modem human populations; 3) the morphology of the complete frontal bone discriminates between hominin groups better than the supraorbital relief; 4) recent modem humans and Neanderthals display diverging growth trajectories in the shape of the frontal bone; differences already exist at the earliest age stages represented here (2.5 years in Neanderthals) and increase towards adulthood. Within the above framework, all Sungir’ fossils align with the recent modem human morphological variation. In contrast, the fossil frontal from Podkumok, North Caucasus, is associated with the Upper Palaeolithic sample of fossils. Satanay, IChvalynsk and Skhodnya frontal bones have an ambiguous morphological associations generally aligning with the modem morphology but demonstrating particular combination of features that sometimes 2 make them closer to the ‘archaic’ fossils in the sample. The Teshik-Tash child is found to be similar to Neanderthals in the frontal bone morphology. However, it shows lesser degree of the development of the ‘classical’ Neanderthal morphology and deviates towards the early modem humans. The Starosel’e child did not demonstrate any affiliation with the ‘archaic’ morphological pattern in its frontal bone. 3 Table of contents List of figures ........................................................................................................................................ 6 List of tables ...........................................................................................................................................9 List of tables .......................................................................................................................................... 9 Chapter 1 Introduction.......................................................................................................................11 Chapter 2 Literature Review........................................................................................................... 15 Early modem humans in Europe and the Neanderthal legacy............................................. 15 The early archaeological and palaeoanthropological record from north-eastern Eurasia 31 Frontal bone: Comparative morphology and evolution..........................................................45 The frontal bone as part of the cranium ................................................................................46 Frontal bone morphology in the comparative studies of fossilH om o.............................52 Circumorbital morphology in primates................................................................................. 58 Morphology and ontogeny of the frontal bone in modem humans.......................................60 G eneral........................................................................................................................................ 60 Ectocranial surface ...................................................................................................................61 Endocranial surface ..................................................................................................................62 Frontal sinuses ............................................................................................................................64 Muscle attachments ...................................................................................................................65 Early development and ossification.......................................................................................65 Growth pattern.......................................................................................................................... 67 Chapter 3 Material.............................................................................................................................71 North-East Eurasian fossils ..........................................................................................................71 Podkum ok .................................................................................................................................. 71 Skhodnya.....................................................................................................................................72 K hvalynsk.................................................................................................................................. 72 Satanay calvarium.............................................. 73 Starosel’e .....................................................................................................................................74 Sungir’ ......................................................................................................................................... 75 Teshik-Tash ................................................................................................................................ 76 Modem populations............................................... 86 Fossils............................................................................................................................................... 87 Chapter 4 Methods.............................................................................................................................91 Data procurement...........................................................................................................................91 Age estimation...........................................................................................................................91 Sex determination ....................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Exploitation of the Natural Environment by Neanderthals from Chagyrskaya Cave (Altai) Nutzung Der Natürlichen Umwelt Durch Neandertaler Der Chagyrskaya-Höhle (Altai)
    doi: 10.7485/QU66_1 Quartär 66 (2019) : 7-31 Exploitation of the natural environment by Neanderthals from Chagyrskaya Cave (Altai) Nutzung der natürlichen Umwelt durch Neandertaler der Chagyrskaya-Höhle (Altai) Ksenia A. Kolobova1*, Victor P. Chabai2, Alena V. Shalagina1*, Maciej T. Krajcarz3, Magdalena Krajcarz4, William Rendu5,6,7, Sergei V. Vasiliev1, Sergei V. Markin1 & Andrei I. Krivoshapkin1,7 1 Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography, Russian Academy of Sciences, Siberian Branch, 630090, Novosibirsk, Russia; email: [email protected]; [email protected] 2 Institute of Archaeology, National Academy of Science of Ukraine, 04210, Kiev, Ukraine 3 Institute of Geological Sciences, Polish Academy of Sciences, Twarda 51/55, 00-818 Warszawa, Poland 4 Institute of Archaeology, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Szosa Bydgoska 44/48, 87-100 Toruń, Poland 5 PACEA, UMR 5199, CNRS, Université de Bordeaux, Ministère de la Culture et de la Communication (MCC), F-33400 Pessac, France 6 New York University, Department of Anthropology, CSHO, New York, NY 10003, USA 7 Novosibirsk State University, Pirogova 1, 630090 Novosibirsk, Russia Abstract - The article presents the first results of studies concerning the raw material procurement and fauna exploitation of the Easternmost Neanderthals from the Russian Altai. We investigated the Chagyrskaya Cave – a key-site of the Sibirya- chikha Middle Paleolithic variant. The cave is known for a large number of Neanderthal remains associated with the Sibirya- chikha techno-complex, which includes assemblages of both lithic artifacts and bone tools. According to our results, a Neanderthal population has used the cave over a few millennia. They hunted juvenile, semi-adult and female bisons in the direct vicinity of the site.
    [Show full text]
  • Past Climate Changes, Population Dynamics and the Origin of Bison in Europe Diyendo Massilani1†, Silvia Guimaraes1†, Jean-Philip Brugal2,3, E
    Massilani et al. BMC Biology (2016) 14:93 DOI 10.1186/s12915-016-0317-7 RESEARCHARTICLE Open Access Past climate changes, population dynamics and the origin of Bison in Europe Diyendo Massilani1†, Silvia Guimaraes1†, Jean-Philip Brugal2,3, E. Andrew Bennett1, Malgorzata Tokarska4, Rose-Marie Arbogast5, Gennady Baryshnikov6, Gennady Boeskorov7, Jean-Christophe Castel8, Sergey Davydov9, Stéphane Madelaine10, Olivier Putelat11,12, Natalia N. Spasskaya13, Hans-Peter Uerpmann14, Thierry Grange1*† and Eva-Maria Geigl1*† Abstract Background: Climatic and environmental fluctuations as well as anthropogenic pressure have led to the extinction of much of Europe’s megafauna. The European bison or wisent (Bison bonasus), one of the last wild European large mammals, narrowly escaped extinction at the onset of the 20th century owing to hunting and habitat fragmentation. Little is known, however, about its origin, evolutionary history and population dynamics during the Pleistocene. Results: Through ancient DNA analysis we show that the emblematic European bison has experienced several waves of population expansion, contraction, and extinction during the last 50,000 years in Europe, culminating in a major reduction of genetic diversity during the Holocene. Fifty-seven complete and partial ancient mitogenomes from throughout Europe, the Caucasus, and Siberia reveal that three populations of wisent (Bison bonasus)and steppe bison (B. priscus) alternately occupied Western Europe, correlating with climate-induced environmental changes. The Late Pleistocene European steppe bison originated from northern Eurasia, whereas the modern wisent population emerged from a refuge in the southern Caucasus after the last glacial maximum. A population overlap during a transition period is reflected in ca. 36,000-year-old paintings in the French Chauvet cave.
    [Show full text]
  • A Genetic Analysis of the Gibraltar Neanderthals
    A genetic analysis of the Gibraltar Neanderthals Lukas Bokelmanna,1, Mateja Hajdinjaka, Stéphane Peyrégnea, Selina Braceb, Elena Essela, Cesare de Filippoa, Isabelle Glockea, Steffi Grotea, Fabrizio Mafessonia, Sarah Nagela, Janet Kelsoa, Kay Prüfera, Benjamin Vernota, Ian Barnesb, Svante Pääboa,1,2, Matthias Meyera,2, and Chris Stringerb,1,2 aDepartment of Evolutionary Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, 04103 Leipzig, Germany; and bCentre for Human Evolution Research, Department of Earth Sciences, The Natural History Museum, London SW7 5BD, United Kingdom Contributed by Svante Pääbo, June 14, 2019 (sent for review March 22, 2019; reviewed by Roberto Macchiarelli and Eva-Maria Geigl) The Forbes’ Quarry and Devil’s Tower partial crania from Gibraltar geographic range from western Europe to western Asia (for an are among the first Neanderthal remains ever found. Here, we overview of all specimens, see SI Appendix, Table S1). Thus, show that small amounts of ancient DNA are preserved in the there is currently no evidence for the existence of substantial petrous bones of the 2 individuals despite unfavorable climatic genetic substructure in the Neanderthal population after ∼90 ka conditions. However, the endogenous Neanderthal DNA is present ago (4), the time at which the “Altai-like” Neanderthals in the among an overwhelming excess of recent human DNA. Using im- Altai had presumably been replaced by more “Vindija 33.19- proved DNA library construction methods that enrich for DNA like” Neanderthals (17). fragments carrying deaminated cytosine residues, we were able The Neanderthal fossils of Gibraltar are among the most to sequence 70 and 0.4 megabase pairs (Mbp) nuclear DNA of the prominent finds in the history of paleoanthropology.
    [Show full text]
  • Anthropology
    CALIFOR!:HA STATE UNIVERSI'fY, NO:R'l'HRIDGE 'l'HE EVOLUTIONARY SCHENES 0!.'' NEANDER.THAL A thesis su~nitted in partial satisfaction of tl:e requirements for the degree of Naste.r of A.rts Anthropology by Sharon Stacey Klein The Thesis of Sharon Stacey Klein is approved: Dr·,~ Nike West. - Dr. Bruce Gelvin, Chair California s·tate University, Northridge ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ·There are many people I would like to thank. Firs·t, the members of my corr.mi ttee who gave me their guidance and suggestions. Second, rny family and friends who supported me through this endea7cr and listened to my constant complaining. Third, the people in my office who allowed me to use my time to complete ·this project. Specifically, I appreciate the proof-reading done by my mother and the French translations done by Mary Riedel. ii.i TABLE OF' CONTENTS PAGE PRELIMINA:H.Y MATEIUALS : Al")stra-:-:t vi CHAP'I'ERS: I. Introduction 1 II. Methodology and Materials 4 III. Classification of Neanderthals 11 Species versus Subspecies Definitions of Neanderthals 16 V. The Pre-sapiens Hypothesis .i9 VI. The Unilinear Hypothesis 26 Horphological Evidence Transi tiona.l Sp.. ::;:cimens T'ool Complexes VII. The Pre-Neanderthal Hypothesis 58 Morphological Evidence Spectrum Hypothesis "Classic'1 Neanderthal's Adaptations Transitional Evidence Tool Complexes VIII. Sumnary and Conclusion 90 Heferences Cited 100 1. G~<ological and A.rchaeoloqical 5 Subdivisions of the P1eistoce!1e 2. The Polyphyletic Hypothesis 17 3. The Pre-sapiens Hypothesis 20 4. The UnilinPar Hypothesis 27 iv FIGUHES: P.Z\GE 5. Size Comparisons of Neanderthal 34 and Australian Aborigine Teeth 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Comments on Mezmaiskaya"
    Eurasian Prehistory, 5 (1) : 131- 136. GETTING BACK TO BASICS: A RESPONSE TO OTTE "COMMENTS ON MEZMAISKAYA" Lubov Golovanova, Vladimir Doronichev and Naomi Cleghorn Marcel Otte recently argued (In "Comments Jar to the Ahmarian tradition, and particularly the on Mezmaiskaya, North Caucasus", Eurasian lithic assemblages from Abu Noshra and the La­ Prehistory, this issue) that the Early Upper Paleo­ gaman, dating between 30 and 35 ky BP (Gilead, lithic (EUP) at Mezmaiskaya Cave can be defined 1991 ). This preliminary conclusion is based on as Aurignacian (versus Golovanova et al., 2006). the prevalence of micro-laminar (bladelet) debi­ This raises an old methodological problem con­ tage, a high percentage of tools made on bladelets cerning the correct use of scientific terms and the (compared with 45 .7 percent at Lagama), and a definition of the Aurignacian. Lithic definitions rather low representation (about 20 percent) of such as Aurignacian and Gravettian, which were endscrapers and burins. It is important to note that ori ginally based on specific materials, have been only the later Ahmarian assemblages provided a rather more loosely applied to assemblages dis­ basis for this comparison. Moreover, despite tant in time and space. We believe that the wider many similarities, the EUP industry from Layer application of these original terms not only sim­ 1C at Mezmaiskaya is not identical to the Ahmar­ plifies them by a subjective reduction of their pri­ ian. mary determining attributes, but also confuses our Ongoing excavations of EUP levels in Mez­ understanding of cultural processes within and maiskaya Cave now permit a more accurate com­ between various regions.
    [Show full text]
  • Comments on Mezmaiskaya"
    EllrasianPrehistory, 5 (I): 13/-136. GETTING BACK TO BASICS: A RESPONSETO OTTE "COMMENTS ON MEZMAISKAYA" Lubov Golovanova, Vladimir Doronichev and Naomi Cleghorn MarcelOtte recently argued (In "Comments lar to the Ahrnarian tradition, and particularly the f onMezmaiskaya,North Caucasus", Eurasian lithic assemblages from Abu Noshra and the La- Prehistory, thisissue)that the Early Upper Paleo- gaman, dating between 30 and 35 ky BP (Gilead, Iilhic(EDP)atMezmaiskayaCave can be defined 1991). This preliminary conclusion is based on asAurignacian(versus Golovanova et al., 2006). the prevalence of micro-laminar (bladelet) debi- Ihisraisesan old methodological problem con- tage, a high percentage of tools made on bladelets cerningthecorrectuse of scientific terms and the (compared with 45.7 percent at Lagama), and a definitionof the Aurignacian. Lithic definitions rather low representation (about 20 percent) of suchasAurignacianand Gravettian which were endscrapers and burins. It is important to note that originallybasedon specific materials, have been only the later Ahmarian assemblages provided a rathermoreloosely applied to assemblages dis- basis for this comparison. Moreover, despite tantintimeand space. We believe that the wider many similarities, the EUP industry from Layer ap.plicationof these original terms not only sim- l C at Mezmaiskaya is not identical to the Ahmar- plifiesthemby a subjective reduction of their pri- tan. mary determiningattributes, but also confuses our Ongoing excavations of EUP levels in Mez- understandingof cultural processes within and maiskaya Cave now permit a more accurate com- betweenvariousregions. parison with the Ahmarian. Typical el-Wad To get hack to the basic definition of the points with fine lateral retouch, which are very ~urignacian,it is necessary to return to Sonne- characteristic of the Ahmarian assemblages from Ville-Bordes'(1950) classic publication on this Lagama (Bar-Yosefand Belfer 1977: fig.
    [Show full text]
  • The Russian -American Perimortem Taphonomy Project in Siberia: a Tribute to Nicolai Dmitrievich Ovodov , Pioneering Siberian
    the russian-american perimortem taphonomy project in siberia: a tribute to nicolai dmitrievich ovodov, pioneering siberian vertebrate paleontologist and cave archaeologist Christy G. Turner II Arizona State University, 2208 N. Campo Alegre Dr., Tempe, AZ 85281-1105; [email protected] abstract This account describes ten years of data collecting, travel, personal experiences, analyses, and report writing (a list follows the text) on the subject of “perimortem” (at or around the time of death) bone damage in Ice Age Siberia. In the telling, emphasis is given to Nicolai D. Ovodov’s role in this long- term project, and his earlier contributions to Siberian cave and open-site archaeology. This is more a personal story than a scientific report. Observations made on the bone assemblage from 30,000-year- old Varvarina Gora, an open-air site east of Lake Baikal that Ovodov helped excavate in the 1970s, illustrate our research. keywords: taphonomy, Late Pleistocene Siberia, cave hyenas introduction Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin has reportedly said The reason for our taphonomy study is simple. We that Russia is just outside her back door in Wasilla. I don’t wanted to see first-hand the damage to bone caused by know which way that door actually faces, but she has a human butchering compared with chewing by nonhuman point. Russia is close to Alaska geographically, historically, animals, particularly that of large carnivores, especially prehistorically and in other ways. Alaska scholars should cave hyenas, Crocuta spelaea (Fig. 1). Remains of these know as much about Russia as my Southwest U.S. col- creatures show that they roamed in Siberia as far as 55˚ N, leagues have to know about Mexico.
    [Show full text]
  • © in This Web Service Cambridge University
    Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-01829-7 - Human Adaptation in the Asian Palaeolithic: Hominin Dispersal and Behaviour during the Late Quaternary Ryan J. Rabett Index More information Index Abdur, 88 Arborophilia sp., 219 Abri Pataud, 76 Arctictis binturong, 218, 229, 230, 231, 263 Accipiter trivirgatus,cf.,219 Arctogalidia trivirgata, 229 Acclimatization, 2, 7, 268, 271 Arctonyx collaris, 241 Acculturation, 70, 279, 288 Arcy-sur-Cure, 75 Acheulean, 26, 27, 28, 29, 45, 47, 48, 51, 52, 58, 88 Arius sp., 219 Acheulo-Yabrudian, 48 Asian leaf turtle. See Cyclemys dentata Adaptation Asian soft-shell turtle. See Amyda cartilaginea high frequency processes, 286 Asian wild dog. See Cuon alipinus hominin adaptive trajectories, 7, 267, 268 Assamese macaque. See Macaca assamensis low frequency processes, 286–287 Athapaskan, 278 tropical foragers (Southeast Asia), 283 Atlantic thermohaline circulation (THC), 23–24 Variability selection hypothesis, 285–286 Attirampakkam, 106 Additive strategies Aurignacian, 69, 71, 72, 73, 76, 78, 102, 103, 268, 272 economic, 274, 280. See Strategy-switching Developed-, 280 (economic) Proto-, 70, 78 technological, 165, 206, 283, 289 Australo-Melanesian population, 109, 116 Agassi, Lake, 285 Australopithecines (robust), 286 Ahmarian, 80 Azilian, 74 Ailuropoda melanoleuca fovealis, 35 Airstrip Mound site, 136 Bacsonian, 188, 192, 194 Altai Mountains, 50, 51, 94, 103 Balobok rock-shelter, 159 Altamira, 73 Ban Don Mun, 54 Amyda cartilaginea, 218, 230 Ban Lum Khao, 164, 165 Amyda sp., 37 Ban Mae Tha, 54 Anderson, D.D., 111, 201 Ban Rai, 203 Anorrhinus galeritus, 219 Banteng. See Bos cf. javanicus Anthracoceros coronatus, 219 Banyan Valley Cave, 201 Anthracoceros malayanus, 219 Barranco Leon,´ 29 Anthropocene, 8, 9, 274, 286, 289 BAT 1, 173, 174 Aq Kupruk, 104, 105 BAT 2, 173 Arboreal-adapted taxa, 96, 110, 111, 113, 122, 151, 152, Bat hawk.
    [Show full text]
  • The Appendicular Remains of the Kiik-Koba 2 Neandertal Infant
    The Appendicular Remains of the Kiik-Koba 2 Neandertal Infant ERIK TRINKAUS Department of Anthropology, Washington University, St. Louis, MO 63130, USA; [email protected] MARIA B. MEDNIKOVA Institute of Archaeology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Dm. Ulianova str. 19, Moscow 117036, RUSSIA; [email protected] LIBBY W. COWGILL Department of Anthropology, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65201, USA; [email protected] submitted: 9 August 2016; revised 21 November 2016; accepted 7 December 2016 ABSTRACT The appendicular skeleton (scapula, humerus, ulnae, radii, metacarpals, pollical phalanges, hip bone, femora, tibiae and fibula) of the Neandertal infant from Kiik-Koba (Crimea), Kiik-Koba 2, are reassessed in the context of Late Pleistocene archaic and modern human infant remains. Based on long bone lengths, it should have been 4–6 months old at death, of indeterminate sex. The infant resembles (most) older Neandertals in its scapular dorsal sulcus axillary border, medially oriented radial tuberosity, radial curvature, large pollical opponens flange, and low crural index. It lacks the mediolateral pubic elongation seen in some older Neandertals, its brachial index is average for a Late Pleistocene or recent human, and its femoral neck-shaft angle is low for its developmental age. The percent cortical areas of its humerus and especially femur are average for its age, but its tibial one is unusually low. Yet, when scaled to intermetaphyseal lengths, the midshaft rigidities of all three long bones are unexceptional for a Late Pleistocene or non-mechanized recent human infant. The Kiik-Koba 2 infant limb bones thus provide additional data and inferences concerning the mosaic of Neandertal early postnatal development of postcranial features and appendicular hypertrophy, when assessed in the broader context of both Late Pleistocene and recent human infant remains.
    [Show full text]
  • Ahead of the Game: Middle and Upper Palaeolithic Hunting Behaviors in the Southern Caucasus
    Ahead of the Game: Middle and Upper Palaeolithic Hunting Behaviors in the Southern Caucasus The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Adler, Daniel S., Guy Bar#Oz, Anna Belfer#Cohen, and Ofer Bar# Yosef. 2006. Ahead of the Game: Middle and Upper Palaeolithic Hunting Behaviors in the Southern Caucasus. Current Anthropology 47, no. 1: 89–118. Published Version doi:10.1086/432455 Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:12242824 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 Current Anthropology Volume 47, Number 1, February 2006 89 Ahead of the Game Middle and Upper Palaeolithic Hunting Behaviors in the Southern Caucasus by Daniel S. Adler, Guy Bar-Oz, Anna Belfer-Cohen, and Ofer Bar-Yosef Over the past several decades a variety of models have been proposed to explain perceived behavioral and cognitive differences between Neanderthals and modern humans. A key element in many of these models and one often used as a proxy for behavioral “modernity” is the frequency and nature of hunting among Palaeolithic populations. Here new archaeological data from Ortvale Klde, a late Middle–early Upper Palaeolithic rockshelter in the Georgian Republic, are considered, and zooar- chaeological methods are applied to the study of faunal acquisition patterns to test whether they changed significantly from the Middle to the Upper Palaeolithic.
    [Show full text]
  • An Anthropological Assessment of Neanderthal Behavioural Energetics
    DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY, CLASSICS & EGYPTOLOGY An Anthropological Assessment of Neanderthal Behavioural Energetics. Thesis submitted in accordance with the requirements of the University of Liverpool for the Degree of Doctor in Philosophy by Andrew Shuttleworth. April, 2013. TABLE OF CONTENTS……………………………………………………………………..i LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………………………………v LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………………………………..vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS…………………………………………………………………...vii ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………………viii TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................1 1.1. Introduction..............................................................................................................1 1.2. Aims and Objectives................................................................................................2 1.3. Thesis Format...........................................................................................................3 2. THE NEANDERTHAL AND OXYEGN ISOTOPE STAGE-3.................................6 2.1. Discovery, Geographic Range & Origins..............................................................7 2.1.1. Discovery........................................................................................................7 2.1.2. Neanderthal Chronology................................................................................10 2.2. Morphology.............................................................................................................11
    [Show full text]
  • Mandibular Ramus Shape Variation and Ontogeny in Homo Sapiens and Homo Neanderthalensis
    Journal of Human Evolution xxx (2018) 1e17 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Human Evolution journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jhevol Mandibular ramus shape variation and ontogeny in Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis * Claire E. Terhune a, , Terrence B. Ritzman b, c, d, Chris A. Robinson e a Department of Anthropology, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, 72701, USA b Department of Neuroscience, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA c Department of Anthropology, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, USA d Human Evolution Research Institute, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa e Department of Biological Sciences, Bronx Community College, City University of New York, Bronx, New York, USA article info abstract Article history: As the interface between the mandible and cranium, the mandibular ramus is functionally significant and Received 28 September 2016 its morphology has been suggested to be informative for taxonomic and phylogenetic analyses. In pri- Accepted 27 March 2018 mates, and particularly in great apes and humans, ramus morphology is highly variable, especially in the Available online xxx shape of the coronoid process and the relationship of the ramus to the alveolar margin. Here we compare ramus shape variation through ontogeny in Homo neanderthalensis to that of modern and fossil Homo Keywords: sapiens using geometric morphometric analyses of two-dimensional semilandmarks and univariate Growth and development measurements of ramus angulation and relative coronoid and condyle height. Results suggest that Geometric morphometrics Hominin evolution ramus, especially coronoid, morphology varies within and among subadult and adult modern human populations, with the Alaskan Inuit being particularly distinct.
    [Show full text]