Events in Prehistory: Dates and Event Cards—Key

Copy Link

Events in Prehistory: Dates and Event Cards―Key 8.1.2 e Remind students that prehistory dates are approximate and theoretical. 2,000,000 years BCE First evidence of Homo habilis (skillful humans) in Africa: they stood upright, had small brains, and used their hands to make tools for survival. 1,500,000 years BCE First evidence of Homo erectus (upright humans) in Africa: they were taller humans with bigger brains and better tools, and lived in small hunter-gatherer societies. 1,000,000 BCE First evidence of humans migrating from Africa to Europe and Asia 700,000 BCE First evidence of humans using fire for survival 250,000 BCE Beginning of evidence of Homo sapiens (thinking humans) who looked similar to modern humans: they used spoken language, adapted to colder climates, and had art and religion. Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons were both Homo sapiens. 13,000 BCE First evidence of humans migrating to the Americas 10,000 BCE First evidence of agriculture and the development of agrarian societies 3500 BCE First evidence of written language Additional markers that may be added to the prehistory span of the wall About 2.5 million BCE Old Stone Age (Paleolithic age): there are small hunter-gatherer to 10,000 BCE societies that used stone tools (pre-agriculture; there are also long periods of Ice Ages during this time). About 250,000 BCE Neanderthals appear in Europe (evidence of burial of the dead and religious beliefs). About 100,000 BCE Cro-magnons appear in North Africa, Asia, and Europe; they were skillful toolmakers and artists. Invention of the axe, first evidence of cave paintings About 14,000 to End of the last Ice Age: glaciers and ice sheets in Europe, North 12,000 BCE America, and Asia are receding; climate is warming; more plants are available as food sources. About 10,000 to Beginning of the Neolithic Age (New Stone Age): agriculture begins; 8000 BCE better tools are developed, people begin to settle in villages in some areas. About 8000 BCE Evidence of first city―Jericho―in Israel About 6500 BCE City of Catal Hüyük built in Turkey .

Recommended publications

Two Modern Compositional Approaches

Musical Aesthetics of the Natural World: Two Modern Compositional Approaches Eli Stine and Christopher Luna-Mega University of Virginia, McIntire Department of Music Throughout recorded human history, experiences and observations of the natural world have inspired the arts. Within the sonic arts, evocations of nature permeate a wide variety of acoustic and electronic composition strategies. These strategies artistically investigate diverse attributes of nature: tranquility, turbulence, abundance, scarcity, complexity, and purity, to name but a few. Within the 20th century, new technologies to understand these attributes, including media recording and scientific analysis, were developed. These technologies allow music composi- tion strategies to go beyond mere evocation and to allow for the construction of musical works that engage explicit models of nature (what has been called ‘biologically inspired music’). This paper explores two such deployments of these ‘natural sound models’ within music and music generation systems created by the authors: an electroacoustic composition using data derived from multi-channel recordings of forest insects (Luna-Mega) and an electronic music generation system that extracts musical events from the different layers of natural soundscapes, in particular oyster reef soundscapes (Stine). Together these works engage a diverse array of extra-musical disciplines: environmental science, acoustic ecology, entomology, and computer science. The works are contextualized with a brief history of natural sound models from pre- antiquity to the present in addition to reflections on the uses of technology within these projects and the potential experiences of audiences listening to these works. “Great art picks up where nature ends.” - Mark Chagall and aesthetics towards a more quantitative awareness of how The natural world has been a focal point for the arts since the natural world functions and evolves is present within a the Upper Paleolithic.
Chapter 2: Prehistoric People, 8000 BC

0032-0047 CH02-846240 11/14/02 11:33 PM Page 32 CHAPTER Prehistoric People 2 8000 B.C.–3000 B.C. ᭡ Neolithic pottery Paleolithic carving ᭤ 8000 B.C. 6500 B.C. 4000 B.C. 3000 B.C. New Stone Age begins Catal Hüyük World population reaches Writing is established about 90 million invented 32 UNIT 1 PLACE AND TIME 0032-0047 CH02-846240 11/14/02 10:11 PM Page 33 Chapter Focus Read to Discover Chapter Overview Visit the Human Heritage Web site • How tools, language, clothing, and the discovery of fire at humanheritage.glencoe.com helped early people advance. and click on Chapter 2—Chapter • What Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons were like. Overviews to preview this chapter. • How people changed from food gatherers to food producers. • Why specialization, government, and religion were impor- tant in Neolithic societies. Terms to Learn People to Know Places to Locate prehistory Lucy Olduvai Gorge civilization Neanderthals Jericho migrate Cro-Magnons Catal Hüyük specialization Why It’s Important Most archaeologists believe people have lived on the earth for millions of years. The period of time before the invention of writing is called prehistory. It lasted Reading Check until about five thousand years ago, when people learned how When did to write. Through the use of artifacts, archaeologists have prehistory end? traced the milestones that paved the way from prehistory to What helped bring the rise of civilization—a time when people progressed cultur- about the rise of ally and began to live in cities. civilization? SECTION 1 The Paleolithic Age Although there were no written records during prehistory, scientists have learned a great deal about prehistoric people.
Persistence of Middle Stone Age Technology to the Pleistocene/Holocene Transition Supports a Complex Hominin Evolutionary Scenario in West Africa

This is a repository copy of Persistence of Middle Stone Age technology to the Pleistocene/Holocene transition supports a complex hominin evolutionary scenario in West Africa. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/129212/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Scerri, E.M.L., Blinkhorn, J., Niang, K. et al. (2 more authors) (2017) Persistence of Middle Stone Age technology to the Pleistocene/Holocene transition supports a complex hominin evolutionary scenario in West Africa. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, 11. pp. 639-646. ISSN 2352-409X https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2017.01.003 Reuse This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND) licence. This licence only allows you to download this work and share it with others as long as you credit the authors, but you can’t change the article in any way or use it commercially. More information and the full terms of the licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Persistence of Middle Stone Age technology to the Pleistocene/Holocene transition supports a complex hominin evolutionary scenario in West Africa Eleanor M.L. Scerria*, James Blinkhornb, Khady Niangc, Mark D. Batemand, Huw S. Groucutta a Research
Upper Paleolithic Human Remains from the Gruta Do Caldeirão, Tomar

REVISTA PORTUGUESA DE Arqueologia .volume 4.número 2.2001 5 Upper Paleolithic human remains from the Gruta do Caldeirão, Tomar,Portugal ERIK TRINKAUS1 SHARA E. BAILEY2 JOÃO ZILHÃO3 ABSTRACTThe Upper Paleolithic human remains from the Solutrean and Solutrean to Magdalenian levels of the Gruta do Caldeirão, Tomar (Portugal) are described paleontolog- ically. The remains, which include maxillary and mandibular pieces, associated and isolated teeth, and small postcranial elements, derive from a series of individuals between childhood and early adulthood. The teeth are relatively large, similar to those of earlier Upper Paleolithic Europeans, and the postcranial elements derive from a relatively small and gracile individual. All are notable for their lack of pathological alterations. RESUMODescrevem-se paleontologicamente os restos humanos do Paleolítico Superior (Solutrense e Magdalenense) da Gruta do Caldeirão, Tomar (Portugal). Incluindo peças dos maxilares superior e inferior, dentes a elas associados e dentes isolados, e ainda alguns ele- mentos pós-cranianos de pequenas dimensões, os restos pertencem a uma série de indiví- duos de idades compreendidas entre a infância e os primeiros anos da idade adulta. Os den- tes são relativamente grandes, comparáveis aos das restantes populações europeias do Paleolítico Superior inicial, e os elementos pós-cranianos pertencem a um indivíduo relati- vamente pequeno e grácil. É de realçar a ausência, em todos estes restos, de quaisquer alte- rações patológicas. REVISTA PORTUGUESA DE Arqueologia .volume 4.número 2.2001 6 Introduction Upper Paleolithic human remains are relatively rare from Iberia south of the Pyrenees (Fer- embach and Roche, 1971; Aguirre et al., 1991; Zilhão, 1997), and it is therefore of interest to describe in detail those remains that are known and have reasonably reliable stratigraphic con- texts.
Timeline from Ice Ages to European Arrival in New England

TIMELINE FROM ICE AGES TO EUROPEAN ARRIVAL IN NEW ENGLAND Mitchell T. Mulholland & Kit Curran Department of Anthropology, University of Massachusetts Amherst 500 Years Before Present CONTACT Europeans Arrive PERIOD 3,000 YBP WOODLAND Semi-permanent villages in which cultivated food crops are stored. Mixed-oak forest, chestnut. Slash and burn agriculture changes appearance of landscape. Cultivated plants: corn, beans, and squash. Bows and arrows, spears used along with more wood, bone tools. 6,000 YBP LATE Larger base camps; small groups move seasonally ARCHAIC through mixed-oak forest, including some tropical plants. Abundant fish and game; seeds and nuts. 9,000 YBP EARLY & Hunter/gatherers using seasonal camping sites for MIDDLE several months duration to hunt deer, turkey, ARCHAIC and fish with spears as well as gathering plants. 12,000 YBP PALEOINDIAN Small nomadic hunting groups using spears to hunt caribou and mammoth in the tundra Traditional discussions of the occupation of New England by prehistoric peoples divide prehistory into three major periods: Paleoindian, Archaic and Woodland. Paleoindian Period (12,000-9,000 BP) The Paleoindian Period extended from approximately 12,000 years before present (BP) until 9,000 BP. During this era, people manufactured fluted projectile points. They hunted caribou as well as smaller animals found in the sparse, tundra-like environment. In other parts of the country, Paleoindian groups hunted larger Pleistocene mammals such as mastodon or mammoth. In New England there is no evidence that these mammals were utilized by humans as a food source. People moved into New England after deglaciation of the region concluded around 14,000 BP.
The Medway Megaliths and Neolithic Kent

http://kentarchaeology.org.uk/research/archaeologia-cantiana/ Kent Archaeological Society is a registered charity number 223382 © 2017 Kent Archaeological Society THE MEDWAY MEGALITHS AND NEOLITHIC KENT* ROBIN HOLGATE, B.Sc. INTRODUCTION The Medway megaliths constitute a geographically well-defined group of this Neolithic site-type1 and are the only megalithic group in eastern England. Previous accounts of these monuments2 have largely been devoted to their morphology and origins; a study in- corporating current trends in British megalithic studies is therefore long overdue. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN BRITISH MEGALITHIC STUDIES Until the late 1960s, megalithic chambered barrows and cairns were considered to have functioned purely as tombs: they were the burial vaults and funerary monuments for people living in the fourth and third millennia B.C. The first academic studies of these monuments therefore concentrated on the typological analysis of their plans. This method of analysis, though, has often produced incorrect in- terpretations: without excavation it is often impossible to reconstruct the sequence of development and original appearance for a large number of megaliths. In addition, plan-typology disregards other aspects related to them, for example constructional * I am indebted to Peter Drewett for reading and commenting on a first draft of this article; naturally I take responsibility for all the views expressed. 1 G.E. Daniel, The Prehistoric Chamber Tombs of England and Wales, Cambridge, 1950, 12. 2 Daniel, op. cit; J.H. Evans, 'Kentish Megalith Types', Arch. Cant, Ixiii (1950), 63-81; R.F. Jessup, South-East England, London, 1970. 221 THE MEDWAY MEGALITHS GRAVESEND. ROCHESTER CHATHAM r>v.-5rt AYLESFORD MAIDSTONE Fig.
The Aurignacian Viewed from Africa

Aurignacian Genius: Art, Technology and Society of the First Modern Humans in Europe Proceedings of the International Symposium, April 08-10 2013, New York University THE AURIGNACIAN VIEWED FROM AFRICA Christian A. TRYON Introduction 20 The African archeological record of 43-28 ka as a comparison 21 A - The Aurignacian has no direct equivalent in Africa 21 B - Archaic hominins persist in Africa through much of the Late Pleistocene 24 C - High modification symbolic artifacts in Africa and Eurasia 24 Conclusions 26 Acknowledgements 26 References cited 27 To cite this article Tryon C. A. , 2015 - The Aurignacian Viewed from Africa, in White R., Bourrillon R. (eds.) with the collaboration of Bon F., Aurignacian Genius: Art, Technology and Society of the First Modern Humans in Europe, Proceedings of the International Symposium, April 08-10 2013, New York University, P@lethnology, 7, 19-33. http://www.palethnologie.org 19 P@lethnology | 2015 | 19-33 Aurignacian Genius: Art, Technology and Society of the First Modern Humans in Europe Proceedings of the International Symposium, April 08-10 2013, New York University THE AURIGNACIAN VIEWED FROM AFRICA Christian A. TRYON Abstract The Aurignacian technocomplex in Eurasia, dated to ~43-28 ka, has no direct archeological taxonomic equivalent in Africa during the same time interval, which may reflect differences in inter-group communication or differences in archeological definitions currently in use. Extinct hominin taxa are present in both Eurasia and Africa during this interval, but the African archeological record has played little role in discussions of the demographic expansion of Homo sapiens, unlike the Aurignacian. Sites in Eurasia and Africa by 42 ka show the earliest examples of personal ornaments that result from extensive modification of raw materials, a greater investment of time that may reflect increased their use in increasingly diverse and complex social networks.
The Pleistocene Peopling of the North: Paleolithic Milestones and Thresholds Horizons in Northern Eurasia Part Ii: the Middle Paleolithic Human Biogeographic Realm

ARCHAEOLOGY, ETHNOLOGY & ANTHROPOLOGY OF EURASIA Archaeology Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia 43/4 (2015) 3–18 E-mail: [email protected] 3 PALEOENVIRONMENT. THE STONE AGE N. Rolland Prehistoric Anthropology Research Canada, 192 Bushby Street, Victoria, BC, V8S 1B6, Canada Email: [email protected] THE PLEISTOCENE PEOPLING OF THE NORTH: PALEOLITHIC MILESTONES AND THRESHOLDS HORIZONS IN NORTHERN EURASIA PART II: THE MIDDLE PALEOLITHIC HUMAN BIOGEOGRAPHIC REALM The Middle Paleolithic record for the “peopling of the North” is presented with tables, a distribution map, chronology, bioclimatic circumstances, and toolmaking repertoires. Salient aspects identify time-series, patterns of adaptive strategies, dispersal “frontlines”, and strategies for procurement of food-animals. They support empirically a model of the human biogeographic “cold space” realm; its bearing on the adaptive horizons of the historical zonation of the Paleolithic culture; debates about the Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition in Eurasia; and antecedents for trends in intensi¿ cation of Holocene culture in circumpolar habitats, with reference to the Canadian Arctic. Keywords: Middle Paleolithic milestones, human biogeography, social morphology, occupation “frontlines”, culture historical time series. Introduction successful adaptation strategies, including some instances of settlements during stadial advances. These processes, In Part I of the article, devoted to the peopling of North in which provided the possibility of peopling the sub-polar Paleolithic, the issues of peopling of Northern Eurasia in high-latitude habitats of Eurasia, are discussed in Part II. the Early Pleistocene were discussed. Despite the scarcity of archaeological records of this period and debatable contexts of some Early Paleolithic sites, we can trace the Middle Paleolithic colonization milestones cyclical human expansions into north Eurasian middle and high latitudes.
Ch. 4. NEOLITHIC PERIOD in JORDAN 25 4.1

Borsa di studio finanziata da: Ministero degli Affari Esteri di Italia Thanks all …………. I will be glad to give my theses with all my love to my father and mother, all my brothers for their helps since I came to Italy until I got this degree. I am glad because I am one of Dr. Ursula Thun Hohenstein students. I would like to thanks her to her help and support during my research. I would like to thanks Dr.. Maysoon AlNahar and the Museum of the University of Jordan stuff for their help during my work in Jordan. I would like to thank all of Prof. Perreto Carlo and Prof. Benedetto Sala, Dr. Arzarello Marta and all my professors in the University of Ferrara for their support and help during my Phd Research. During my study in Italy I met a lot of friends and specially my colleges in the University of Ferrara. I would like to thanks all for their help and support during these years. Finally I would like to thanks the Minister of Fournier of Italy, Embassy of Italy in Jordan and the University of Ferrara institute for higher studies (IUSS) to fund my PhD research. CONTENTS Ch. 1. INTRODUCTION 1 Ch. 2. AIMS OF THE RESEARCH 3 Ch. 3. NEOLITHIC PERIOD IN NEAR EAST 5 3.1. Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (PPNA) in Near east 5 3.2. Pre-pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) in Near east 10 3.2.A. Early PPNB 10 3.2.B. Middle PPNB 13 3.2.C. Late PPNB 15 3.3.
On the Nature of Transitions: the Middle to Upper Palaeolithic and the Neolithic Revolution

On the Nature of Transitions: the Middle to Upper Palaeolithic and the Neolithic Revolution The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Bar-Yosef, Ofer. 1998. “On the Nature of Transitions: The Middle to Upper Palaeolithic and the Neolithic Revolution.” Cam. Arch. Jnl 8 (02) (October): 141. Published Version doi:10.1017/S0959774300000986 Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:12211496 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 Cambridge Archaeological Journal 8:2 (1998), 141-63 On the Nature of Transitions: the Middle to Upper Palaeolithic and the Neolithic Revolution Ofer Bar-Yosef This article discusses two major revolutions in the history of humankind, namely, the Neolithic and the Middle to Upper Palaeolithic revolutions. The course of the first one is used as a general analogy to study the second, and the older one. This approach puts aside the issue of biological differences among the human fossils, and concentrates solely on the cultural and technological innovations. It also demonstrates that issues that are common- place to the study of the trajisition from foraging to cultivation and animal husbandry can be employed as an overarching model for the study of the transition from the Middle to the Upper Palaeolithic. The advantage of this approach is that it focuses on the core areas where each of these revolutions began, the ensuing dispersals and their geographic contexts.
Early Farmers from Across Europe Directly Descended from Neolithic Aegeans

Early farmers from across Europe directly descended from Neolithic Aegeans Zuzana Hofmanováa,1, Susanne Kreutzera,1, Garrett Hellenthalb, Christian Sella, Yoan Diekmannb, David Díez-del-Molinob, Lucy van Dorpb, Saioa Lópezb, Athanasios Kousathanasc,d, Vivian Linkc,d, Karola Kirsanowa, Lara M. Cassidye, Rui Martinianoe, Melanie Strobela, Amelie Scheua,e, Kostas Kotsakisf, Paul Halsteadg, Sevi Triantaphyllouf, Nina Kyparissi-Apostolikah, Dushka Urem-Kotsoui, Christina Ziotaj, Fotini Adaktylouk, Shyamalika Gopalanl, Dean M. Bobol, Laura Winkelbacha, Jens Blöchera, Martina Unterländera, Christoph Leuenbergerm, Çiler Çilingiroglu˘ n, Barbara Horejso, Fokke Gerritsenp, Stephen J. Shennanq, Daniel G. Bradleye, Mathias Curratr, Krishna R. Veeramahl, Daniel Wegmannc,d, Mark G. Thomasb, Christina Papageorgopoulous,2, and Joachim Burgera,2 aPalaeogenetics Group, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, 55099 Mainz, Germany; bDepartment of Genetics, Evolution, and Environment, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom; cDepartment of Biology, University of Fribourg, 1700 Fribourg, Switzerland; dSwiss Institute of Bioinformatics, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland; eMolecular Population Genetics, Smurfit Institute of Genetics, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland; fFaculty of Philosophy, School of History and Archaeology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece; gDepartment of Archaeology, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S1 4ET, United Kingdom; hHonorary Ephor of Antiquities, Hellenic Ministry of Culture & Sports,
Behavioural Complexity and Modern Traits in the Philippine Upper Palaeolithic

Behavioural Complexity and Modern Traits in the Philippine Upper Palaeolithic AlFred F. PAwlIk introduction The discussion of cultural, cognitive, and behavioral modernity has a long tradition in europe’s prehistoric archaeology ( Dibble 1989; Hahn 1986; Jelinek 1982; klein 1995, 1999; Mellars 1989a, 1989b). The appearance of specialized blade indus- tries, bone and antler tools, and especially figurative art, musical instruments, and personal ornaments are seen as significant indicators of the highly developed cultural and cognitive abilities of their makers (Clottes 2001; Conard 2003; Conard et al. 2004). The seemingly sudden appearance of expressive art and symbolism together with complex tool technologies in europe at around 40,000 years ago has been attributed to explosive cultural and cognitive advancement with the arrival of ana- tomically modern Homo sapiens ( Klein and Blake 2002; Mellars 1991; Mithen 1996). Whether this Upper Palaeolithic revolution in europe was due to social factors or genetic mutation, was related to changes in the ecosystem, or has a cultural expla- nation (such as competition with another human species, the Neanderthals) is still under debate ( Bar-Yossef 2002; Conard et al. 2004; d’errico 2003; Haidle 2006; McBrearty and Brooks 2000; Mellars 2005; Zilhão 2001). Yet, the “human revolu- tion” model is used to explain the success of the Homo sapiens immigrants over the Neanderthals ( Bräuer and Smith 1992; Conard 2006, 2008; Mellars 2005). On the other hand, potential indicators of an earlier and gradually developing cul- tural and cognitive modernity have been seen in African assemblages. The appearance of some modern cognitive traits (e.g., production of projectile points, shell-fishing, personal ornaments, notational or incised pieces, and pigment processing) in Africa has been dated back to the Middle Pleistocene, earlier than the first evidence of ana- tomically modern hominids 200,000 years ago (Henshilwood et al.