Frontiers of Anthropology

First Americans: were they Iberian, not Siberian?

2012-03-05T10:52:00.002-08:00

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21538-first-americans-were-they-iberian-not-siberian.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=online-news

First Americans: were they Iberian, not Siberian?

13:45 05 March 2012
by Andy Coghlan
DID some of the first American settlers come from Europe rather than across the Bering land bridge from Siberia to Alaska, as most people believe?The controversial theory is advanced in the book Across Atlantic Ice, launched last week in the US. Co-authors Bruce Bradley of the University of Exeter, UK, and Dennis Stanfordof the Smithsonian Institution in Washington DC claim that glaciers and ice floes spanned much of the north Atlantic Ocean during the last ice age. This bridge lasted at least 2000 years.
Between 18,000 and 25,000 years ago, Bradley and Stanford think that Solutrean people from northern Spain and France developed an Inuit-like lifestyle on the ice, and eventually reached America."We're using an analogy with Inuit, who expanded all across the Arctic with technologies no more sophisticated than those we know the Solutreans had," says Bradley. Their key evidence is the discovery of 18,000 to 26,000-year-old tools with a Solutrean appearance at six sites in the eastern US. "Several of these are new finds," says Bradley.
One, a knife embedded in a 22,000-year-old mastodon skull, was dredged up 80 kilometres from the Virginian coast in 75 metres of water. "The youngest the knife can be is 14,500 years old, based on when the land was inundated with sea water," says Bradley. "The location was land, a barrier island, at the time the blade was deposited."
Solutrean-style tools were not invented by the Asian people thought to have been the first Americans. They supposedly reached Alaska around 13,000 years ago through Beringia, a temporary land bridge across the Bering strait. According to conventional thinking, these Siberian settlers established the so-called Clovis culture, leading ultimately to today's native Americans.
Bradley and Stanford argue that because such advanced tools can't have come from Siberia, they must have arrived much earlier. The only explanation, they say, is that the Solutreans brought them there as early as 23,000 years ago, over the ice.
Other archaeologists are deeply sceptical of the theory, which has been circulating for at least a decade. [Half a century, more likely!-DD]
According to Lawrence Straus of the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque, the Solutrean culture disappeared in Europe around 16,000 to 18,000 years ago – at least 5000 years before the Clovis appeared in America. Straus also doubts that the Solutreans had the technology to cross the ice, and argues that the Clovis developed the sophisticated Solutrean-style tools independently.[Straus basically has no case left now. And ALL of the resistance to the theory has been from the diehard conservatives of academia all along, NOT from field workers.-DD]

[The alternate theory is that stepping-stone islands across the Atlantic, remnants of an older landbridge, provided conveinent stopover points and base-camps for the Soultrean travellers. We DO have evidence for such former islands in the form of now-sunken seamounts and guyots. And another part of the evidence includes that the Magdalenians who followed the Solutreans in Europe represent a new physical type and is intrusive into Europe, developed outside of Europe. Those are some of the skulls we have been discussing which resemble some of the Archaic and Moundbuilder cultures of the New World: it was noticed earlier (and the theory has been around longer) that they physically resembled Inuit (ESKIMOES) especially. And so this in turn furnishes a good assumption that their Solutrean ancestors had been Inuit-like Arctic hunters of the Atlantic. And in later European history, skulls of that type were asociated with the Iberians. Best Wishes, Dale D.]

New evidence suggests Stone Age hunters from Europe discovered America

2012-03-04T14:37:00.000-08:00

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/new-evidence-suggests-stone-age-hunters-from-europe-discovered-america-7447152.html

New evidence suggests Stone Age hunters from Europe discovered America
David Keys

Tuesday 28 February 2012

{Of course if Atlantis was up as a halfway stopover between Europe and the US, the route would have been MUCH easier to travel-DD]

New archaeological evidence suggests that America was first discovered by Stone Age people from Europe – 10,000 years before the Siberian-originating ancestors of the American Indians set foot in the New World.

A remarkable series of several dozen European-style stone tools, dating back between 19,000 and 26,000 years, have been discovered at six locations along the US east coast. Three of the sites are on the Delmarva Peninsular in Maryland, discovered by archaeologist Dr Darrin Lowery of the University of Delaware. One is in Pennsylvania and another in Virginia. A sixth was discovered by scallop-dredging fishermen on the seabed 60 miles from the Virginian coast on what, in prehistoric times, would have been dry land.
The new discoveries are among the most important archaeological breakthroughs for several decades - and are set to add substantially to our understanding of humanity's spread around the globe.
The similarity between other later east coast US and European Stone Age stone tool technologies has been noted before. But all the US European-style tools, unearthed before the discovery or dating of the recently found or dated US east coast sites, were from around 15,000 years ago - long after Stone Age Europeans (the Solutrean cultures of France and Iberia) had ceased making such artefacts. Most archaeologists had therefore rejected any possibility of a connection. But the newly-discovered and recently-dated early Maryland and other US east coast Stone Age tools are from between 26,000 and 19,000 years ago - and are therefore contemporary with the virtually identical western European material.
What’s more, chemical analysis carried out last year on a European-style stone knife found in Virginia back in 1971 revealed that it was made of French-originating flint.
Professor Dennis Stanford, of the Smithsonian Institution in Washington DC, and Professor Bruce Bradley of the University of Exeter, the two leading archaeologists who have analysed all the evidence, are proposing that Stone Age people from Western Europe migrated to North America at the height of the Ice Age by travelling (over the ice surface and/or by boat) along the edge of the frozen northern part of the Atlantic. They are presenting their detailed evidence in a new book - Across Atlantic Ice – published this month.
At the peak of the Ice Age, around three million square miles of the North Atlantic was covered in thick ice for all or part of the year.
However, the seasonally shifting zone where the ice ended and the open ocean began would have been extremely rich in food resources – migrating seals, sea birds, fish and the now-extinct northern hemisphere penguin-like species, the great auk.
Stanford and Bradley have long argued that Stone Age humans were quite capable of making the 1500 mile journey across the Atlantic ice - but till now there was comparatively little evidence to support their thinking.
But the new Maryland, Virginia and other US east coast material, and the chemical tests on the Virginian flint knife, have begun to transform the situation. Now archaeologists are starting to investigate half a dozen new sites in Tennessee, Maryland and even Texas – and these locations are expected to produce more evidence.
Another key argument for Stanford and Bradley’s proposal is the complete absence of any human activity in north-east Siberia and Alaska prior to around 15,500 years ago. If the Maryland and other east coast people of 26,000 to 19,000 years ago had come from Asia, not Europe, early material, dating from before 19,000 years ago, should have turned up in those two northern areas, but none have been found.
Although Solutrean Europeans may well have been the first Americans, they had a major disadvantage compared to the Asian-originating Indians who entered the New World via the Bering Straits or along the Aleutian Islands chain after 15,500 years ago.
Whereas the Solutreans had only had a 4500 year long ‘Ice Age’ window to carry out their migratory activity, the Asian-originating Indians had some 15,000 years to do it. What’s more, the latter two-thirds of that 15 millennia long period was climatologically much more favourable and substantially larger numbers of Asians were therefore able to migrate.
As a result of these factors the Solutrean (European originating) Native Americans were either partly absorbed by the newcomers or were substantially obliterated by them either physically or through competition for resources.
Some genetic markers for Stone Age western Europeans simply don’t exist in north- east Asia – but they do in tiny quantities among some north American Indian groups. Scientific tests on ancient DNA extracted from 8000 year old skeletons from Florida have revealed a high level of a key probable European-originating genetic marker. There are also a tiny number of isolated Native American groups whose languages appear not to be related in any way to Asian-originating American Indian peoples.
But the greatest amount of evidence is likely to come from under the ocean – for most of the areas where the Solutreans would have stepped off the Ice onto dry land are now up to 100 miles out to sea.
The one underwater site that has been identified - thanks to the scallop dredgers – is set to be examined in greater detail this summer – either by extreme-depth divers or by remotely operated mini submarines equipped with cameras and grab arms.

[Unless I miss my guess, these stone tools will be of the right shape and in the right chrological layer to be clasifiable as Sandia. That will give those Clovis-First people who deliberately schemed to have the Sandia culture removed by a campaign of innuendo a kick in the pants-DD]

Reassessment of Atlantean Agriculture

2012-03-03T11:43:00.000-08:00

I had entered this map last time without making extensive comments: the truth is the piece was running too long and so I thought I should break it in half. The connection lines are mine and it seemed to me that several experts were consistently missing a pattern of cultigens arising first in Africa and then moving outward. After all, there was a culture in Egypt already on a par with the Naftufians of Palestine when they arose, and the Egyptian culture had relatives in the Saharan area.
It begins to look as if consistent plant food gathering and processing was going on in Africa as far back as over 100,000 years ago and that part of what humans were consuming at the time were later well-known domesticated plants-not only yams but also cowpeas, sorghum and (in the Middle East) barley.Furthermore, it turns out that there is a fragment of flax twisted into thread for fabric and dyed found in a cave in Georgia and dated to before 30,000 years ago, aaccording to the Wikipedia.
What results from this is that we have a movement of cultivated crops out of Africa ( specifically out of the Saharan region) on a timescale comparable to the "Cattle Out of Africa, Too" scenario, which has cattle developing in Northern Africa since before 20,000 years ago. This movement went primarily through Southern Asia, but part of it also deflected Westward into Atlantis along with the Solutrean Crossing. And food-production in Atlantis was going on at least concurrently with the Egyptian Sebilian, probably using many of the same food plants.Atlantis in the stages when it was developing agriculture might well be envisioned as using primarily crops borrowed from Northern Africa as of the Solutrean age, and that the agricultural element stayed behind as a home base while the more venturesome population continued on to America.
The following is a Wikipedia map of the Neolithic spread, amended to include the Atlantis area.

Map of the world showing approximate centers of origin of agriculture and its spread in prehistory: the Fertile Crescent (11,000 BP), Sundaland with the Yangtze and Yellow River basins (11000-9000 BP) and the New Guinea Highlands (9000–6000 BP), Central Mexico (11000–4000 BP), Northern South America (10000–4000 BP), Sahara,sub-Saharan Africa and Upper Egypt (15000–4000 BP, exact boundaries unknown), eastern USA (9000–3000 BP).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neolithic
Excerpting the Wikipedia article, full text at end of the article.
The Neolithic Age, Era, or Period, νέος (nèos, "new") and λίθος (lithos, "stone"): or New Stone era, was a period in the development of human technology, beginning about 10200 cal. BCE according to the ASPRO chronology in some parts of the Middle East, and later in other parts of the world.[1] It is traditionally considered as the last part of the Stone Age. The Neolithic followed the Epipaleolithic period, beginning with the rise of farming, which produced the "Neolithic Revolution", and ending when metal tools became widespread in the Copper Age (chalcolithic) or Bronze Age or developing directly into the Iron Age, depending on the geographical region. The Neolithic is a measured progression of behavioral and cultural characteristics and changes, including the use of wild and domestic crops and the use of domesticated animals.[2]

New findings put the beginning of a culture tentatively called Neolithic back to around 10,700 to 9400 BC in Tell Qaramel in northern Syria, 25 km north of Aleppo.[3] Until those findings are adopted within the archaeological community, the beginning of the Neolithic culture is considered to be in the Levant (Jericho, modern-day West Bank) about By 10200-8800 cal. BCE. It developed directly from the Epipaleolithic Natufian culture in the region, whose people pioneered the use of wild cereals, which then evolved into true farming. The Natufian period was between 12000-10200 cal. BCE and the so called "proto-neolithic" is now included in the PPNA between 10200-8800 cal. BCE. As the Natufians had become dependent on wild cereals in their diet, and a sedentary way of life had begun among them, the climatic changes associated with the Younger Dryas are thought to have forced people to develop farming. By 10200-8800 cal. BCE, farming communities arose in the Levant and spread to Asia Minor, North Africa and North Mesopotamia. Early Neolithic farming was limited to a narrow range of plants, both wild and domesticated, which included einkorn wheat, millet and spelt, and the keeping of dogs, sheep and goats. By about 6900-6400 cal. BC, it included domesticated cattle and pigs, the establishment of permanently or seasonally inhabited settlements, and the use of pottery.[4]
The area I highlighted in red print answers the 64 million dolar question: I have previously indicated on this blog my belief that the onset of largescale agriculture in Atlantis had to do with the sudden worseniong of climate at the end of the last Ice ages, in the Dryas complex of climatic zones and especially in the vicinity of 12000-11000 BC. My guess is that this is what forced the development of an Atlantean expansion in search of more resources and was the real reason for the Atlantean Empire itself.-DD

Domesticated Plant and Animal tables below
[Tables are from About.com, amended and updated].

Plant Domestication

Plant	Where Domesticated	Date
Fig trees	Near East	9500 BC
Rice	East Asia	10000 BC
Barley	North Africa,Near East	15000 BC
Einkorn wheat	Near East	8500 BC
Emmer wheat	Near East	8500 BC
Chickpea Black-eyed Pea	Subsaharan Africa	8500 BC
Bottle gourd	Africa	15000 BC
Potatoes	Andes Mountains	10000 BC
Squash (Cucurbita pepo)	Central America	10000 BC
Maize	Central America	7000 BC
Broomcorn millet	East Asia	6000 BC
Bread wheat	Near East	6000 BC
Coconut	Africa, India	b.4500 BC
Tobacco	South America	1500 BC
African yams	Africa, India, South America	100000 BC
Asiatic yams	Sundaland, New Guinea	10500 BC
Manioc/Cassava	South America	8000 BC
Chenopodium	South America	8000 BC
Avocado	Central America	5000 BC
Cotton	Africa, South America	9000 BC
Bananas	Africa, Southeast Asia	10000 BC
Chili peppers	South America	4000 BC
Amaranth	Central America	4000 BC
Watermelon	Subsaharan Africa	b.6000 BC
Olives	Near East	4000 BC
Cotton	India	4000 BC
Pomegranate	Iran	3500 BC
Hemp	East Asia	3500 BC
Linen (Flax)	N. Africa, SW Asia	30000 BC
Coca	South America	3000 BC
Squash (Cucurbita pepo ovifera )	North America	6000 BC
Sunflower	Central America	2600 BC
Sweet Potato	Peru	5000 BC
Pearl millet	Africa	b.2500 BC
Marsh elder (Iva annua)	North America	4000 BC
Sorghum	Africa	30000 BC
Sunflower	North America	2000 BC
Saffron	Mediterranean	1900 BC
Chenopodium	China	1900 BC
Chocolate	Mexico	2600 BC
Coconut	Africa, India	b.4500 BC
Taro	Sundaland, New Guinea	25000 BC

Animal Domestication Table

Animal	Where Domesticated	Date
Dog	Ethiopia, South Asia	150,000 BC? b. 50,000 BC
Sheep	Western Mediterranean, Near East	b. 8500 BC
Cat	NW Africa, Egypt	8500 BC
Goats	Western Mediterranean, Near East	b. 8500 BC
Pigs	East Asia, Sundaland	b. 10000 BC
Cattle	Circum-Sahara	20,000 BC
Chicken	East Asia, Sundaland	10,000 BC
Guinea pig	Andes Mountains	5000 BC?
Llama and Alpaca	Andes Mountains	5000 BC?
Donkey/ Ass	Northeast Africa, Spain	b. 8000 BC
Horse	Spain, Kazakhstan	b. 8000,3600 BC
Silkworm	China	b. 8500 BC
Bactrian camel	Southern Russia/Mongolia	3000 BC
Dromedary camel	Saudi Arabia	3000 BC
Honey Bee	Spain, Egypt	b. 7000 BC
Banteng	Thailand	3000 BC
Water buffalo	Pakistan/India	4500 BC
Duck	Egypt,Western Asia	b. 3500 BC
Yak	Tibet	2500 BC
Goose	Megalithic Europe	Ending 1500 BC
Reindeer	Siberia	1000 BC?
Turkey	Mexico	1000 BC?

Clicking the links will take you to an About.com article on the subject. The information will be standard stuff and likely outdated by more recent finds.
Among the first recognised domesticated crops, we already have TransAtlantic families, genera and even species. Firstly and most notably we have the melons, gourds, squashes, pumpkins and cucumbers: and out of this lot we have the Bottlegourd showing up in various sites in America from at least 9000-10000 BC, from which it was estimated it was derived from African sources before 15000 BC (Hence the West African Neolithic center has to be at least that old) Out of the same family came many varieties of squashes and gourds that were nearly as old, and the most important one today is the pumpkin. Cucmbers originated in either Africa or India and the West Indian representative species is the gherkin (Pickled like cucumbers but only when very young) The Wikipedia entry also mentions melons as being domesticated nearly as far back as squashes in both Mexico and in Africa: and the typical melons would be the cantelopes of Europe (such as the casaba melon) and those of North America (the musk melons or what Americans think of as the canteloupe)-both are the same species but of different types. Bitter gourds are also used both in Old and New Worlds, mostly for flavouring during cooking.
African yams are documented as being preColumbian in Eastern Brazil, along with development of native yams and other roots and tubers following. The Taro is a special case. It was grown in the Classical Mediterranean and Romans used it in place of the potato under the name of Colocassa. But its origins lie further East and its introduction into the Mediterranean came about the same time as domesticated fowl (chickens): and other types of Arrowroots were used in Europe before its introduction. Taro is still widely gre Azores, in the Canary Islands and in The West Indies, but in all such cases it is thought to be a more recent introduction and replacing other, older types of Arrowroots. The mere fact that all of these places used similar arrowroots at all is probably significant. I usually refer to the West Indies native species as being the exemplar of the type, but there could also have been more than one species involved originally. the beginnings of Taro use are fearfully old however (The Wikipedia entry quoted below would indicate BEFORE 25000 BC ) and so it is also posstble that Taro was grown in the Atlantis area, Africa and the Mediterranean, from the Later Pleistocene as well and we simply have no records of it. And while we are at it, Lotuses or Waterlillies probably fall into the same category, and similar flour can be made out of lotus roots.There is basically NO literature for how long humans have been consuming waterlillies.

Cucumbers to the Left and Gherkins to the Right. Cucumbers are credited with an origin in India but there could be older ones in use in Africa: africans use several similar and related plabnts for a number of purposes, including medicinally.

zucchini is an american-derived squash that is much like a cucumber. presumably this represents the primitive type.

Bottlegourds

Left, old world and right, new world melons of the same species. (Cassaba and Muskmelon "Canteloupes")

Left, Bitter Gourd and Right, Gourd Seeds

Asphodel Fields, remembered in Clasical times as indicating the Elysian fields or the Isles of the Blessed in the West (Hesperides)the lower stems of these plants form edible bulbs, but these were not much esteemed as food at the time the myths were written down.

Opium Poppies, source for both the poppyseeds and the drugs contained in in the "Gall" (as the Bible called it)Poppyheads are found in a funerary context in Neolithic Spain in a context suggesting it had religious usages: although it was widely used in later times, I believe that is the oldest usage on record.

Purple Concord Grapes. The Atlantean area seems to have been fortunate in at least one other way: it was one of the few places where grapes were tasty or even actually edible. That was the only reason we have wine today-had it been someplace where some other kinds of grapes grew and humans would not have wanted to drink the juice. Atlanteans also not only invented beer, they doted on beer and had it at every meal. Like the later Egyptians, Sumerians, Romans and Barbarians all did universally.

Domesticated fig (Female cloned fig)The Wikipedia article suggests these have been domesticated since at least 9500 BC

Blackeyed peas on the Left, green peas on the Right. Not only are blackeyed peas of African origin, green peas were known first in Egypt and spread outward from there.

Pinto beans native to the Basque region at Left, and Red Kidney Beans as traditionally grown in India

The bean plant (Phaseolus)

Lupins, an ornamental pulse crop favoured by the Romans, and at right the lupin seed
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lupin

Mandrake plant on the Right and the roots on the Left. The mandrake plant is ful of dangerous toxins and hallucinogens. For this reason it has many "Magical" and medicinal uses. Yet it is closely related to potatoes and can be looked upon as similar to what potatoes would be before humans bred all of those toxins out so they could be safely eaten.

"Male and Female Mandrakes"

common potatoes, derived from the Andes mountain area of Peru and Bolivia.

Sweet potato, actually not related to the common potato and originating in a different area, North near the Carribean and Mesoamerica. Yams were important there and although sweet potatoes are not actually yams either, they have been domesticated with the idea in mind that they were supposed to be "Another kind of Yams"

Peanuts, found commonly in both South America and in Africa prior to Columbus. These might also have had a West African origin and came across along with the yams and other African cultigens.

Wild Onions, much the same on both sides of the Atlantic.

Arrowroot Ryzomes. These are West Indian Xanthosoma examples, similar to Taro but always distinguished from it by Natives. Taro was universally distributed in older days, but more modern experts prefer to say much of this is since the European age of discovery. Since they absolutely cannot say the wide distribution of sweet potatoes is postcolumbian any more, there is still some hope for the idea hat Taro was world-wide in Precolumbian times.

Common African Yams, the "African Potato"

Left, the Quinoa Plant (Chenopodium) and the seeds at Right.

Sorgum. A type of sorgum is found native to Mexico ans Sorghum is documented to have been harvested and processed as food for more than 100,000 years ago.

Finger Millet and Foxtail millet also turn out to have forms in Mexico since ancient times. Which brings up the spectre of New World civilisations running on millets and sorghum Of African origin for thousands of years until corn (Maize) was developed enough to bypass them in popularity and productiveness.Since there is a very good chance Atlantis existed before maize was well-developed, we can think in terms of such alternatives as millets and quinoa. That would give Atlantis more of a North-Chinese flavor than what we might have been expecting.

Foxtail millet of the genus Setaria and ion the right, specimen from Mexico as catalogued.

Cultivated Barley

Though at least three species of wild barley have long been known in the Americas, evidence for ancient cultivated barley was not widely known until 1983, when professional archaeologists announced the discovery of pre-Columbian domesticated barley found in Arizona (see the Dec. 1983 issue of Science 83,) This was a New World species of cultivated (unhulled) barley. Further, it has been known for years that there are several kinds of wild barley native to the Americas. You can partially verify this yourself on the new USDA Plants Web site, where a search on barley (enter the search string "*barley*") reveals that "foxtail barley" and "dwarf barley" are native plants in the United States - along with "Arizona barley," "California barley," "Stebbins' barley," and others. . "Fox-tail millet" or "setaria" is a Central American grain that may have been used by Mesoamericans
See also Foxtail Millet, also African Finger Millet,
http://www.tropicos.org/Reference/2538?tab=synonymy

I fully expect that all of those canals in Atlantis would have been lined with Wild Rice such as is still found around Lake Superior. It would not actually be cultivated, but it would be encouraged to grow as a bonus harvestable crop.

At Left, Flax Plant which produces linen. At right the seeds of the flax plant.

Neolithic Revolution

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Neolithic Revolution was the first agricultural revolution. It was the wide-scale transition of many human cultures from a lifestyle of hunting and gathering to agriculture and settlement. Archaeological data indicates that various forms of plants and animal domestication evolved independently[?] in six separate locations worldwide circa 10,000–7000 years BP (8,000–5,000 BC). The earliest known evidence exists in the tropical and subtropical areas of southwestern/southern Asia.^[1]
However, the Neolithic Revolution involved far more than the adoption of a limited set of food-producing techniques. During the next millennia it would transform the small and mobile groups of hunter-gatherers that had hitherto dominated human history into sedentary societies based in built-up villages and towns, which radically modified their natural environment by means of specialized food-crop cultivation (e.g., irrigation and food storage technologies) that allowed extensive surplus food production. These developments provided the basis for high population density settlements, specialized and complex labor diversification, trading economies, the development of non-portable art, architecture, and culture, centralized administrations and political structures, hierarchical ideologies, and depersonalized systems of knowledge (e.g., property regimes and writing). The first full-blown manifestation of the entire Neolithic complex is seen in the Middle Eastern Sumerian cities (ca. 3,500 BC), whose emergence also inaugurates the end of the prehistoric Neolithic period.
The relationship of the above-mentioned Neolithic characteristics to the onset of agriculture, their sequence of emergence, and empirical relation to each other at various Neolithic sites remains the subject of academic debate, and seems to vary from place to place, rather than being the outcome of universal laws of social evolution.^[2]^[3]

Agricultural transition

Knap of Howar farmstead on a site occupied from 3500 BC to 3100 BC

The term Neolithic Revolution was coined in the 1920s by Vere Gordon Childe to describe the first in a series of agricultural revolutions in Middle Eastern history. The period is described as a "revolution" to denote its importance, and the great significance and degree of change affecting the communities in which new agricultural practices were gradually adopted and refined.
The beginning of this process in different regions has been dated from perhaps 8000 BC in Melanesia^[5]^[6] to 2500 BC in Subsaharan Africa, with some considering the developments of 9000–7000 BC in the Fertile Crescent to be the most important. This transition everywhere seems associated with a change from a largely nomadic hunter-gatherer way of life to a more settled, agrarian-based one, with the inception of the domestication of various plant and animal species—depending on the species locally available, and probably also influenced by local culture.
There are several competing (but not mutually exclusive) theories as to the factors that drove populations to take up agriculture. The most prominent of these are:

The Oasis Theory, originally proposed by Raphael Pumpelly in 1908, popularized by Vere Gordon Childe in 1928 and summarised in Childe's book Man Makes Himself.^[7] This theory maintains that as the climate got drier due to the Atlantic depressions shifting northward, communities contracted to oases where they were forced into close association with animals, which were then domesticated together with planting of seeds. However, today this theory has little support amongst archaeologists because climate data for the time actually shows that at the time, the climate of the region was getting wetter rather than drier.^[8]
The Hilly Flanks hypothesis, proposed by Robert Braidwood in 1948, suggests that agriculture began in the hilly flanks of the Taurus and Zagros mountains, where the climate was not drier as Childe had believed, and fertile land supported a variety of plants and animals amenable to domestication.^[9]
The Feasting model by Brian Hayden^[10] suggests that agriculture was driven by ostentatious displays of power, such as giving feasts, to exert dominance. This required assembling large quantities of food, which drove agricultural technology.
The Demographic theories proposed by Carl Sauer^[11] and adapted by Lewis Binford^[12] and Kent Flannery posit an increasingly sedentary population that expanded up to the carrying capacity of the local environment and required more food than could be gathered. Various social and economic factors helped drive the need for food.
The evolutionary/intentionality theory, developed by David Rindos^[13] and others, views agriculture as an evolutionary adaptation of plants and humans. Starting with domestication by protection of wild plants, it led to specialization of location and then full-fledged domestication.
Peter Richerson, Robert Boyd, and Robert Bettinger^[14] make a case for the development of agriculture coinciding with an increasingly stable climate at the beginning of the Holocene. Ronald Wright's book and Massey Lecture Series A Short History of Progress^[15] popularized this hypothesis.
The postulated Younger Dryas impact event, claimed to be in part responsible for megafauna extinction, and which ended the last ice age, could have provided circumstances that required the evolution of agricultural societies for humanity to survive. The agrarian revolution itself is a reflection of typical overpopulation by certain species following initial events during extinction eras; this overpopulation itself ultimately propagates the extinction event.
Leonid Grinin argues that whatever plants were cultivated, the independent invention of agriculture always took place in special natural environments (e.g., South-East Asia). It is supposed that the cultivation of cereals started somewhere in the Near East: in the hills of Palestine or Egypt. So Grinin dates the beginning of the agricultural revolution within the interval 12,000 to 9,000 BP, though in some cases the first cultivated plants or domesticated animals' bones are even of a more ancient age of 14–15 thousand years ago.^[16]
Andrew Moore suggested that dawn of the neolithic revolution originated over long periods of development in the Levant, possibly beginning during the Epipaleolithic. In "A Reassessment of the Neolithic Revolution", Frank Hole further expanded the relationship between plant and animal domestication. He suggested the events could have occurred independently over different periods of time, in as yet unexplored locations. He noted that no transition site had been found documenting the shift from what he termed immediate and delayed return social systems. He noted that the full range of domesticated animals (goats, sheep, cattle and pigs) were not found until the sixth millennium at Tell Ramad. Evidenced by arguments such as those by Maria Hopf regarding cultivated emmer and barley at Jericho, along with the earliest emmer suggested by Willem van Zeist at Tell Aswad, Hole concluded that "close attention should be paid in future investigations to the western margins of the Euphrates basin, perhaps as far south as the Arabian Peninsula, especially where wadis carrying Pleistocene rainfall runoff flowed."^[17]

In contrast to the Paleolithic (2.6 million years ago to 10,000 BC) in which several hominid species existed, only one (Homo sapiens) reached the Neolithic.

Domestication of plants

Neolithic grindstone for processing grain

Once agriculture started gaining momentum, human activity resulted in the selective breeding of cereal grasses (beginning with emmer, einkorn and barley), and not simply of those that would favour greater caloric returns through larger seeds. Plants that possessed traits such as small seeds or bitter taste would have been seen as undesirable. Plants that rapidly shed their seeds on maturity tended not to be gathered at harvest, thus not stored and not seeded the following season; years of harvesting selected for strains that retained their edible seeds longer. Several plant species, the "pioneer crops" or Neolithic founder crops, were the earliest plants successfully manipulated by humans at sites such as Tell Aswad. Some of these pioneering attempts failed at first and crops were abandoned, sometimes to be taken up again and successfully domesticated thousands of years later: rye, tried and abandoned in Neolithic Anatolia, made its way to Europe as weed seeds and was successfully domesticated in Europe, thousands of years after the earliest agriculture.^[18] Wild lentils present a different challenge that needed to be overcome: most of the wild seeds do not germinate in the first year; the first evidence of lentil domestication, breaking dormancy in their first year, was found in the early Neolithic at Jerf el-Ahmar (in modern Syria), and quickly spread south to the Netiv HaGdud site in the Jordan Valley.^[18] This process of domestication allowed the founder crops to adapt and eventually become larger, more easily harvested, more dependable in storage and more useful to the human population.

A Sumerian harvester's sickle dated to 3000 BC

Figs, barley and, most likely, oats were cultivated in the Jordan Valley, represented by the early Neolithic site of Gilgal I, where in 2006^[19] archaeologists found caches of seeds of each in quantities too large to be accounted for even by intensive gathering, at strata dateable c. 11,000 years ago. Some of the plants tried and then abandoned during the Neolithic period in the Ancient Near East, at sites like Gilgal, were later successfully domesticated in other parts of the world.
Once early farmers perfected their agricultural techniques, their crops would yield surpluses that needed storage. Most hunter gatherers could not easily store food for long due to their migratory lifestyle, whereas those with a sedentary dwelling could store their surplus grain. Eventually granaries were developed that allowed villages to store their seeds longer. So with more food, the population expanded and communities developed specialized workers and more advanced tools.
The process was not as linear as was once thought, but a more complicated effort, which was undertaken by different human populations in different regions in many different ways.

Agriculture in Papua New Guinea

Evidence of drainage ditches at Kuk Swamp on the borders of the Western and Southern Highlands of Papua New Guinea, shows evidence of the cultivation of Taro and a variety of other crops, dating back to 9,000 BC. Two potentially significant economic species, taro (Colocasia esculenta) and yam (Dioscorea sp.) have been identified dating at least to 10,200 calibrated years before present (cal BP). Further evidence of Bananas and Sugar Cane date to 6,950 to 6,440 BP. This is the altitudinal limits of these crops, and it has been suggested that cultivation in more favourable ranges in the lowlands may have been even earlier. The Australian CSIRO has found evidence that Taro was introduced into the Solomons for human use, from 25,000 years ago, making taro cultivation the earliest crop in the world^[20] It seems to have resulted in the spread of the Trans New Guinea language phylum from New Guinea east into the Solomon Islands and West into Timor and adjacent areas of Indonesia. This seems to confirm the theories of Carl Sauer who in "Agricultural Origins and Dispersals" suggested this region was a centre of early agriculture as early as 1952.

Agriculture in Asia

The Neolithic Revolution is believed to have become widespread in southwest Asia around 8000 BC–7000 BC, though earlier individual sites have been identified. In China, foxtail millet, broomcorn millet and rice were important domesticated crops.
Although archaeological evidence provides scant evidence as to which of the genders performed what task in Neolithic cultures, by comparison with historical and contemporary hunter-gatherer communities it is generally supposed that hunting was typically performed by the men, whereas women had a more significant role in the gathering. By extension, it may be theorised that women were largely responsible for the observations and initial activities that began the Neolithic Revolution, insofar as the gradual selection and refinement of edible plant species was concerned.^{[citation needed]}
The precise nature of these initial observations and (later) purposeful activities that would give rise to the changes in subsistence methods brought about by the Neolithic Revolution are not known; specific evidence is lacking. However, several reasonable speculations have been put forward; for example, it might be expected that the common practice of discarding food refuse in middens would result in the regrowth of plants from the discarded seeds in the (fertilizer-enriched) soils. In all likelihood, a number of factors contributed to the early onset of agriculture in Neolithic human societies.

Agriculture in the Fertile Crescent

Generalised agriculture apparently first arose in the Fertile Crescent because of many factors. The Mediterranean climate has a long dry season with a short period of rain, which made it suitable for small plants with large seeds, like wheat and barley. These were the most suitable for domestication because of the ease of harvest and storage and the wide availability. In addition, the domesticated plants had especially high protein content. The Fertile Crescent had a large area of varied geographical settings and altitudes. The variety given made agriculture more profitable for former hunter-gatherers. Other areas with a similar climate were less suitable for agriculture because of the lack of geographic variation within the region and the lack of availability of plants for domestication.

Agriculture in Africa

Nile River Valley, Egypt

The Revolution developed independently in different parts of the world, not just in the Fertile Crescent. On the African continent, three [Adjacent]areas have been identified as independently developing agriculture: the Ethiopian highlands, the Sahel and West Africa.^[21]
The most famous crop domesticated in the Ethiopian highlands is coffee. In addition, khat, ensete [A variety of banana plant necessarily deriving from a more ordinary bananalike predecessor-DD], noog, teff and finger millet were also domesticated in the Ethiopian highlands. Crops domesticated in the Sahel region include sorghum and pearl millet. The kola nut, extracts from which became an ingredient in Coca Cola, was first domesticated in West Africa. Other crops domesticated in West Africa include African rice, African yams and the oil palm[Actually a type of coconut palm-DD].^[21]
A number of crops that have been cultivated in Africa for millennia came after their domestication elsewhere. Agriculture in the Nile River Valley developed from crops domesticated in the Fertile Crescent. Bananas and plantains, which were first domesticated in Southeast Asia, most likely Papua New Guinea, were re-introduced into Africa possibly as early as 5,000 years ago. Asian yams and taro were also cultivated in Africa.^[21]
Prof. Fred Wendorf and Dr. Romuald Schild, of the Department of Anthropology at Southern Methodist University, originally thought to have found evidence of early agriculture in Upper Paleolithic times at Wadi Kubbaniya, on the Kom Ombos plateau, of Egypt, including a mortar and pestle, grinding stones, several harvesting implements and charred wheat and barley grains—which may have been introduced from outside the region. Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS) dating since their first reports has invalidated their hypothesis. This objection has been disputed also.^[22]
Many such grinding stones are found with the early Egyptian Sebilian and Mechian cultures and evidence has been found of a neolithic domesticated crop-based economy dating around 15000 BC.^[23] Philip E. L. Smith^[24] writes: "With the benefit of hindsight we can now see that many Late Paleolithic [actually MESOLITHIC-DD] peoples in the Old World were poised on the brink of plant cultivation and animal husbandry as an alternative to the hunter-gatherer's way of life". Unlike the Middle East, this evidence appears as a "false dawn" to agriculture, as the sites were later abandoned, and permanent farming then was delayed until 5000 BC with the Tasian and Badarian cultures and the arrival of crops and animals from the Near East.[the gap in Egypt may be more illusionary than real in that we only have so many archaeological sites explored so far and none in the interval in between. One new discovery strategically placed could upset this applecart once again-DD]

Agriculture in the Americas

Further information: New World Crops, Ancient Pueblo Peoples, Oasisamerica, and Proto-Uto-Aztecan

Corn, beans and squash were among the earliest crops domesticated in Mesoamerica, with maize beginning about 7500 BC, squash, as early as 8000 to 6000 BC and [diversified types of]beans by no later than 6000 BC. Potatoes and manioc were domesticated in South America. In what is now the eastern United States, Native Americans domesticated sunflower, sumpweed and goosefoot [sometime before] 2500 BC. At Guilá Naquitz cave in the Mexican highlands, fragments of maize pollen, bottle gourd and Cucurbita pepo squash were recovered and variously dated between 9000 to 10000 BC. [DD has revised these dates upwards to match the documents referenced earlier on this blog In this area of the world people relied on hunting and gathering for several millennia to come. Sedentary village life based on farming did not develop until the second millennium BC, referred to as the formative period.^[25]

Domestication of animals

When hunter-gathering began to be replaced by sedentary food production it became more profitable to keep animals close at hand. Therefore, it became necessary to bring animals permanently to their settlements, although in many cases there was a distinction between relatively sedentary farmers and nomadic herders. The animals' size, temperament, diet, mating patterns, and life span were factors in the desire and success in domesticating animals. Animals that provided milk, such as cows and goats, offered a source of protein that was renewable and therefore quite valuable. The animal’s ability as a worker (for example ploughing or towing), as well as a food source, also had to be taken into account. Besides being a direct source of food, certain animals could provide leather, wool, hides, and fertilizer. Some of the earliest domesticated animals included dogs (about 150,000 years ago),^[26] sheep, goats, cows [by 25000 years ago, as with dogs, in Africa], and pigs [Unknown antiquity, but in the Oriental realms, probably in Sundaland and the oldest examples would now be lost underwateramended dates and additions by DD].

Domestication of animals in the Middle East

Dromedary Camel caravan in Algeria

The Middle East served as the source for many animals that could be domesticated, such as sheep, goats and pigs. This area was also the first region to domesticate the Dromedary Camel. Henri Fleisch discovered and termed the Shepherd Neolithic flint industry from the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon and suggested that it could have been used by the earliest nomadic shepherds. He dated this industry to the Epipaleolithic or Pre-Pottery Neolithic as it is evidently not Paleolithic, Mesolithic or even Pottery Neolithic.^[27]^[28] The presence of these animals gave the region a large advantage in cultural and economic development. As the climate in the Middle East changed, and became drier, many of the farmers were forced to leave, taking their domesticated animals with them. It was this massive emigration from the Middle East that would later help distribute these animals to the rest of Afroeurasia. This emigration was mainly on an east-west axis of similar climates, as crops usually have a narrow optimal climatic range outside of which they cannot grow for reasons of light or rain changes. For instance, wheat does not normally grow in tropical climates, just like tropical crops such as bananas do not grow in colder climates. Some authors, like Jared Diamond, have postulated that this East-West axis is the main reason why plant and animal domestication spread so quickly from the Fertile Crescent to the rest of Eurasia and North Africa, while it did not reach through the North-South axis of Africa to reach the Mediterranean climates of South Africa, where temperate crops were successfully imported by ships in the last 500 years.^{[citation needed]} The African Zebu is a separate breed of cattle that was better suited to the hotter climates of central Africa than the fertile-crescent domesticated bovines. North and South America were similarly separated by the narrow tropical Isthmus of Panama, that prevented the andes llama to be exported to the Mexican plateau.

Consequences

Social change

It is often argued that agriculture gave humans more control over their food supply, but this has been disputed by the finding that nutritional standards of Neolithic populations were generally inferior to that of hunter gatherers, and life expectancy may in fact have been shorter, in part due to diseases. Average height, for example, went down from 5' 10" (178 cm) for men and 5' 6" (168 cm) for women to 5' 3" (165 cm) and 5' 1" (155 cm), respectively[for Europeans-DD], and it took until the twentieth century for average human height to come back to the pre-Neolithic Revolution levels.^[29] The shift to agricultural food production supported a denser population, which in turn supported larger sedentary communities, the accumulation of goods and tools, and specialization in diverse forms of new labor. The development of larger societies led to the development of different means of decision making and to governmental organization. Food surpluses made possible the development of a social elite who were not otherwise engaged in agriculture, industry or commerce, but dominated their communities by other means and monopolized decision-making.

Subsequent revolutions

Domesticated cow being milked in Ancient Egypt.

Andrew Sherratt has argued that following upon the Neolithic Revolution was a second phase of discovery that he refers to as the secondary products revolution. Animals, it appears were first domesticated purely as a source of meat.^[30] The Secondary Products Revolution occurred when it was recognised that animals also provided a number of other useful products. These included:

hides and skins (from undomesticated animals)
manure for soil conditioning (from all domesticated animals)
wool (from sheep, llamas, alpacas, and Angora goats)
milk (from goats, cattle, yaks, sheep, horses and camels)
traction (from oxen, onagers, donkeys, horses, camels and dogs)
guarding and herding assistance (dogs)

Sherratt argues that this phase in agricultural development enabled humans to make use of the energy possibilities of their animals in new ways, and permitted permanent intensive subsistence farming and crop production, and the opening up heavier soils for farming. It also made possible nomadic pastoralism in semi arid areas, along the margins of deserts, and eventually led to the domestication of both the dromedary and bactrian camel. Overgrazing of these areas, particularly by herds of goats, greatly extended the areal extent of deserts. Living in one spot would have more easily permitted the accrual of personal possessions and an attachment to certain areas of land. From such a position, it is argued, prehistoric people were able to stockpile food to survive lean times and trade unwanted surpluses with others. Once trade and a secure food supply were established, populations could grow, and society would have diversified into food producers and artisans, who could afford to develop their trade by virtue of the free time they enjoyed because of a surplus of food. The artisans, in turn, were able to develop technology such as metal weapons. Such relative complexity would have required some form of social organisation to work efficiently, so it is likely that populations that had such organisation, perhaps such as that provided by religion, were better prepared and more successful. In addition, the denser populations could form and support legions of professional soldiers. Also, during this time property ownership became increasingly important to all people. Ultimately, Childe argued that this growing social complexity, all rooted in the original decision to settle, led to a second Urban Revolution in which the first cities were built.^{[citation needed]}
Other "agricultural revolutions" occurred in later millennia:

The Arab Agricultural Revolution (8th–13th centuries), a term coined by the historian Andrew Watson postulating a fundamental transformation in agriculture arising from the diffusion of crops through the Islamic world
The British Agricultural Revolution (17th–19th centuries), an increase in agricultural productivity in Great Britain which helped drive the Industrial Revolution
The Scottish Agricultural Revolution (18th–19th centuries), the British Agricultural Revolution in Scotland specifically, which led to the Lowland Clearances
The Green Revolution (1943–late 1970s), a series of research, development, and technology transfer initiatives that increased industrialized agriculture production in India and other countries in the developing world

Disease

Llama overlooking the ruins of the Inca city of Machu Picchu

Throughout the development of sedentary societies, disease spread more rapidly than it had during the time in which hunter-gatherer societies existed. Inadequate sanitary practices and the domestication of animals may explain the rise in deaths and sickness following the Neolithic Revolution, as diseases jumped from the animal to the human population. Some examples of diseases spread from animals to humans are influenza, smallpox, and measles.^[31] In concordance with a process of natural selection, the humans who first domesticated the big mammals quickly built up immunities to the diseases as within each generation the individuals with better immunities had better chances of survival. In their approximately 10,000 years of shared proximity with animals, Eurasians and Africans became more resistant to those diseases compared with the indigenous populations encountered outside Eurasia and Africa.^[32] For instance, the population of most Caribbean and several Pacific Islands have been completely wiped out by diseases. According to the Population history of American indigenous peoples, 90% of the population of certain regions of North and South America were wiped out long before direct contact with Europeans. Some cultures like the Inca Empire did have one big mammal domesticated, the Llama, but the Inca did not drink its milk or live in a closed space with their herds, hence limiting the risk of contagion.
The causal link between the type or lack of agricultural development, disease and colonisation is not supported by colonization in other parts of the world. Disease increased after the establishment of British Colonial rule in Africa and India despite the areas having diseases for which Europeans lacked natural immunity. In India agriculture developed during the Neolithic period with a wide range of animals domesticated. During colonial rule an estimated 23 million people died from cholera between 1865 and 1949, and millions more died from plague, malaria, influenza and tuberculosis. In Africa European colonisation was accompanied by great epidemics, including malaria and sleeping sickness and despite parts of colonised Africa having little or no agriculture Europeans were more susceptible than the Africans. The increase of disease has been attributed to increased mobility of people, increased population density, urbanisation, environmental deterioration and irrigation schemes that helped to spread malaria rather than the development of agriculture.^[33]

Technology

In his book Guns, Germs, and Steel, Jared Diamond argues that Europeans and East Asians benefited from an advantageous geographical location that afforded them a head start in the Neolithic Revolution. Both shared the temperate climate ideal for the first agricultural settings, both were near a number of easily domesticable plant and animal species, and both were safer from attacks of other people than civilizations in the middle part of the Eurasian continent. Being among the first to adopt agriculture and sedentary lifestyles, and neighboring other early agricultural societies with whom they could compete and trade, both Europeans and East Asians were also among the first to benefit from technologies such as firearms and steel swords. In addition, they developed resistances to infectious disease, such as smallpox, due to their close relationship with domesticated animals. Groups of people who had not lived in proximity with other large mammals, such as the Australian Aborigines and American indigenous peoples were more vulnerable to infection and largely wiped out by diseases.
During and after the Age of Discovery, European explorers, such as the Spanish conquistadors, encountered other groups of people who had never or only recently adopted agriculture, such as in the Pacific Islands, lacked domesticated big mammals such as the people of the New Guinea Highlands.

Archeogenetics

The dispersal of Neolithic culture from the Middle East has recently been associated with the distribution of human genetic markers. In Europe, the spread of the Neolithic culture has been associated with distribution of the E1b1b lineages and Haplogroup J that are thought to have arrived in Europe from North Africa and the Near East respectively.^[34]^[35] In Africa, the spread of farming, and notably the Bantu expansion, is associated with the dispersal of Y-chromosome haplogroup E1b1a from West Africa.^[34]

E1 Y-DNA distribution map from Wikipedia article

[The derivation of the E1b1 YDNA series is from Western Subsaharan Africa and its greatest concemntration is in Mali. It differentiated between 3500 and 25000 years ago (Wikipedia article on the E1 strains especially noting E1b1a and E1b1b, each of which also has a separate entry) and it is especially associated with Neolithic expansions in The Near East into Eastern Europe and throught Africa, Including Egypt.(Many locations persisting only in small concentrations) The presence in the Iberian peninsula is traceable to the recent occupancy of the area by MOORS. There is thus a possible argument to be made that the Mid-East and North African Neolithics had their cradles here about 20000-30000 with a latency period during the Upper Pleistocene, during which the Naftufuian of Palestine was typical,but which burst out of the Near East at the beginning of the Holocene and radiating out in all directions, as if expanding into a power vaccuum. The expansion into the Danubian area after 6000 BC and its modern genetic residue as represented on the map is especially instructive. -DD]

References

^ "Origin of agriculture and domestication of plants and animals linked to early Holocene climate amelioration", Anil K. Gupta*, Current Science, Vol. 87, No. 1, 19 October 2010
^ "The Slow Birth of Agriculture", Heather Pringle*
^ "Zawi Chemi Shanidar", EMuseum, Minnesota State University
^ Diamond, J.; Bellwood, P. (2003). "Farmers and Their Languages: The First Expansions". Science 300 (5619): 597–603. Bibcode 2003Sci...300..597D. doi:10.1126/science.1078208. PMID 12714734. edit
^ Denham, Tim P.; et al. (2003). "Origins of Agriculture at Kuk Swamp in the Highlands of New Guinea". Science 301 (5630): 189–193. doi:10.1126/science.1085255. PMID 12817084.
^ The Kuk Early Agricultural Site
^ Gordon Childe (1936). Man Makes Himself. Oxford university press.
^ Scarre, Chris (2005). "The World Transformed: From Foragers and Farmers to States and Empires" in The Human Past: World Prehistory and the Development of Human Societies (Ed: Chris Scarre). London: Thames and Hudson. Page 188. ISBN 0-500-28531-4
^ Charles E. Redman (1978). Rise of Civilization: From Early Hunters to Urban Society in the Ancient Near East. San Francisco: Freeman.
^ Hayden, Brian (1992). "Models of Domestication". In Anne Birgitte Gebauer and T. Douglas Price. Transitions to Agriculture in Prehistory. Madison: Prehistory Press. pp. 11–18.
^ Sauer, Carl O. (1952). Agricultural origins and dispersals. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
^ Binford, Lewis R. (1968). "Post-Pleistocene Adaptations". In Sally R. Binford and Lewis R. Binford. New Perspectives in Archaeology. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company. pp. 313–342.
^ Rindos, David (December 1987). The Origins of Agriculture: An Evolutionary Perspective. Academic Press. ISBN 978-0125892810).
^ Richerson, Peter J.; et al. (2001). "Was Agriculture Impossible during the Pleistocene but Mandatory during the Holocene?". American Antiquity 66 (3): 387–411. doi:10.2307/2694241.
^ Wright, Ronald (2004). A Short History of Progress. Anansi. ISBN 0-88784-706-4).
^ Grinin L.E. Production Revolutions and Periodization of History: A Comparative and Theoretic-mathematical Approach. / Social Evolution & History. Volume 6, Number 2 / September 2007 [1]
^ Hole, Frank., A Reassessment of the Neolithic Revolution, Paléorient, Volume 10, Issue 10-2, pp. 49-60, 1984.
^ ^a ^b Weiss, Ehud; Kislev, Mordechai E.; Hartmann, Anat (2006). "Autonomous Cultivation Before Domestication". Science 312 (5780): 1608–1610. doi:10.1126/science.1127235. PMID 16778044.
^ "Tamed 11,400 Years Ago, Figs Were Likely First Domesticated Crop". http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/06/060602074522.htm.
^ Denham, Tim et al (received July 2005) "Early and mid Holocene tool-use and processing of taro (Colocasia esculenta), yam (Dioscorea sp.) and other plants at Kuk Swamp in the highlands of Papua New Guinea" (Journal of Archaeological Science, Volume 33, Issue 5, May 2006).
^ ^a ^b ^c Diamond, Jared (1999). Guns, Germs, and Steel. New York: Norton Press. ISBN 0-393-31755-2.
^ DR Harris, HE Gove, P Damon "The Impact on Archaeology of Radiocarbon Dating by Accelerator Mass Spectrometry" Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A323, 23–43 1987 [2]
^ The Cambridge History of Africa
^ Smith, Philip E.L., Stone Age Man on the Nile, Scientific American Vol. 235 No. 2, August 1976.
^ Graeme Barker (25 March 2009). The Agricultural Revolution in Prehistory: Why Did Foragers Become Farmers?, p. 252. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-955995-4. http://books.google.com/books?id=fkifXu2gx4YC. Retrieved 4 January 2012.
^ McGourty, Christine (2002-11-22). "Origin of dogs traced". BBC News. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2498669.stm. Retrieved 2006-11-29.
^ L. Copeland; P. Wescombe (1966). Inventory of Stone-Age Sites in Lebanon: North, South and East-Central Lebanon,. Impr. Catholique. http://books.google.com/books?id=qhPRQwAACAAJ. Retrieved 1 January 2012.
^ Fleisch, Henri., Notes de Préhistoire Libanaise : 1) Ard es Saoude. 2) La Bekaa Nord. 3) Un polissoir en plein air. BSPF, vol. 63.
^ Shermer, Michael (2001) The Borderlands of Science, Oxford University Press p.250
^ Sherratt 1981
^ Furuse, Y.; Suzuki, A.; Oshitani, H. (2010). "Origin of measles virus: Divergence from rinderpest virus between the 11th and 12th centuries". Virology Journal 7: 52. doi:10.1186/1743-422X-7-52. PMC 2838858. PMID 20202190. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=2838858. edit
^ Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies - Jared Diamond, 1997
^ Marshall, P. J. Ed. (1996), Cambridge illustrated History: British Empire, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0-521-00254-0, p. 142
^ ^a ^b Semino et al, O; Magri, C; Benuzzi, G; Lin, AA; Al-Zahery, N; Battaglia, V; MacCioni, L; Triantaphyllidis, C et al (2004). "Origin, Diffusion, and Differentiation of Y-Chromosome Haplogroups E and J: Inferences on the Neolithization of Europe and Later Migratory Events in the Mediterranean Area". American journal of human genetics 74 (5): 1023–34. doi:10.1086/386295. PMC 1181965. PMID 15069642. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1181965.
^ Lancaster, Andrew (2009). "Y Haplogroups, Archaeological Cultures and Language Families: a Review of the Multidisciplinary Comparisons using the case of E-M35". Journal of Genetic Genealogy 5 (1). http://www.jogg.info/51/files/Lancaster.pdf.

Yams Out of Africa and the Origins of Agriculture

2012-03-02T14:22:00.000-08:00

Root crop	Common name	Suggested origin
American species
Ipomoea batatas	sweet potato	Central America and Caribbean
Manihot esculenta	cassava, manioc	from Caribbean to Northeast Brazil
Xanthosoma sagittifolium	new cocoyam, taro	from Caribbean to North Brazil
Solanum tuberosum	potato	Andean South America ( Bolivia and Peru)
Oxalis tuberosa	oca	Andean South America ( Bolivia and Peru)
Dioscorea trifida	sweet yam	from Caribbean to Coastal Brazil
African species
Dioscorea rotundata	yam	Tropical West Africa, S. Asia, S. America
Dioscorea cayenensis	wild yam	Tropical West Africa
Dioscorea dumetorum	bitter yam	Tropical West Africa
Dioscorea bulbifera	air potato	Tropical West Africa to S. Asia
Asian species
Dioscorea alata	yam	South Asia
Dioscorea esculenta	lesser yam, small potatoes	South Asia
Dioscorea opposita	chinese yam	South Asia
Colocasia esculenta	old cocoyam or taro	Southeast Asia
Musa acuminate	banana/plantain	Southeast Asia, Africa

Source: Adapted from Purseglove (1968,1972).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dioscorea
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yam_(vegetable)

The development of domesticated plants was thought to have proceeded in two stages: an older level of taking plant cuttings and utilizing especially vines, root-crops and some tree crops, which is asociated with the tropical forests in the equatorial regions and is much less labour-intensive; and the more commonly recognised seed neolithic typically based on wheat, barley, corn, oats, or rice, which is based more in the temperate zone and is also contemporaneous with the origin of our usual domesticated animals such as cows, sheep, goats, pigs and so on. The tropical vine-neolithic is much older and it is much harder to say HOW old: but traces of starch on African grinding-stones indicate that starchy yams were being regularly grown and processed over 100,000 years ago in the Middle stone age. More recently it has been shown that inhabitants of the middle-east at about that same date or older were regularly eating cooked starchy roots, and that observation extends to Neanderthals, as revealed by examining the fossilized deposits of calculus around their teeth and gums.
http://eduardo-mondlane.academia.edu/MussaRaja/Papers/406609/Middle_Stone_Age_Starch_Acquisition_In_the_Niassa_Rift_Mozambique
http://smithsonianscience.org/2011/01/starch-grains-found-on-neandertal-teeth-helps-debunk-theory-their-extinction-was-caused-by-dietary-deficiencies/
http://www.reasons.org/articles/new-insight-on-starch-grains-recovered-from-neanderthal-teeth
http://www.mnh.si.edu/highlight/Neanderthal_Diet/
http://www.nature.com/news/2009/091217/full/news.2009.1147.html
http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1801132/scientists_explore_stone_age_pantry/
Quote from the last article:

Julio Mercader, holder of the Canada Research Chair in Tropical Archaeology in the U of C’s Department of Archaeology, recovered dozens of stone tools from a deep cave in Mozambique showing that wild sorghum, the ancestor of the chief cereal consumed today in sub-Saharan Africa for flours, breads, porridges and alcoholic beverages, was in Homo sapiens’ pantry along with the African wine palm, the ["false" ensete] banana, pigeon peas, wild oranges and the African "potato" [yams]. This is the earliest direct evidence of humans using pre-domesticated cereals anywhere in the world. Mercader’s findings are published in the December 18 issue of the prestigious research journal Science.
Source: redOrbit (http://s.tt/168Dy)

It thus seems reasonable to me that humans going on the journeys out of Africa already possessed the knowledge of yam-agriculture and the processing of grains and legumes by grinding and cooking

Vegetative, Root-crop Neolithic, Upper Pleistocene date

Secondary, Seed-crop Neolithic, primarily early Holocene

http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/23/5/893.full

Besides being the oldest documentable cultigen in the New World, the Bottle Gourd has been shown to coccur in the Pacific as the American variety, and its introduction into Polynesia seems to be associated with Easter Island and perhaps Mexico secondarily.

distribution centers for cucurbits (Gourds, melons, pumpkins and squashes) The area in red is the center for domestication of the pumpkin Cucurbita pepo. Below, a table of the major varieties

http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S0103-84782002000400028&script=sci_arttext

Above, earliest recorded Bottlegourds in the New World. The red line connects sites more than ten thousand years old. Below centers of bean development for different varieties of beans (Phaseolus)

BEFORE CIVILIZATION

Evidence of human artistic creativity first came to light in 1940 near Lascaux in southwestern France with the discovery of a vast underground cavern. The cavern walls were covered with paintings of animals, including many that had been extinct for thousands of years. Similar cave paintings have been found in Spain and elsewhere in southern France.

To even the most skeptical person, these artistic troves reveal rich imaginations and sophisticated skills, qualities also apparent in the stone tools and evidence of complex social relations uncovered from prehistoric sites. The production of such artworks and tools over wide areas and long periods of time demonstrates that skills and ideas were not simply individual but were deliberately passed along within societies. These learned patterns of action and expression constitute culture. culture includes material objects, such as dwellings, clothing, tools, and crafts, along with nonmaterial values, beliefs, and languages. Although it is true that some animals also learn new ways, their activities are determined primarily by inherited instincts. Only human communities trace profound cultural developments over time. The development, transmission, and transformation of cultural practices and events are the subject of history.

FOOD GATHERING AND STONE TECHNOLOGY

Stone tool-making, the first recognizable cultural activity, first appeared around 2 million years ago. The Stone Age, which lasted from then until around 4,000 years ago, can be a misleading label. Stone tools abound at archaeological sites, but not all tools were of stone. They were made as well of bone, skin, and wood, materials that survive poorly. In addition, this period encompasses many cultures and sub-periods. Among the major subdivisions, the Paleolithic (Old Stone Age) lasted unil 10,000 years ago, about 3,000 years after the end of the last Ice Age, long periods when glaciers covered much of North America, Europe, and Asia. The Neolithic (New Stone Age), which is associated with the origins of agriculture, followed.

Fossilized animal bones bearing the marks of butchering tools testify to the scavenging and hunting activities of Stone Age peoples, but anthropologists do not believe that early humans lived primarily on meat. Modern foragers (hunting and food-gathering peoples) in the Kalahari Desert of southern Africa and Ituri Forest of central Africa derive the bulk of their day-to-day nourishment from wild vegetable foods. They eat meat at feasts. Stone Age peoples probably did the same, even though the tools and equipment for gathering and processing vegetable foods have left few archaeological traces.

Like modern foragers, ancient humans would have used skins and mats woven from leaves for collecting fruits, berries, and wild seeds, and they would have dug up edible roots with wooden sticks. Archaeologists suspect that the doughnut-shaped stones often found at Stone Age sites served as weights to make wooden digging sticks more effective.

Cooking makes both meat and vegetables tastier and easier to digest, something early humans may have discovered inadvertently after wildfires. Humans may have begun setting fires deliberately 1 million to 1.5 million years ago, but proof of cooking does not appear until some 12,500 years ago, when clay cooking pots came into use in East Asia.

Studies of present -day foragers also indicate that Ice Age women probably did most of the gathering and cooking, which they could do while caring for small children. Women past child-bearing age would have been the most knowledgeable and productive food gatherers. Men, with stronger arms and shoulders, would have been better suited for hunting, particularly for large animals. Some early cave art suggests male hunting activities.

The same studies, along with archaeological evidence from Ice Age campsites, indicate that early foragers lived in groups that were big enough to defend themselves from predators and divide responsibility for food collection and preparation, but small enough not to exhaust the food resources within walking distance. Even bands of around fifty men, women, and children would have moved regularly to follow migrating animals or collect seasonally ripening plants in different places.

In regions with severe climates or lacking in natural shelters like caves, people built huts of branches, stones, bones, skins, and leaves as seasonal camps. Animal skins served as clothing, with the earliest evidence of woven cloth appearing about 26,000 years ago. Groups living in the African grasslands and other game-rich areas probably spent only three to five hours a day securing food, clothing, and shelter. This would have left a great deal of time for artistic endeavors, tool-making, and social life.

The foundations of what later ages called science, art, and religion also date to the Stone Age. Gatherers learned which local plants were edible and when they ripened, as well as which natural substances were effective for medicine, consciousness altering, dyeing, and other purposes. Hunters learned the habits of game animals. People experimented with techniques of using plant and animal materials for clothing, twine, and construction. Knowledge of the environment included identifying which minerals made good paints and which stones made good tools. All of these aspects of culture were passed orally from generation to generation.

Early music and dance have left no traces, but visual artwork has survived abundantly. Cave paintings appear as early as 32,000 years ago in Europe and North Africa and somewhat later in other parts of the world. Because many feature food animals like wild oxen, reindeer, and horses, some scholars believe the art records hunting scenes or played a magical and religious role in hunting.

A newly discovered cave at Vallon Pont-d'Arco in southern France, however, features rhinoceros, panthers, bears, owls, and a hyena, which probably were not hunted for food. Other drawings include people dressed in animal skins and smeared with paint and stencils of human hands. Some scholars suspect that other marks in cave paintings and on bones may represent efforts at counting or writing.

Some cave art suggests that Stone Age people had well-developed religions, but without written texts, it is hard to know what they believed. Some graves from about 100,000 years ago contain stone implements, food, clothing, and red-ochre powder, indicating that early people revered their leaders enough to honor them in death and may have believed in an afterlife.

The Agricultural Revolutions

Around 10,000 years ago, some human groups began to meet their food needs by raising domesticated plants and animals. Gradually over the next millennium, most people became food producers, although hunting and gathering continued in some places.

The term Neolithic Revolution, commonly given to the changeover from food gathering to food producing, can be misleading. Neolithic means "new stone," but the new tool designs that accompanied the beginnings of agriculture did not define it. Nor was the "revolution" a single event. The changeover occurred at different times in different parts of the world. The term Agricultural Revolutions is more precise because it emphasizes the central role of food production and signals that the changeover occurred several times. The adoption of agriculture often included the domestication of animals for food (see Map 1.1).

Food gathering gave way to food production over hundreds of generations. The process may have begun when forager bands, returning year after year to the same seasonal camps, scattered seeds and cleared away weeds to encourage the growth of foods they liked. Such semi-cultivation could have supplemented food gathering without the permanent settlement of the group. Families choosing to concentrate their energies on food production, however, would have had to settle permanently near their fields.

Specialized stone tools first alerted archaeologists to new food-producing practices: polished or ground stone heads to work the soil, sharp stone chips embedded in bone or wooden handles to cut grasses, and stone mortars to pulverize grain. Early farmers used fire to clear fields of shrubs and trees and discovered that ashes were a natural fertilizer. After the burn-off, farmers used blades and axes to keep the land clear.

Selection of the highest-yielding strains of wild plants led to the development of domesticated varieties over time. As the principal gatherers of wild plant foods, women probably played a major role in this transition to plant cultivation, but the task of clearing fields probably fell to the men.

In the Middle East, the region with the earliest evidence of agriculture, human selection had transformed certain wild grasses into higher-yielding domesticated grains, now known as emmer wheat and barley, by 8000 B.C.E. Farmers there also discovered that alternating the cultivation of grains and pulses (plants yielding edible seeds such as lentils and peas) helped maintain fertility.

Plants domesticated in the Middle East spread to adjacent lands, but in many parts of the world, agriculture arose independently. Exchanges of crops and techniques occurred between regions, but societies that had already turned to farming borrowed new plants, animals, and farming techniques more readily than foraging groups did.

The eastern Sahara, which went through a wet period after 8000 B.C.E., preserves the oldest traces of food production in northern Africa. As in the Middle East, emmer wheat and barley became the principal crops and sheep, goats, and cattle the main domestic animals. When drier conditions returned around 5000 B.C.E., many Saharan farmers moved to the Nile Valley, where the river's annual flood provided water for crops.

In Greece, wheat and barley cultivation, beginning as early as 6000 B.C.E., combined local experiments with Middle Eastern borrowings. Shortly after 4000 B.C.E., farming developed in the light-soiled plains of Central Europe and along the Danube River. As forests receded because of climate changes and human clearing efforts, agriculture spread to other parts of Europe over the next millennium.

Early farmers in Europe and elsewhere practiced shifting cultivation, also known as swidden agriculture. After a few growing seasons, farmers left the fields fallow (abandoned to natural vegetation) and cleared new fields nearby. Between 4000 and 3000 B.C.E., for example, communities of from forty to sixty people in the Danube Valley supported themselves on about 500 acres (200 hectares) of farmland, cultivating a third or less each year while leaving the rest fallow to regain its fertility. From around 2600 B.C.E., people in Central Europe began using ox-drawn wooden plows to till heavier and richer soils.

Although the lands around the Mediterranean seem to have shared a complex of crops and farming techniques, geographical barriers blocked the spread elsewhere. Rainfall patterns south of the Sahara favored locally domesticated grains-sorghums, millets, and (in Ethiopia) teff-over wheat and barley. Middle Eastern grains did not grow at all in the humidity of equatorial West Africa; there, yams became an early domestic crop.

Domestic rice originated in southern China, the northern half of Southeast Asia, or northern India, possibly as early as 10,000 B.C.E. but more likely closer to 5000 B.C.E. The warm, wet climate of southern China particularly favored rice. Indian farmers cultivated hyacinth beans, green grams, and black grams along with rice by about 2000 B.C.E.

In the Americas a decline of game animals in the Tehuacán Valley of Mexico after 8000 B.C.E. increased people's dependence on wild plants. Agriculture based on maize (corn) developed there about 3000 B.C.E. and gradually spread. At about the same time, the inhabitants of Peru developed a food production pattern based on potatoes and quinoa, a protein-rich seed grain. People in the more tropical parts of Mesoamerica cultivated tomatoes, peppers, squash, and potatoes. In South America's tropical forests, the root crop manioc became the staple food after 1500 B.C.E. Manioc and maize then spread to the Caribbean islands.

The domestication of animals expanded rapidly during these same millennia. The first domesticated animal, the dog, may have helped hunters track game well before the Neolithic period. Later, animals initially provided meat but eventually supplied milk, wool, and energy as well.

Refuse dumped outside Middle East villages shows a gradual decline in the number of wild gazelle bones after 7000 B.C.E. This probably reflects the depletion of wild game through over hunting by local farmers. Meat eating, however, did not decline. Sheep and goat bones gradually replaced gazelle bones. Possibly wild sheep and goats learned to graze around agricultural villages to take advantage of the suppression of predators by humans. The tamer animals may gradually have accepted human control and thus become themselves a ready supply of food. The bones of tame animals initially differ so little from those of their wild ancestors that the early stages of domestication are hard to date. However, selective breeding for characteristics like a wooly coat and high milk production eventually yielded distinct breeds of domestic sheep and goats.

Elsewhere, other wild species were evolving domestic forms during the centuries before 3000 B.C.E.: cattle in northern Africa or the Middle East, donkeys in northern Africa, water buffalo in China, humped-back Zebuo cattle in India, horses and two-humped camels in Central Asia, one-humped camels in Arabia, chickens in South- east Asia, and pigs in several places. Like domestic plant species, varieties of domesticated animals spread from one region to another. The Zebu cattle originally domesticated in India, for example, became important in sub- Saharan Africa about 2,000 years ago.

Once cattle and water buffalo had become sufficiently tame to be yoked to plows, long after their initial domestication, they became essential to the agricultural cycle of grain farmers. In addition, animal droppings pro- vided valuable fertilizer. Wool and milk production also followed initial domestication bya substantial period.

In the Americas, domestic llamas provided meat, transport, and wool, while guinea pigs and turkeys pro- vided meat. Dogs assisted hunters and also provided meat. Some scholars believe that no other American species could have been domesticated, but this cannot be proven. Domestic species could not be borrowed from elsewhere, however, because of the geographical isolation of the Americas.

Pastoralism, a way of life dependent on large herds of grazing livestock, came to predominate in arid regions. As the Sahara approached its maximum dryness around 2500 B.C.E., pastoralists replaced farmers who migrated southward (see Chapter 7). Moving herds to new pastures and watering places throughout the year made pastoralists almost as mobile as foragers and discouraged accumulation of bulky possessions and substantial dwellings. Like modern pastoralists, early cattle keepers probably relied more heavily on milk than on meat, since killing animals diminished the size of their herds. During wet seasons, they may also have engaged in semi-cultivation or bartered meat and skins for plant foods with nearby farming communities.

Why did the Agricultural Revolutions occur? Some theories assume that growing crops had obvious advantages. Grain, for example, provided both a dietary staple and the makings of beer. Beer drinking appears frequently in ancient Middle Eastern art and can be dated to as early as 3500 B.C.E. Most researchers today, however, believe that climate change drove people to abandon hunting and gathering in favor of pastoralism and agriculture. So great was the global warming that ended the last Ice Age that geologists gave the era since about 9000 B.C.E. a new name: the Holocene. Scientists have also found evidence that temperate lands were exceptionally warm between 6000 and 2000 B.C.E., when people in many parts of the world adopted agriculture. The precise nature of the climatic crisis probably varied. In the Middle East, shortages of wild food caused by dry- ness or population growth may have stimulated food c production. Elsewhere, a warmer, wetter climate could have turned grasslands into forest and thereby reduced p supplies of game and wild grains.

In many drier parts of the world, where wild food remained abundant, agriculture did not arise. The inhabitants of Australia relied exclusively on foraging until a recent centuries, as did some peoples on the other continents. Amerindians in the arid grasslands from Alaska to the Gulf of Mexico hunted bison, and salmon fishing sustained groups in the Pacific Northwest. Ample supplies of fish, shellfish, and aquatic animals permitted food gatherers east of the Mississippi River to become increasingly sedentary. In the equatorial rain forest and in the southern part of Africa, conditions also favored retention of older ways.

Whatever the causes, the gradual adoption of food I production transformed most parts of the world. A hundred thousand years ago, world population, mostly living in the temperate and tropical regions of Africa and ] Eurasia, did not exceed 2 million. The population may 1 have fallen still lower during the last glacial epoch, between 32,000 and 13,000 years ago. Agriculture sup- ported a gradual population increase, perhaps to 10 million by 5000 B.C.E., and then a mushrooming to between 50 million and 100 million by 1000 B.C.E.

Life In Neolithic Communities

Evidence that an ecological crisis may have triggered the transition to food production

has prompted reexamination of the assumption that farmers enjoyed a better life than foragers did. Early farmers probably had to work much harder and for much longer periods than food gatherers. Long days spent clearing and cultivating the land yielded meager harvests. Guarding herds from predators, guiding them to fresh pastures, and tending to their needs imposed similar burdens.

Although early farmers commanded a more reliable food supply, their diet contained less variety and nutrition than that of foragers. Skeletons show that Neolithic farmers were shorter on average than earlier foragers. Death from contagious diseases ravaged farming settlements, which were contaminated by human waste, infested by disease-bearing vermin and insects, and in- habited by domesticated animals-especially pigs and cattle-whose diseases could infect people.

A dependable supply of food that could be stored between harvests to see people through nonproductive sea- sons, droughts, and other calamities proved decisive in the long run, however. Over several millennia, farmers came to outnumber non-farmers, permanent settlements generated cultural changes, and specialized crafts appeared in fledgling towns.

Some researchers envision violent struggles between farmers and foragers. Others see a more peaceful transition. Violence may well have accompanied land clearance that constrained the foragers' food supplies. And farmers probably fought for control of the best land. In most cases, however, farmers seem to have displaced foragers by gradual infiltration rather than by conquest.

The archaeologist Colin Renfrew maintains that over a few centuries, farming populations in Europe could have increased by a factor of fifty to one hundred just on the basis of the dependability of their food supply. In his view, as population densities rose, individuals with fields farthest away from their native village formed new settlements, leading to a steady, nonviolent expansion of agriculture consistent with the archaeological record. An expansion by only 12 to 19 miles (20 to 30 kilometers) in a generation could have brought farming to every corner of Europe between 6500 and 3500 B.C.E.3 Yet it would have happened so gradually as to minimize sharp conflicts with foragers, who would simply have stayed clear of the agricultural frontier or gradually adopted agriculture themselves. Studies that map similar genetic changes in the population also suggest a gradual spread of agricultural people across Europe from south- east to northwest.

Like forager bands, kinship and marriage bound farming communities together. Nuclear family size (parents and their children) may not have risen, but kinship relations traced back over more generations brought distant cousins into a common kin network. This encouraged the holding of land by large kinship units known as lineages or clans.

Because each person has two parents, four grandparents, eight great-grandparents, and so on, each individual has a bewildering number of ancestors. Some societies trace descent equally through both parents, but most give greater importance to descent through either the mother (matrilineal societies) or the father (patrilineal societies).

Some scholars believe descent through women and perhaps rule by women prevailed in early times. The traditions of Kikuyu farmers on Mount Kenya in East Africa, for example, relate that women ruled until the Kikuyu men conspired to get all the women pregnant at once and then overthrew them while they were unable to fight back. No specific evidence can prove or disprove legends such as this, but it is important not to confuse tracing descent through women (matrilineality) with rule by women (matriarchy) .

Religiously, kinship led to reverence for departed ancestors. Old persons often received elaborate burials. A plastered skull from Jericho in the Jordan Valley of modem Israel may be evidence of early ancestor reverence or worship at the dawn of agriculture.

The religions of foragers tended to center on sacred groves, springs, and wild animals. In contrast, the rituals of farmers often centered on the Earth Mother, a deity believed to be the source of new life, an all-powerful (and usually male) Sky God, and divinities representing fire, wind, and rain.

Assemblages of megaliths (meaning "big stones") seem to relate to religious beliefs. One complex built in the Egyptian desert before 5000 B.C.E. includes stone burial chambers, a calendar circle, and pairs of upright stones that frame the rising sun on the summer solstice. Stonehenge; a famous megalithic site in England constructed about 2000 B.C.E., marked the position of the sun and other celestial bodies at key points in the year. In the Middle East, the Americas, and other parts of the world, giant earth burial mounds may have served similar ritual and symbolic functions.

In some parts of the world, a few Neolithic villages grew into towns, which served as centers of trade and specialized crafts. Two towns in the Middle East, Jericho on the west bank of the Jordan River and Catal Huyuk (cha-TAHL-hoo-YOOK) in central Anatolia (modem Turkey), have been extensively excavated (Map 1.2 shows their location). Jericho revealed an elaborate early agricultural settlement. The round mud-brick dwellings characteristic of Jericho around 8000 B.C.E. may have imitated the shape of the tents of foragers who once had camped near Jericho's natural spring. A millennium later, rectangular rooms with finely plastered walls and floors and wide doorways opened onto central courtyards. Surrounding the 10- 1 acre (4-hectare) settlement, a massive stone wall protected against attacks.

The ruins of Catal Huyuk, an even larger Neolithic c town, date to between 7000 and 5000 B.C.E. and cover 32 acres (13 hectares). Its residents lived in plastered mud-brick rooms with elaborate decorations, but Catal Huyuk had no wall. Instead, the outer walls of its houses formed a continuous barrier without doors or large windows. Residents entered their houses by climbing down ladders through a hole in the roof.

Long-distance trade at Catal Huyuk featured obsidian, a hard volcanic rock that artisans chipped, ground, and polished into tools, weapons, mirrors, and ornaments. Other residents made fine pottery, wove baskets and woolen cloth, made stone and shell beads, and worked leather and wood. House sizes varied, but nothing indicates that Catal Huyuk had a dominant class or a centralized political structure.

Representational art at Catal Huyuk makes it clear that hunting retained a powerful hold on people's minds. wan paintings of hunting scenes closely resemble earlier cave paintings. Many depict men and women adorned with leopard skins. Men were buried with weapons rather than with farm tools, and bones from rubbish heaps prove that wild game featured prominently in their diet.

Yet Catal Huyuk's economy rested on agriculture. The surrounding fields produced barley and emmer wheat, as well as legumes and other vegetables. Pigs were kept along with goats and sheep. Nevertheless, foragers' foods, such as acorns and wild grains, had not yet disappeared. Catal Huyuk had one religious shrine for every two houses. At least forty rooms contained shrines with depictions of horned wild bulls, female breasts, goddesses, leopards, and handprints. Rituals involved burning dishes of grain, legumes, and meat but not sacrifice of live animals. Statues of plump female deities far outnumber statues of male deities, suggesting that the inhabitants venerated a goddess as their principal deity. The large number of females who were buried elaborately in shrine rooms may have been priestesses of this cult. The site's principal excavator maintains that although male priests existed, "it seems extremely likely that the cult of the goddess was administered mainly by women."

Metalworking became a specialized occupation in the late Neolithic period. At Catal Hulyuk, objects of copper and lead, which occur naturally in fairly pure form, date to about 6400 B.C.E. Silver and gold also appear at early dates in various parts of the world. Because of their rarity and their softness, these metals did not replace stone tools and weapons. The discovery of decorative and ceremonial objects of metal in graves indicates that they became symbols of status and power.

Towns, specialized crafts, and religious shrines forced the farmers to produce extra food for non-farmers like priests and artisans. The building of permanent houses, walls, and towers, not to mention megalithic monuments, also called for added labor. Stonehenge, for exam- pie, took some 30,000 person-hours to build. Whether these tasks were performed freely or coerced is unknown.

http://www.mmilam.com/bulliet_chapter1.htm

Sunken PreFiji

2012-03-02T12:03:00.000-08:00

http://fijiguide.com/page/history-1

Pre History
The original homeland of the Pacific island peoples was South-East Asia. Early people, Homo erectus, reached South-East Asia about two million years ago and modern man, Homo sapien, arrived approximately 60,000 years ago. Although evidence of human settlement in New Guinea dates back at least 25,000 years, the Austronesian migration from South-East Asia to New Guinea 6000 years ago marked a new stage in cultural evolution. Unlike their neolithic forebears, who were hunters and gatherers, the newcomers (who eventually were to populate Fiji) had adopted sail and outrigger canoes, methods of cultivating root crops, and pig farming.

According to archaeological evidence (mostly pottery), Fiji was settled in three different waves. The earliest wave dates from between 1260 and 900 BC. A second group of migrants appear to have arrived between 990 and 720 BC, and a third group after 830 BC.. This is evidenced by a number of birds becoming extinct and changes in the distribution of bird life, indicating a massive environmental impact caused by a large, sophisticated population.

There is, however, new evidence suggesting that Fiji and the South Pacific may have been settled 8000 to 10,000 years ago. In an article published in the Journal of Pacific History (April 1986), Fergus Clunie and the late John Gibbons postulated that the oceans have risen dramatically in the last 4000 to 18,000 years due to the melting of the polar ice caps. If this is true, massive land areas that were once above thesea's surface now may be 130 to 150 meters beneath the sea. Thus, many of the sites that were settled by the first migrants to the South Pacific are inaccessible to archaeologists. Clunie and Gibbons buttress their argument with biological, archaeological and linguistic evidence.

Though scientists may disagree about exactly when the forebears of Fijians first came to roost, they submit that these people came from the New Britain area (now belonging to Papua New Guinea) and were most likely ancestors of present-day Polynesians. They practiced agriculture, raised pigs and poultry, and fished.

Changes in pottery style indicate a probable second wave of migrants to the area between 400 and 100 BC. Scientists use the word 'probable' because they are not sure if the new pottery style was caused by an influx of new people or if it was simply a local development. If migrants caused the changes, the newcomers probably mixed with the indigenous people and perhaps dominated them.

The final settlement of Fiji (1000 to 1800 AD) was a massive movement from Melanesia. This wave of people practiced a sophisticated form of terraced agriculture, which helped support a large population that may have risen to 200,000. People grew yams and taro, raised poultry, fished and evolved a highly developed culture.

For further reading on the early migrations to Fiji there's a great article entitled The Story of Lapital Migraton in Fiji, written by Patrick Nunn, a Professor of Geography at the University of the South Pacific.It examines theories on where the first people in Fiji came from, when they came and where they settled.

Pre-European Contact Society

As evidenced by their advanced form of agriculture, the pre-contact Fiji islands were a highly evolved, stratified society, interlocked and interdependent through trade. Different clans were responsible for various crafts or activities such as pottery-making, mat-weaving, canoe-building and salt production. These items were traded throughout the Fiji group of islands and even as far away as Tonga.

Women worked hard and aged early. Men did intermittent hard jobs such as breaking in land for crops. They also performed occasional social duties like warfare, house building and ceremonial lovo cooking in large underground ovens. In other words, the more spectacular activities were usually in the man's domain, whereas the drudgery of weeding, washing and collecting firewood was (and still is) done by women.

Fijian society was dominated by a complicated class system. Chiefs often had tremendous personal power, which was expressed in demands for tribute from conquered tribes and in many bloody human sacrifices. To outsiders, the chiefs seemed to have arbitrary and ruthless power based on 'club law'. Said one early observer:

"No eastern tyrants can rule with more absolute terror than the chiefs do here; and few people are more thoroughly enslaved and trampled than are these islanders."

Each 'tribe' was broken up into several clans, each with its own function in society. There were chiefly clans, priestly clans, artisans, fishingclans and diplomatic clans whose purpose was to act asspokespeople for the chief.

Leadership in the tribal units was strictly hereditary and succession often a subject of debate. Rank was inherited through both parents, and in a polygamous society this could be very confusing. A chief might have five different sons from five different wives, each with a different political status. To complicate matters even more, rank could be inherited from one's mother's brothers, and succession was usually through brothers before it passed on to sons. There might be a number of individuals qualified as chiefly candidates, but those who became chiefs had to stand out from the group.

Because of intermarriage, incredibly complex relationships between tribes throughout Fiji were created. Tribal leaders hoping to gain political power could thus draw support from different clans throughout the islands through their blood ties, and in the process just as easily make enemies. No one chief was dominant in Fiji. The political scene was in a constant flux of changing allegiances brought about by disputes over land, property or women, by quarrels, or by the rulers' petty jealousies.

--Given that the islanders first lived at the now-submerged larger sunken platforms and the first known colonists were dated to 1290 BC [my emphasis added in red lettering above], it would suggest a final sinking of the Fijian platform was sometime before 1300 BC: which is about my scenario for the Fijian "Po" theory dating back to Velikovsky's 1500 BC and giving rise to the Polynesian stories of a sunken former Pacific landmass. I am now convinced that this theory is testing out, but that the major cultural center involved was still Sundaland (earlier Indonesia)

Best Wishes, Dale D.

Greater Fiji

Dale's Letter to Atlantis Rising Magazine, published
in #54, Nov/Dec 2005

Churchward's Tale

I was interested to see your article on James
Churchward ("Colonel Churchward's Strange Tale", AR#53)
The article mentioned the presumed "superswell" towards the end; formerly this area had been known as the Darwin Rise. This has been on the books since the
'60's and '70's, but the area was assumed to have collapsed sometime in the late Cretaceous or early Cenozoic. Incidentally, it appears to have been basically held up by a large magma bubble, so that Churchward was not far wrong once you realize that he described all volcanic ejecta as "gas"
The mid-Atlantic ridge shows evidence of a similar collapse, at least to the extent of a downward displacement of 2 to 3 kilometers.
It might interest you to know that the "Troano ms." that Churchward was so fond of quoting as a source clearly expresses one continuous number in Mayan numeration (base-20) only the translator did not recognize the place values. Churchward quotes the figure of "64,000,000" several times (giving it a slightly different reading each time although it is always allegedly the same exact direct quote) without realizing that it is, of course, a place value in base-20, as also is 8000 and so on.

It does not matter if the alleged temple records that Churchward uses as a source actually existed or
not; whatever happened, his "translation" is entirely Churchwards fancy, and even if true consisted entirely of intuitive interpretations of a dead and unknown language, and largely in plain pictures of dubious import. Even if one of the priests aided in such an interpretation, this can in no way be taken as a historical record; it could have been only the priest's delusion that Churchward shared.
The name "Mu" does not exist in the Pacific as the name of a lost continent, the Polynesian equivalent for a sunken land would be "Po". In the Pacific, the name "Mu" denotes an unknown race of black Pygmies. The name "Mu" as referenced to ANY mythical place is used in China as a paradise in the far WEST (hence possibly Atlantis) Ivan Sanderson wrote that Churchward "was undoubtedly a charming man, but quite mad" That is presumably the best way to put the matter. NONE of Churchward's traceable sources meant anything like what he WANTED them to mean.

Incidentally, there actually is some good evidence for a former large island now sunk in the Pacific,
pehaps as large as Borneo at largest and including Fiji, Tonga and possibly Samoa. Velikovsky quotes Samoan tradition on page 143 of Worlds in Collision and dates its submergence to 1500 BC. (Chapter 6, "the Shadow of Death") The Samoan tradition states that the former land
went down and modern islands came up at the time. What is interesting about this is that if the date of 1500 BC is correct (and it is wrong in several other instances Velikovsky cites) it is possibly relatable to the beginnings of the Lapita ware cultures, possibly the earliest forerunners of the Polynesians (and Churchward is also misleading when he calls the Polynesians "whites")

Dale A. Drinnon
Indianapois, IN
[Original draft]

Roots of American R1 Y DNA

2012-03-01T14:47:00.000-08:00

[This blog entry follows after the earlier posting:

http://frontiers-of-anthropology.blogspot.com/2012/01/some-largescale-migrations-into-new.html ]

As mentioned before, I consider the distribution of YDNA group R to be transAtlantic and significant. The Western European R group has been stated to have a distribution suggesting Megalithic Europe (B on the map below) but on the website where I got the maps, it was noted that the distribution is really more like the Magdalenian Upper Paleolithic or early-Mesolithic (Map A below) In either event, the Basque region is mentioned as a center of distribution and dispersal.

As far as the American R groups go,Some suggestion has been made that they represent post-=-contact European mixing. The DNA seems to old and too firmly entrenched for that (See map below from the Wikipedia entry) The American R groups are called "R1-M173"as being nommittal, M173is the classification for ALL subsequent R types. Actually the American R types show a distinctive resemblance to the European type. Furthermore, the distribution on the map is obviously more especially Algonquin and Canadian: if it was actually a matter of greater admixture with European whites, the distribution should show more of it in the USA than in Canada. Obviously this more tends to reinforce the view that the Algonquins came from Megalith-Builders of Europe and they retreated into Canada with the coming of the Europeans. So presumably, both Magdalenians and Megalith-builders are involved. And this goes directly to the matter of the Hopewellians and Archaics because it would seem that that they came in with persistent Magdalenian traits and thereafter continued on persisting.

The start of this line of thinking was the article on this blog concerning the idea that The Mitchell-Hedges Crystal skull actually depicted an ethnic type which was independantly pegged by other authors as being the last wave of immigrants out of Atlantis just before the crash:
http://frontiers-of-anthropology.blogspot.com/2011/03/mitchell-hedges-crystal-skull-is.html

The migrations out of Atlantis being defined by Lewis Spence as varieties of CroMagnons that appeared mysteriously in Europe one after each other. The last two of these waves were Magdalenian and Azilian cultures, as defined archaeologically. These followed after the Solutrean period.
The matter of Lewis Spence's theory of Cromagnon Migrations was touched on in the recent blog posting on The Last Wave out of Atlantis:
http://frontiers-of-anthropology.blogspot.com/2012/02/last-wave-out-of-atlantis.html
Which segued into the followup posting on South America and the Archaic cultures:
http://frontiers-of-anthropology.blogspot.com/2012/02/taking-of-south-america-in-atlantean.html

Cutting the theory here, the Solutrean is also significant as being the suspected ancestral source for the Paleoindians of the Americas and the Clovis culture in specific. That blog posting was followed up by another article:
http://frontiers-of-anthropology.blogspot.com/2011/03/some-largescale-migrations-into-new.html

Which basically was a simplified presentation of my doctoral thesis presented at IU, based on the different types of skulls shown by early Americans and my specialization being in the measurement and comparison of human skulls. (The paper passed with reccomendations but it turned out I did not use that one as a doctoral thesis, as there were some sensitive issues involved)

Both the more recent blog postings on the Brazillian Moundbuilders and the North American ones (Hopewellians and asociated Archaics) were in part derived from that original work although there has been a lot more information more recently and some of that very important in updating the overall theory. My work on the Adenas, Dinarics, Beaker-Folk and Legendary Giants was an outgrowth of that original study, an interesting sideline. I cannot say when I had the first outlines for the theory but it would have been in the 1980s when I was in IU in Bloomington: the final paper was submitted in 1995.
http://frontiers-of-anthropology.blogspot.com/2012/02/american-cromagnons-archaics-and.html
http://frontiers-of-anthropology.blogspot.com/2012/02/brazillian-moundbuilders.html
http://frontiers-of-anthropology.blogspot.com/2011/03/fomorian-giants-adenas-and-giants-of.html

And in this case, the matter of the R1 DNA was another b Blog entry posted last March:
http://frontiers-of-anthropology.blogspot.com/2011/03/y-chromosome-dna-and-last-atlantean.html

Which has some followup and some updates but basically there are all the related postings.

After identifying these fossil types of European humans with the Archaics and Hopewellian, it seems to me that we have gone on to show they were YDNA R groups too, at least up to 50% so, and that they could have up to that 50% as YDNA group Q gained through admixture with the previously-established Native types. And the Europeans in the Megalth-builder category would be predominantly YDNA R carrying foreward from their Mesolithic and Magdaleninan forebearers, as can be seen from the maps above. The ranges of these YDNA genes is the same as the Geographic range of the owners of these types of skulls.. The Mesolithic skulls in the drawing at drawing on bottom show some variety of the immigrant types with both longer-headed and shorter-headed types. BOTH sorts would be carrying the R YDNA identifying mutations.The idea is that the strains would contain admixtures from other strains on their mother's sides, hence the variation in physical appearance, but with males of a single and united ethic grouping, hence all the males were of the same signiture Y chromosome DNA type.

Mesolithic/Neolithic European wielding a groundstone ax (Celt) (Reconstruction)

See also the blog posting on the Megalithic connections to the Algonquin Language family of NE North America. These would also be connected to the same DNA groupings although the American populations were more mixed:
http://frontiers-of-anthropology.blogspot.com/2011/03/megalith-builders-red-paint-people-and.html

Best Wishes, Dale D.

Sandra Antunes' Portugese Polished Stones

2012-03-01T03:14:00.000-08:00

A while back, a woman living in Portugal by name of Sandra Antunescontacted me saying that she had a large number of unusual polished stones on her property and sent me photos. At first I was nonplussed because I had not seen anything like them and I did not know what they were, but there was an odd consistency to some of the shapes. I was able to see that there were some standard polished stone celts and hammerstones in amongst the others, and a couple of stones with hollowed out top surfaces that might have functioned as oil lamps at one point.

There were some pieces of plain orange pottery also included aomething like some pottery found in the Southern USa,the West Indies and on the Canary Islands.and the next two photos following)

One of the hammerstones, used to shape other stone tools.

st of the stones had no particular apparent function. They were mostly at the size to conveniently fit into a person's hand and the majority of them were diamond-shaped. Some of them were obviously created to be in the diamond shape on purpose because you would find such features as the one with the stripe down the middle at left.

Sandra suggested they might be female symbols and indicating the female genitals. She also said some of the diamond shaped stones had "Orifaces" indicated on them.

Since some of the other stones were decidedly correspondingly "MALE", that seems to have been the case. And after doing a little research I found that an excavation at a cave in Basque country had turned up similar diamond-shaped polished stones, in this case called "Venus figurines" and along with a number of other stones, some of them similar in shape to polished (nephrite) celts, but seemingly all meant to be pendants for neclaces. They were Magdalenian in age.

http://bertan.gipuzkoakultura.net/es/22/ing/1.php

gipuzkoakultura.net

miércoles 29 febrero 2012

Printable PDF version [659 Kb]

The groups of pendants.

Let us now return to the cave. As we go in, the first series is on the left hand side of the vestibule, close to the entrance. It is made up three items, two elongated and a third almost rectangular with rounded faces and angles.
Five other pendants are located in the area leading to the inner room, in an area covering approximately four square metres, delimited by blocks of stone. Three of these, made from wild goat incisors and decorated, are situated close to one another. But of all the pieces the most beautiful is the pendant carved into a slender deep black pebble, whose natural outline is reminiscent of several classical Palaeolithic "Venus" figures.
Very close to this pendant there is another, blackish in colour, shaped somewhat like the atrophied canine tooth of a deer, although considerably larger. The stone was probably chosen precisely because of this similarity and the symbolism of the original object.
It was in the first of the inner rooms, however, that one of the most spectacular finds from the Palaeolithic era was made: a long necklace, one and half metres long, comprising fourteen blackstone pendants, lain, perhaps intentionally, on the clay floor. The constituent parts, most of which are decorated and elongated in shape, are arranged in orderly fashion, at regular distances. The two ends are finished off with small undecorated stones with natural holes.

In the same room, about four metres from the first set, there is a two piece necklace.

As well as these five groupings, at several points in both the vestibule and in the inner room, there is a series of pendants broken at the perforation holes. These pendants lie relatively close together.

On all pages containing descriptions of pendants, drawings are shown to a scale of 1:1 (life size) and photos to a scale of 1:1.5 (i.e. 50% larger than their real size), to make it easier to appreciate the details. .

75. First set consisting of three pendants. The pre-dominantly elongated shape of two of the pendants contrasts with the subrectangular form of the third. The texture and colour of the last one (brighter and blacker) is also different to the other two. Only one of them is decorated. 76. This first group was found near the entrance to the cave, next to the seat and hearth. 77. This is one of the few undecorated pendants. It is made from a levelled pebble. There is a gentle curve in one side and the angles are slightly rounded. In the area of the hole there are a series of short incisions which might be interpreted as being lines of flight. © Jesús Alonso

These are the only pieces from a necklace which are not made out of stone. They are three incisors of Capra pyrenaica (the Pyrenean wild goat) with two holes in the root, and the vestibular face is decorated with a number of short transversal incisions. They are believed to have been coloured with ochre or at least have come into contact with the material, since one of them was found with remains of red colouring.

The use of teeth from herbivores or carnivores to make pendants was common practise throughout the prehistoric period, when they were drilled and decorated with different motifs. However, there are few examples like this of teeth with more than one hole, although some incisors of horse and deer have been found, decorated and with double holes (some with as many as five) in different Magdalenian levels along the Cantabrian coast and in the Northern Pyrenean area, such as Ermittia (Deba, Gipuzkoa), Arenaza (Galdames, Bizkaia), Isturitz (Izturitze-Donamartiri, Nafarroa Behera), Mas d’Azil (Ariège) and Tito Bustillo (Ribadesella, Asturias).

Human representations are scarce in parietal art and art mobilier. Amongst the latter, particularly interesting are some scenes such as those found in the Bone of Torre (Oiartzun, Gipuzkoa) and the staff from La Vache (Ariège), or the few Venus depictions that have been found: the head of Entrefoces (Morcín, Asturias), the uncertain pendant or perforated staff from El Pendo (Camargo, Cantabria) and “The Venus” of Las Caldas (Oviedo, Asturias). The depiction of the woman, over which greater care has been taken than that of the man, is generally schematic and certain parts of the anatomy are underscored. Interpretations vary: they may represent figures of mother goddesses, votive fertility offerings, testimony of the importance of the role played by women in Palaeolithic society, etc.

The discovery of a series of pendants with break ages, generally around the area of the perforation hole, is interesting. We do not know how and when these breakages were caused; however, broken or destroyed items dating from throughout prehistory have often been found in a range of habitational and funerary contexts, and it has been suggested that they may have formed part of certain ritual practices. In the case of the pendants from Praileaitz I we do not know whether the breakage and the concentration of the items found is random or due to some other factor.

78. This piece is unusually long and almost square in cross section. It was found in two fragments, on either side of the lower face of the large rock that had come away from the southern wall of the entrance. 79. Most of the pendants are decorated in different ways with small incisions of varying depth. Some have a few marks on one of the larger sides; on others, all of one side or even the two sides are carved at approximately equal distances. The empty spaces, rhythm and pairings of the lines often form fanciful designs. © Jesús Alonso

80. Two fine parallel strips of animal or plant origin would have been passed through the double hole drilled with great precision in each of the incisors to fix the position of the tooth, so that the decorative engravings would be visible. © Jesús Alonso

81. Third necklace made of a single drilled stone with gentle curves. The only decoration consists of a number of parallel transverse lines, lightly marked at the bottom right of each face. 82. The outline of the piece is reminiscent of the rounded Palaeolithic “Venus” figurines found in sev-eral locations throughout Europe. Examples include the figure found in Barma Grande, Grimaldi, The “Lozenge”, also from Grimaldi (Italy), Venus I from Willendorf (Austria), the Kostienki Venus (Russia) and the Lespugue Venus (France), or the outline of the relief of the Venus with Horn from Laussel (France). 83. At the narrower end there is a bi-conical drilled hole, finished off with very regular rotation; at an earlier phase the surface had been cleared or pre-pared. © Jesús Alonso

84. This thin bright black pebble would have been chosen to make into a pendant for its outline, the balance of its dimensions and its special texture. © Jesús Alonso

85. The fourteen black stones that make up the largest necklace found in the cave gradually emerge, looking as if they had been gently laid on the ground. 86. Detail of excavation of one of the pendants. 87. During excavation of the necklace two of the elongated pendants were found just over one centimetre apart, their holes superimposed. © Xabi Otero

88. The combination of the shapes, the predominantly black colour and the decorations of the pieces in this large necklace make it unique of its kind. Its elaborate design shows the great sensitivity of these populations of Cro-Magnon people from the Magdalenian period. © Xabi Otero

89. As the dig progresses, the fourteen pieces of this necklace from the inner room which lie close to each other, at approximately equal distances in most cases, encased in the yellow clay or interspersed between stones reveal an arrangement which makes it possible to visualise both the structure and the dimensions. 90. Detail of three of the pendants from one end of the large necklace laid on the clay in the inner room. 91. In five cases small naturally rounded and perforated stones have been inserted into the necklaces in this cavity. None of them are decorated. Three of them form part of this set. © Xabi Otero

92. The incisions on the sides of the pieces include some very varied compositions, some of whichas in this case are very elaborate. We do not know what the purpose of any of these was. 93. Although the transverse markings are the most common, it is significant that as well as the motif already mentioned, this pendant also includes a rhombus with fine incisions. This motif, which on occasions has a longitudinal stroke inside, is often found on Magdalenian spears. © Jesús Alonso

94. One important question still remains regarding the authorship of these pendants: were they the work of a single individual or various people? If we look at the workmanship and style of the different pieces, they could all have been made by the same person; despite the variations, they form an artistic and symbolic whole. 95. In some cases it is not easy to work out how many strokes were actually intended. Some of them are so close together that one may be an attempt to rectify the other. In other cases, though, the sole purpose seems to have been to suggest the lines without actually making them any more explicit. © Jesús Alonso

96. This pendant has a series of shaping grooves around the hole and transverse incisions on one side face, as well as on one of the larger faces. The bottom of the opposite face is covered in intense pricking, caused by the pressure of a harder object when the pendant was used as a retoucher or compressor. 97. In this pendant we can clearly see the changes in rhythm and the groupings of the incisions. However, the parallel lines are much more regularly distributed on one of the larger sides. © Jesús Alonso

98. Not all stones display this same desire for perfect symmetry; some, indeed, are clearly more convex or even twisted on one side than the other, although we do not know whether the stones were especially chosen because of these shapes. 99. This pendant is decorated on all sides, but the most complex work is mostly found on one of the wider faces. There are parallel horizontal bodies or stripes of different width, alternating with a certain rhythm. The narrowest of these are undecorated and there are one or two “empty” ones between each decorated one. Of the decorated stones, the ones located at the two ends have very tight diagonal incisions, while the others have a reticulate motif created using lines running diagonally in both directions. © Jesús Alonso

100. Several pendants have larger fine parallel lines forming stripes, generally symmetrical, on one or two of the faces. In many cases, these take up most of the surface. Unlike the narrow sides, the incision is very superficial. 101. One of the most striking features in the process of making some of these pieces is the way they were worn down around the perforation area. This tech-nique was often employed with bone, but it is very unusual on stone. © Jesús Alonso

102. This disc shaped limonite is noticeable for its varied greenish and reddish colouring, contrasting with the more uniform colours of the other pendants on the necklace. 103. Pendant with layers of concretion. © Jesús Alonso

104. Small bead with natural hole situated at one end of a fourteen piece necklace. The symmetry sometimes seen in the decorations on the stones also extends to the way the pendants were arranged on the necklace, with two limonite stones of very similar shape and size positioned at each end. © Jesús Alonso 105. Arrangement of the fourteen pendants as they appeared in the inner room during excavations. © Xabi Otero

106. Partial view of the inner room of the cave. 107. Fifth set found in the cave, consisting of two stone pendants, one with a natural perforation. On occasions, smaller beads and ornaments, such as seeds or even feathers of different colours would have been hung between these items. © Xabi Otero

108. Some of the stones appear not to have been cho-sen for the regularity of their shape; for example, some were selected because they had a natural perforation which could be used. 109. Although many of these pieces have small parallel lines, this example is remarkable for the regularity, uniformity and clarity of the incisions. The opposite side, in contrast, contains no decoration. © Xabi Otero

111. This pendant is notably similar to the atrophied canine tooth of a deer in shape, only bigger. All its edges are decorated, as is one of the side faces, with regularly spaced transverse lines. The perimeter of the largest base is also decorated. Atrophied deer canines were highly valued in many cultures, from the beginning of the Upper Palaeolithic practically down to the present, although not all of them were made into pendants. Imitations were also made from the earliest times in ivory or stones of varying colours (Gatzarria, El Pendo, etc.). Most of the natural specimens or imitations are plain, although some are decorated, generally with short lines. The decoration on the example from La Garma is very similar to that on the piece from Praileaitz I. 112. Perforated canine tooth from deer from the La Garma cave (Ribamontán al Monte, Cantabria). © Xabi Otero

113. This large disc shaped stone, one of those selected with natural holes, is particularly interesting, with considerable doming on one face. It is not decorated. 114. All the planes of this pendant had very regular incisions. Unlike most examples with decorations on the broader faces, the lines on this pendant are deeper. This piece was found inside the cave during the excavation process, broken into two fragments, lying 13 metres from each other. © Xabi Otero

115. In some specimens the ends are very different. The one with the hole generally narrows slightly or is even pointed, to make it easier to drill. The opposite end is generally thicker to help the stone hang better. 116. In this elongated pendant, like some others, irregular incised points can be seen around the hole, caused by a sharp object. © Xabi Otero

117. Despite the simplicity of this pendant, its natural appearance is quite striking: a long, narrow helicoidal shaped stone, which appears to turn on itself. This movement has been captured by the person who collected it and accentuated with a series of transverse lines at regular distances along the edges. 118. We gradually leave the gloom of the rooms in the cave, emerging into the bright light of the exterior. © Xabi Otero

6- Ritual activities
7- The process of manufacturing pendants
8- The groups of pendants
9- Who lived in Praileaitz I?

2007 Departamento de Cultura, Juventud y Deporte - Diputación Foral de Gipuzkoa

--Prior to this time I had also heard that the "Caveman" culture at Andalucia did not use chipped-stone tools but polished stone ones, and that such tools included carefully-selected water-worn stones from the beds of watercourses (Atlantis in Andalucia by E. M. Whishaw) Some of the tools were also made of ground slate as spentioned. So it seems in Iberia the Magdalenian period included a very early "Neolithic" using ground-stone tools, which included symbolic smooth-stone "Idols" conventionalized to indicate male and female sex organs. The ones that Sandra had found were not meant to be worn as pendants, but they were at just the right size to hold onto for security's sake and for reassurance in times of need. I asumed that Sandra had found a Neolithic site (with pottery) that carried on in the same tradition as started by these polished-stone CroMagnons.

I did tell Sandra that she needed to have her stones looked at by somebody in a position of authority such as at a museum. She said there were no museums locally but she would try and contact the museum at Lisbon.

Best Wishes, Dale D.

'Witness to the Deluge'

2012-02-29T15:11:00.005-08:00

Guadeloupe Woman

"Guadeloupe Woman Was Found in 1812.
"This is a well authenticated discovery which has been in the British Museum for over a century. A fully modern human skeleton was found in the French Caribbean island of Guadeloupe inside an immense slab of limestone, dated by modern geologists at 28 million years old.(More examples could be cited.)
"Human beings,just like those living today(but sometimes larger), have been found in very deep levels of strata."
This is the version of the information as it appears on some of the Creationist websites. Of course, scientists do not think the remains are fossilzed in limestone for 28 million years. But what they DO think is very interesting and very pertinent to our thesis.
Creationists make out that the skeleton is kept hidden because it is an embarassment to scientists. to the contrary, a quick internet search found this courteous reply to an inquiry into the matter:

Thank you for your enquiry. Our specialist, Robert Kruszynski has replied as follows:

"We do hold this set of human remains from Grand Terre island, Guadeloupe, West Indies. It is a human skeleton lacking its skull and all its foot bones, with all the available postcranial bones still partially embedded in a block of oolitic limestone. It is stored and curated here in our Special Collection.
It was, as reported below, found in 1812 and presented to the British Museum in 1813 by Sir A. Cochrane R.N., who was at that time one of the Lords of the Admiralty. In 1881 it became part of the foundation collection of this Museum. It was originally registered as M 16820 and then in 2006 it was re-registered as PA HR 4128.
In 2006 I personally weighed the block of limestone containing this partial skeleton and its weight came to approximately 230 Kg. From the same findspot are a number of other human skeletons (possibly six) which were (at the time at least) also partially embedded in oolitic limestone and these are now stored in a museum in Paris. Palaeontological and mineralogical work has been carried out on the block we have which indicates nothing unusual about this find and there is now a plan to carry out absolute dating on the bones of this skeleton."
If you have any further questions, please contact me.
Yours sincerely,
Dr Hilary Ketchum
Earth Sciences Identification and Advisory Officer Angela Marmont Centre for UK Biodiversity The Natural History Museum Cromwell Road London SW7 5BD

--As a mater of fact the limestone is not especially significant nor is it especially ancient. It is part of a coral reef formation which has grown up around the skeletons over the past estimated ten thousand years or so.That is where the next mystery comes in because the West Indies were not supposed to be inhabited until much later. There is however a good deal of data confirming that there was a major catastropheies at the end of the Ice Age involving multiple volcanic blasts, tsunamis, torrential storms, earthquakes and cave-ins at the highest imagineable level. And one fluted Clovis-type point found on Cuba, a diputed find.

The mere fact that here we have several skeletons together at about 10000 years ago bespeaks a time when there were sizeable settlements in the West Indies: the fact that these several people were killed together, rolled into the sea together and later encorporated into a coral reef, at a time when there is evidence of a tremendous tsunami all along the Atlantic seaboard from the mouth of the St Lawrence all the way down to Southern Brazil, at a time when the entire bed of the North Atlantic is acquiring a layer of volcanic debris AND the simultaneous eruption of several volcanos more locally (including Mount Pelee' on the adjacent island of Martinique) IS very signficant. And it begins to look as if the Guadeloupe Woman skeleton deserves the title "Witness to the Flood" far more truthfully than the famous fossil salamander from the Alps ever did.

One of my recent postings had a map showing examples of human remains that were all supposed drowned together simultaneously at about 10,000 years ago. That map also needed to have included these examples and the similar find of a human skull found by divers on the Bahama banks.

Best Wishes, Dale D.

Continuing Evidence For Landbridges And Longrange Oceanic Crossings in Ancient Times

2012-02-28T06:05:00.000-08:00

[I should sopecify that d, e, f, g, and h on the map below are all transAtlantic links which could well still involve "Atlantis" (or various now missing transAtlantic stepping-stone islands) and that this exchange includes cotton. This is by no means an exhaustive list.-DD]

Sea Monkeys Are the Tip of the Iceberg: More Biogeographical Conundrums for Neo-Darwinism

Casey Luskin March 3, 2010 8:00 AM

In my previous post responding to the National Center for Science Education, I observed that the origin of South American monkeys (platyrrhines) is a striking example of a discontinuity between evolution and biogeography. As I observed at the end of that post, which was adapted from "The NCSE's Biogeographic Conundrums: A Defense of Explore Evolution's Treatment of Biogeography":

the NCSE was not quite accurate when claiming that "By comparing macroevolutionary patterns between different groups, we find that the same patterns repeat. This strongly suggests that the same forces drove the diversification of those different groups." The truth is that whenever oceanic "sweepstakes" dispersal is required, we find an exception to expected neo-Darwinian rules of biogeography. And as will be seen in my next post, there are so many exceptions that one might reasonably question whether the inviolable neo-Darwinian rule of universal common ancestry is supported by biogeography.

When proponents of neo-Darwinism "speculate" about the "luck" and "chance" needed to explain this "amazing" phenomenon and "challenging" biegeographical data, it's clear that they are lacking reasonable explanations. Yet rafting or other means of "oceanic dispersal" have been suggested to solve a number of other biogeographical conundrums that challenge neo-Darwinism, including:

Lizards reaching South America⁷⁸
Large caviomorph rodents reaching South America⁷⁹
Bees arriving in Madagascar⁸⁰
Lemurs arriving in Madagascar⁸¹
The arrival of other mammals in Madagascar, including the Tenrecidae (hedgehoglike insectivorous mammals), aardvarks, the hippopotamus, and the Viverridae (cat-sized carnivorous mammals)⁸²
Dispersal of salamanders across the western end of the Mediterranean⁸³
Dispersal of certain lizards across the western end of the Mediterranean⁸⁴
The origin of certain lizards in Cuba⁸⁵
The appearance of elephant fossils on "many islands," which are said to have arrived by swimming⁸⁶
Dispersal of freshwater frogs across oceanic island chains⁸⁷
Certain frogs reaching Madagascar⁸⁸
The colonization of Anguilla by green iguanas⁸⁹
Appearance of certain South American insects⁹⁰
Dispersals of chameleons across the Indian Ocean⁹¹
Origin of certain insects in Caribbean islands⁹²
The origin of mantellid frogs found on the island of Mayotte in the Comoros archipelago, despite the fact that "[a]mphibians are thought to be unable to disperse over ocean barriers because they do not tolerate the osmotic stress of salt water"⁹³
The spread of flightless insects to the Chatham Islands⁹⁴
The origin of indigenous gekkos in South America⁹⁵
Origin of crocodile distributions⁹⁶
The appearance of sloths in South America⁹⁷
The origin of a group of Australian rodents⁹⁸
The appearance of land mammals of the Mediterranean islands (also suggesting that "Hippos, elephants, and giant deer reached the islands by swimming")⁹⁹
The origin of various land reptiles in Western Samoa¹⁰⁰
The presence of Crotalus rattlesnakes in Baja California¹⁰¹

Indeed, a review in 2005 by Alan de Queiroz wrote that "[s]triking examples of oceanic dispersal" include:

(a) Scaevola (Angiospermae: Goodeniaceae) three times from Australia to Hawaii; (b) Lepidium mustards (Angiospermae: Brassicaceae) from North America and Africa to Australia; (c) Myosotis forget-me-nots (Angiospermae: Boraginaceae) from Eurasia to New Zealand and from New Zealand to South America; (d) Tarentola geckos from Africa to Cuba; (e) Maschalocephalus (Angiospermae: Rapateaceae) from South America to Africa; (f) monkeys (Platyrrhini) from Africa to South America; (g) melastomes (Angiospermae: Melastomataceae) from South America to Africa; (h) cotton (Angiospermae: Malvaceae: Gossypium) from Africa to South America; (i) chameleons three times from Madagascar to Africa; (j) several frog genera to and from Madagascar; (k) Acridocarpus (Angiospermae: Malpighiaceae) from Madagascar to New Caledonia; (l) Baobab trees (Angiospermae: Bombacaceae: Adansonia) between Africa and Australia; (m) 200 plant species between Tasmania and New Zealand; (n) many plant taxa between Australia and New Zealand; and (o) Nemuaron (Angiospermae: Atherospermataceae) from Australia (or Antarctica) to New Caledonia.¹⁰²

Figure 1 of De Queiroz's paper contains a revealing map of the world covered in lines criss-crossing back and forth across oceans showing how many species must have traversed oceans to explain their distributions in locations unexpected by traditional biogeography:

(Reprinted from Trends in Ecology and Evolution, Vol.20(2), Alan de Queiroz, "The resurrection of oceanic dispersal in historical biogeography," pages 68-73, (February 2005) with permission from Elsevier. Slightly resized to fit blog formatting.)
It seems clear that there are plenty of examples that contradict the NCSE's simplistic picture of biogeography where the alleged "consistency between biogeographic and evolutionary patterns provides important evidence about the continuity ... [that] would be expected of a pattern of common descent." Somehow all of the above examples got left off the NCSE's reply to Explore Evolution. There seem to be many more "biogeographic conundrums" than the NCSE is letting on.
References Cited:
[78.] John C. Briggs, Global Biogeography, pg. 93 (Elsevier Science, 1995).
[79.] Id. at 124.
[80.] Susan Fuller, Michael Schwarz, and Simon Tierney, "Phylogenetics of the allodapine bee genus Braunsapis: historical biogeography and long-range dispersal over water," Journal of Biogeography, Vol. 32:2135--2144 (2005).
[81.] Anne D. Yoder, Matt Cartmill, Maryellen Ruvolo, Kathleen Smith, & Rytas Vilgalys, "Ancient single origin of Malagasy primates." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, Vol. 93:5122-- 5126 (May, 1996); Peter M. Kappeler, "Lemur Origins: Rafting by Groups of Hibernators?," Folia Primatol, Vol. 71:422--425 (2000); Christian Roos, JÃ¼rgen Schmitz, and Hans Zischler, "Primate jumping genes elucidate strepsirrhine phylogeny," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, Vol. 101: 10650--10654 (July 20, 2004).
[82.] Philip D. Rabinowitz & Stephen Woods, "The Africa--Madagascar connection and mammalian migrations," Journal of African Earth Sciences, Vol. 44:270--276 (2006); Anne D. Yoder, Melissa M. Burns, Sarah Zehr, Thomas Delefosse, Geraldine Veron, Steven M. Goodman, & John J. Flynn, "Single origin of Malagasy Carnivora from an African ancestor," Nature, Vol. 421:734-777 (February 13, 2003).
[83.] Michael Veith, Christian Mayer, Boudjema Samraoui, David Donaire Barroso, and Serge Bogaerts, "From Europe to Africa and vice versa: evidence for multiple intercontinental dispersal in ribbed salamanders (Genus Pleurodeles)," Journal of Biogeography, Vol. 31:159--171 (2004).
[84.] S. Carranza, D. J. Harris, E. N. Arnold, V. Batista and J. P. Gonzalez de la Vega, Phylogeography of the lacertid lizard, Psammodromus algirus, in Iberia and across the Strait of Gibraltar, Journal of Biogeography, Vol. 33:1279--1288 (2006).
[85.] Alan de Queiroz, "The resurrection of oceanic dispersal in historical biogeography," Trends in Ecology and Evolution, Vol.20(2):68-73 (February 2005).
[86.] Richard John Huggett, Fundamentals of Biogeography, pg. 60 (Routledge, 1998).
[87.] G. John Measey, Miguel Vences, Robert C. Drewes, Ylenia Chiari, Martim Melo, and Bernard Bourles, "Freshwater paths across the ocean: molecular phylogeny of the frog Ptychadena newtoni gives insights into amphibian colonization of oceanic islands," Journal of Biogeography, Vol. 34:7--20 (2007).
[88.] Miguel Vences, Joachim Kosuch, Mark-Oliver RÃ¶del, Stefan LÃ¶tters, Alan Channing, Frank Glaw and Wolfgang BÃ¶hme, "Phylogeography of Ptychadena mascareniensis suggests transoceanic dispersal in a widespread African- Malagasy frog lineage," Journal of Biogeography, Vol. 31:593--601 (2004).
[89.] Ellen J. Censky, Karim Hodge, & Judy Dudley, "Over-water dispersal of lizards due to hurricanes," Nature, Vol. 395:556 (October 8, 1998).
[90.] C. Amedegnato 1993. African-American relationships in the Acridians (Insecta, Orthoptera). In: George W, Lavocat R, editors. The Africa-South America connection. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p 59--75, cited in Alain Houle, "The Origin of Platyrrhines: An Evaluation of the Antarctic Scenario and the Floating Island Model," American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Vol. 109:541--559 (1999).
[91.] C. J. Raxworthy, M. R. J. Forstner, & R. A. Nussbaum, "Chameleon radiation by oceanic dispersal," Nature, Vol. 415, 784--787 (February 14, 2002).
[92.] Nichols SW. 1988. Systematics and biogeography of West Indian Scaritinae (Coleoptera: Carabidae) (Florida, Mexico). Ph.D. thesis, Cornell University, cited in Alain Houle, "The Origin of Platyrrhines: An Evaluation of the Antarctic Scenario and the Floating Island Model," American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Vol. 109:541--559 (1999).
[93.] Miguel Vences, David R. Vieites, Frank Glaw, Henner Brinkmann, Joachim Kosuch, Michael Veith and Axel Meyer, "Multiple overseas dispersal in amphibians," Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, Vol. 270:2435--2442 (2003).
[94.] S. A. Trewick, "Molecular evidence for dispersal rather than vicariance as the origin of flightless insect species on the Chatham Islands, New Zealand," Journal of Biogeography. Vol. 27:1189--1200 (2000).
[95.] Kluge AG. 1969. The evolution and geographical origin of the New World Hemidactylus mabouiabrookii complex (Gekkonidae, Sauria). Misc Pub Mus Zool Univ Chicago 138:1--78, cited in Alain Houle, "The Origin of Platyrrhines: An Evaluation of the Antarctic Scenario and the Floating Island Model," American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Vol. 109:541--559 (1999).
[96.] Llewellyn D. Densmore III, and P. Scott White, "The Systematics and Evolution of the Crocodilia as Suggested by Restriction Endonuclease Analysis of Mitochondrial and Nuclear Ribosomal DNA," Copeia, Vol. 3:602--615 (1991), as discussed in Alain Houle, "The Origin of Platyrrhines: An Evaluation of the Antarctic Scenario and the Floating Island Model," American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Vol. 109:541--559 (1999).
[97.] Storch G. 1993. ''Grube Messel''andAfrican-South American faunal connections. In: George W, Lavocat R, editors. The Africa-South America connection. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p 76--86, cited in Alain Houle, "The Origin of Platyrrhines: An Evaluation of the Antarctic Scenario and the Floating Island Model," American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Vol. 109:541--559 (1999).
[98.] Simpson GG. 1953. Evolution and geography: an essay on historical biogeography with special reference to mammals. Eugene, OR: Oregon State System of Higher Education, cited in Alain Houle, "The Origin of Platyrrhines: An Evaluation of the Antarctic Scenario and the Floating Island Model," American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Vol. 109:541--559 (1999).
[99.] Wilhelm SchÃ¼le, "Mammals, vegetation and the initial human settlement of the Mediterranean islands: a palaeoecological approach," Journal of Biogeography, Vol. 20:399--412 (1993).
[100.] Gill BJ. 1993. The land reptiles of western Samoa. J R Soc N Z 23:79--89, cited in Alain Houle, "The Origin of Platyrrhines: An Evaluation of the Antarctic Scenario and the Floating Island Model," American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Vol. 109:541--559 (1999).
[101.] Stewart SG. 1990. Karyotypes of six rattlesnake (Crotalus) taxa of Baja California and selected Gulf Islands. Ph.D. thesis, California State University, Dominguez Hills, cited in Alain Houle, "The Origin of Platyrrhines: An Evaluation of the Antarctic Scenario and the Floating Island Model," American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Vol. 109:541--559 (1999).
[102.] Alan de Queiroz, "The resurrection of oceanic dispersal in historical biogeography," Trends in Ecology and Evolution, Vol.20(2):68-73 (February 2005).

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/03/sea_monkeys_are_the_tip_of_the032471.html#backfn86

--Further information on the TransAtlantic species listed: Maschalocephalus and another related genus are jungle-living epiphyte plants related to pineapples (Bromeliads) and Melatostomes are ornamental plants that humans make syrups and jellies out of: sheep and goats will not eat the leaves because of their high tannin content. The elephants that were supposed to have dispersed by swimming would evidently include the Canary Islands and elephant teeth and ivory fragments have been reported by Atlantis enthusiasts as being dredged up from the seabed near the Azores.

Best Wishes, Dale D.

Brazillian Moundbuilders

2012-02-26T01:10:00.000-08:00

While working on the Archaics and Hopewell Moundbuilders article I had found some additional interesting informatuion that I thought would go better as a separate article.

The statement I made that the ethnic groups of all the types at the Upper Cave does not mean they are adjacent on the chart: instead I was drawing attemtion to the fact that skull "B" of the robust series is one such out of the ethnic groups represented at the Upper cave Choukoudian, the (male) Capelinha skull separted out of the bottom row at right represents another group, represented by a (female) Upper Cave skull (The "Melanesian" one)and one of the CroMagnon-mixes is closest to the Upper Cave male skull (The skull C here is just a bit too far along into European Cromagnon morphology to count for that, but other skulls in the area are easily of that same "Eastern-Cromagnon" type) Nor yet is it possible the same assemblage crossed over the Bering straits together and marched down to Brazil unmodified to turn up there in the same asortment: the same assortment does NOT appear in North America at the time. So it looks like we once again have evidence of a multiethnic "Lemurian" power out of Sundaland="Mu" where all of these etnic groups were in regular asociation, and that this Sundaland "Mu" was capable of Transpacific voyages during the Pleistocene, by which they directly colonized South America before the Atlanteans arrived!

This also clears up another mystery: for decades reports had been coming out about the skulls at Lagoa Santa in Brazil, one of the associated habitation sites in the area, which alleged either Neanderthal or CroMagnon skuls were to be found there. Critics doubted the statements because they said both statements could not be right. The critics were wrong, there ARE both CroMagnon and Neanderthal skulls to be found in the area, we can tell from the chart. This is a most wonderful asociation. Some critics do not realise, there are thousands of skulls that have been uncovered.

http://www.cleber.com.br/sambaquis/cranios_sambaquis.html

Folder: Skulls Sambaquis
Click on the images to see them bigger

Copyright © 2005-2006 Bidegain Cleber Pereira. All rights reserved.

Please note, some of the Brazilian skulls have the type of cranial deformation as seen in Ice-Age Australia: others have more of the North American Moundbuilder shape and type of cranial deformation, which makes the skulls shorter and broader.
http://www.cleber.com.br/preston.html

Lemurian/Australoid remnant skull Left, Atlantean newcomers Right (African/Mechta type)

Shellmound-Builder (Reconstruction)

a large Brazilian Shellmound, about 45 feet tall: these mounds typically come in rounded or conical; mounds, rings, or in combination of rings and cones. They are made up of remnants of meals, but they also serve as ritual places or for burials.

a dolphin, Such sites give evidence for the exploitation of marine mammals as well as for fishing.

(yellow)clam shells

Archaic-type stone tools such as found in the mounds: these start from before 10000 years ago.

As posted on a Brazilian site: note the information given is at variance to the usual English-speaking world's version of world history:
www.planetaorganico.com.br

12.000 BC – Africa

In pre-historic times, around the year 12000 B.C., the first forms of agriculture (domestication of some grains and vegetable species) and cattle raising (domestication of animals) appeared, together with the first forms of agriculturist villages. In this period, [refuse from] the use of fire and of some tools, as well as of animal manure, became a part of the daily life of the urban agglomerates that gave birth to cities.["Pueblo" like structures in the Sahara go back to this very early date, as does pottery-DD]

Brazil – Before its discovery

In Brazil, before the coming of the Portuguese, the indian population living along the coastal areas would feed basically on fish and shelfish, abundant in the Brazilian coast. The alimentary residues thus resulting became fossils known as sambaquis. They also consumed roots (manioc, yams) and hunted little animals in the areas close to the woods.[This presumably for the several thousands of years since the end of the Ice Age-DD]
Please note, some of the analyses on the very oldest sambaquis human remains show that they had been raising and eating Caribbean yams (Dioscorea trifida)before and up until the time manioc (tapioca) became more popular

sambaqui pottery, surprisingly similar to the oldest pottery found in mounds in the Southern USA

Potsherds from Mauretania, cited on one website as parallel to Brazilian types of similar age

sambaquis

"Zoomorphic" (stone shark image)

sambaquis

"The inferior level of Algodao (PLID T00-0677) was
dated to (7860± 80)BP or C14-cal-BC 7050-6450. Such an
early date would be considered wrong if there had not been
three other single dates, out of the expected range of occurrence
of shellmounds and so remarkably contemporaneous"
[11] T.A. Lima, K.D. Macario, R.M. Anjos, P.R.S. Gomes, M.M.
Coimbra, and D. Elmore. Submitted to Nucl. Instr. Meth. in
Phys.Res.(2002).
[12] T.A. Lima, K.D. Macario, R.M. Anjos, P.R.S. Gomes, M.M.
Coimbra,D.Elmore.SubmittedtoRadiocarbon(2002).
BrazilianJournalofPhysics,vol. 33,no. 2,June,2003

Brazilian Journal of Physics,vol. 36,no. 1A,March,2006
Electron Spin Resonance Dating of Shells from the Sambaqui(ShellMound)Capelinha,S˜aoPaulo,BrazilA. Kinoshitaa,b, L. Figutyc, and O. Baffaa
a Universidade de S˜ao Paulo, DFM-FFCLRP, Av. Bandeirantes, 3900, 14040-901, Ribeir˜ao Preto, SP, Brazil
b Universidade do Sagrado Corac¸˜ao, R. Irm˜a Arminda 10-50 , 17011-160, Bauru, SP, Brazil and
c Universidade de S˜ao Paulo Universidade de S˜ao Paulo,
Museu de Arqueologia e Etnologia, Setor de Arqueologia. Av. Prof. Almeida Prado 1466,
Cidade Universit´aria 05508-900, S˜ao Paulo, SP, Brazil
Received on12September,2005;accepted on10 November,2005
Capelinha is a fluvial sambaqui (BrazilianShellMound) located in the Ribeira Valley in the State of S˜ao Paulo that is being studied. It is one of the oldest sambaquis located along a river dated so far in this region. The use of ESR to date other shells stimulated our group to apply this method to the Capelinha site. Shells from land snails (Megalobulimus sp.) obtained in two levels of excavations were analyzed; one of them was in contact with a skeleton that was dated by C-14. The archeological doses obtained were (8.05±0.07) Gy and (9.50±0.03) Gy. Since the last site was previously dated by C-14 (Beta –Analytics, Beta 153988) giving: 8860 +/- 60 years BP (conventional age) and 8180 to 7710 years BC (calibrated age), the archeological dose found for this shell was used to determine the local rate of (0.93 to 0.98) mGy/year, that aggress with other surveys done in the region. Using this dose rate the age of the second shell was found to be 8.14 to 8.73 ky BP that agrees with the stratigraphy of the site.

SAMBAQUIS THE BRAZILIAN SHELL MOUNDS:
WHAT IS THAT ALL ABOUT?
Sheila Mendonça de SOUZA
Departamento de Endemias, Escola Nacional de Saúde Pública Sérgio Arouca,
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Brasil, sferraz@ensp.fiocruz.br
Claudia Rodrigues CARVALHO
Setor de Antropologia Biológica, Departamento de Antropologia, Museu Nacional,
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Brasil, claudia@mn.ufrj.br

Abstract: Brazilian sambaquis, as other shell mounds all around the world, are prehistoric sites that represent extraordinary strategies of coastal adaptation. They are intentionally build and preserve cultural as well as biological remains. Thousands of burials offer precious material for bioarchaeological investigation. Differences in cultural and environmental conditions along 6.000 years, as well as a peculiar geographical distribution along the southeastern coast of Brazil, make these sites interesting subjects to investigate adaptability and health. Their disapearance was about 1.300 years before present. Their possible contact with ceramists and other people are still to be explained. Key words: Sambaqui, shell mound, Brazil, coastal adaptation, funerary monuments Resumé: Les sambaquis brésiliens, comme d’autres amas coquilles du monde, sont parmi les groupes prehistoriques du Brèsil qui signalent le développement d’une estrategie extraordinaire d’adaptation au litoral. Sa construction fut intentionnel et c’est possible y rencontrer des vestiges culturels ainsi que biologiques. Les milliers de sépultures preservées aux sambaquis sont une source assez importante pour la recherche bio-archéologique. La distribution geographique peculiaire, au long du litoral sud et sud-est, ainsi que les changements culturels et d’environnement pendant 6.000 d’annés, faisent les sambaquis très interresants pour les investigations sur la santé et l’adaptabilité. Sa disparition à l’envion 1300 ans BP et la possibilité du contact aux groupes ceramistes sont encore sujets qui restent a expliquer. Mots clés: Sambaqui, amas de coquilles, Brezil, adptation au litoral, monument funeraire The symposium BIOARCHAEOLOGY AT THE MIDST OF SHELLS was proposed to discuss similarities and differences between the shell mounds in Portugal and Brazil. To help the participants discussing the proposed theme the organizers decided to add brief comments to the oral presentation presenting the state of art on the archaeology of the marine and riverside shell mounds. This paper reports the archaeology of the Brazilian marine sambaquis, emphasizing the interest in recovering and analyzing more bioarchaeological data about the people who built those mounds. Sambaqui is the local name for Brazilian shell mounds, a very common type of prehistoric site. Similar to other ones that are found all around the world, they are also burial places. Preserving human skeletons, the sambaquis are extraordinary windows that let us know more about lifestyle and health in the past. In Brazil the sambaquis does exist especially along the southeastern coast, as an expression of a new economic strategy of intense exploitation of the environments close to the estuaries, lagoons, mangroves and sea. The biggest marine sambaquis are found in Santa Catarina State, but others of smaller sizes are also found in Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, Paraná and Espírito Santo States, where more than one thousand of them have already been registered. Most of them have been destroyed before any research. About 5% of them were minimally excavated and less than 1% provided human remains for scientific studies. These sites are composed by layers of mollusk shells, fish bones and other faunal remains charcoal, polished as well as flaked lithic instruments as axes, grinding stones, arrow points among others. Archeological structures such as hearths and burials with different types of funerary offerings are also found (Prous, 1992; Figuti, 1993; Gaspar, 2000; Gaspar et al., 2008). Although excavated for more than one hundred years, there is no consensus among scholars about them and classifications are based in different criteria such as morphology, geographical location, shell composition, etc. Zooliths, beautiful polished stone sculptures representing animals are found in some of them (Prous, 1992). Ceramics is present in a small number of sites, grouped in the same area. The interpretation of sambaqui has changed through time. First they were viewed as midden left over by small mollusk eating nomadic bands. Today they are seen as monumental constructions intentionally built as landmarks by sedentary fisher groups (DeBlasis XXX, Figuti, XXX, DeMasi, XXX). Despite temporal and regional variation, there are unifying factors among the sambaquis that allow to try to interpret them as a “cultural unit”, as proposed by Gaspar (1994/1995). Eating, feasting, working, burying the dead and daily activities were carried out at the same sopot. Differences among the sites are not necessary because of cultural differences but they may express adaptability along the coast, changing economy, feeding habits and even the use of certain artifacts, as strongly suggested by the variability even inside the same site. Today the sambaquis are recognized as the expression of intentional accumulation of shells and soil to build platforms. In Brazil these territorial marks can reach 30m high and 400m length (Fig. 8.1). Such a building effort certainly required a big amount of energy, a lot of social organization. Big groups and long periods of continuous occupation occurred in some sites. There are hundreds of burials in the biggest sambaquis. Most of the sambaquis are grouped in coastal areas signaling to the areas rich in natural resources and fresh water supply, but also to some king of social articulation. Archaeological remains proved that fishing, collecting shellfish/plants and chasing terrestrial and marine animals were the main economic activities. Low mobility, abundance of resources, bigger groups, some social complexity and possible social interaction between sites is supposed to have occurred (Lima, 1999-2000). Ideological, aesthetic and religious development is inferred from the burials. Coastal environment provides good and abundant proteins for food. The Atlantic forest and the restingas provide fruits and other starch sources. The existence of predictable natural resources along the coast was a positive factor to explain the success of sambaqui lifestyle. Sharing simple and efficient artifacts made of mammal and shark teeth, fish and mammal bones, shells, simple flaked rock crystals and pebble stones, the well succeeded sambaquis expanded in time and space. Amazing polished stone artifacts (Fig. 8.2) in the graves point to cultural variability along the coast. As of now, about 1.600 skeletons were recovered in 60 different Brazilian sites. One of the biggest questions for bioarchaeologists today is if they are able to elucidate the unity and diversity of that people. For many decades questions about the biological characteristics of the sambaqui people have been asked (Alvim, 1978). New answers to ancient questions come from the studies on paleopathology, paleodiet, paleodemography. Geographical distribution of the sambaquis and their temporal persistence (9.000 to 1.300 BP). Brazilian sites distinguish from sites in other parts of the world, this richness points to a well succeeded strategy in tropical environments. At the same time it helps to explain variability in culture and biological cost of each lifestyles. 49 Fig. 8.2. Sculptures made of polished stones representing coastal fauna are characteristics of Brazilian shellmounds These characteristics are guidelines to discuss paleoepide-miological models for sambaquis. Their adaptability was proved by the ability to explore different ecotones along the productive and predictable coastal waters, resulting in the intense exploration of the mangroves, beaches, shallow water lagoons, rocky coastal reefs, sandy plains and estuarine areas as fishing-hunting-collecting fields. Holocene sambaqui lifestyle had the climax between 5.000 and 3.000 y.b.p. The consequences of the contact with other prehistoric people is not clear, in special the ceramists that arrived at the coast 800 to 1.300 years before present (Gaspar, 1994-1995). When the villages of the Itararé tradition and the Tupi and Guarani finally dominated the coast, sambaqui people was not there any more. For some authors, lifestyle based on the water born resources was simply adapted to include domestication of plants like manioc, maize and yams. The systematic use of seasonal natural carbohydrate provided by seasonal sources such as Brazilian pine could happen along with the water protein intake in coastal environments. New data on paleonutrition may help to elucidate this hypo-thesis in the next future (Weslowski et al., 20007). A great number of coastal sites are not characteristic sambaquis but share common artifacts and economic characteristics, suggesting that changes and diversity may have just been adaptative. Village settlements with or without ceramics can be found especially along the last millennia in the areas where sambaquis were dominant 4.000 or more years before. Comparative studies of groups living in true sambaquis and other sites will possibly help to elucidate their possible biological relationships. Concerning our present research, some questions are in the base of the bioarchaeology of the sambaquis: Were all the sambaqui groups similar? What was the biologic impact o their cultural differences? What was the impact of their lifestyles in health? Were they really well adapted as supposed? Which were their biological relationships to
50 Referências bibliográficas ALVIM, M.C. de Me. 1978. Caracterização da morfologia craniana de populações pré-histõricas ddo litoral meridional brasileiro (Paraná e Santa Catarina).
Arquivos de Anatomia e Antropologia do Instituto Souza Marques (Rio de Janeiro) III: 293-318.
De MASI, M.A.N. 1999. Prehistoric hunter gatherer mobility on the southern brazilian coast: Santa Ca-tarina Island. Tese de Doutorado: Stanford University.
FIGUTI, L. 1993. O homem pré-histórico, o molusco e o sambaqui: considerações sobre a subsistência dos povos sambaquianos. Revista do Museu de Arqueologia e Etnologia (São Paulo) 3: 67-80.
GASPAR, M.D. 1994-1995. Espaços, ritos funerários e identidade pré-histórica. Revista do Museu de Arqueologia e Etnologia (São Paulo) 8(2):221-237.
GASPAR, M.D.; De BLASIS, P.; FISH, S.K.; FISH, P.R. 2008. Sambaqui (Shell mound) societies of coastal Brazil. In: Helaine Silverman & William H. Isabelli (Eds.) Handbook of South American Archaeology. Springer: p. 319-338.
LIMA, T.A. 1999-2000. Em Busca dos Frutos do mar: os Pescadores-coletores do Litoral Centro-sul do Brasil. Revista USP, 44:270-332.
PROUS, A. 1992. Arqueologia brasileira. Editora da Universidade de Brasília: Brasília.
WESOLOWSKI, V.; SOUZA, S.M.F. M. de;
REINHARD, K.J.; CECCANTINNI, G. 2007. Grânulos de amido e fitólitos em cálculos dentários humanos> contribuições ao estudo do modo de vida e subsistência dos grupos sambaquianos do litoral sul do Brasil. Revista do Museu de Arqueologia e Etnologia

Sambaquis (shell mounds) of the Brazilian coast

Quaternary International 239 (2011) 51e60

Gustavo Wagnera,*, Klaus Hilberta, Dione Bandeirab, Maria Cristina Tenórioc,Maria Mercedes Okumurad
aPontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul, Av. Ipiranga, 6681, Partenon, CEP: 90619-900, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, BrazilbMuseu Arqueológico de Sambaqui de Joinville, Rua Dona Francisca, 600, Centro, CEP: 89201-250 Joinville, Santa Catarina, BrazilcUniversidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro -Museu Nacional, s/n, Quinta da Boa Vista, CEP: 20940-040, Rio de Janeiro, BrazildUniversity of Cambridge, Fitzwilliam Street, Cambridge, CB2 1QH, United Kingdom
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Available online 21 March 2011
a b s t r a c t
The Brazilian shell mounds called sambaquis have been well known since the 16th century when clergy,travelers, and members of the colonial administration wrote the ?rst narratives of Portuguese America.However,itwasonlyduring the secondquarterof the 19thcentury that, under the ordersof theImperialGovernment, the ?rst scienti?c expeditions carried out systematic research on these archaeological sites.The sambaquis ofBrazil arefound in the costal regions of the southand southeast, fromthe coastof whatis today Espírito Santo State to the Rio Grande do Sul State. The oldest dates come from the states Rio deJaneiroand São Paulo,indicating that therewas an occupation asfar backas the 6th centuryBC. The sitesare to be found in coves, sandy plains dominated by beach-ridges, rocky outcrops, mangrove groves,lagoons,estuariesorlargebays.Thislandscapevariabilityisequallyexpressedinthematerialcultureandresource exploitation, which are characterized by a variety of adaptive strategies and diversity betweenthe various cultural contexts.
2011 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
The earliest references to the large accumulation of molluscvalves in Brazilian territory are attributed to the Jesuit FernãoCardim in 1584, who described the process of shell accumulation,originating from momentary occupations, for the purpose ofmollusc collection and subsequently for smoking on a móquem(grill-like device used to smoke meats) to supply the inlandvillages. In 1585, the Jesuit José de Anchieta mentioned islands ofshells found along the Brazilian coast. In 1587, Gabriel Soares deSousa described in detail the molluscs used by the Tupinambá ofthecoastofBahiaforconstructingtheshellmounds.The1797workof the Jesuit Gaspar da Madre Deus described the funeral customsduring seasonal occupations on the surface of the sites. However,during the 19th century the sambaquis captured the interestof theEmperor Dom Pedro II, who sent several scienti?c commissions tostudy the nation’s pre-historic past, and even personally oversawthe excavations of the sambaquis of Rio Sant’Ana, in Santos (Souza,1991; Wagner, 2009a).
In Brazil, these sites are found more commonly between thetemperate latitudes (Fig. 1) while they become less frequent at warmer or colder latitudes (cf. Fairbridge, 1976). There are refer-ences to shell mounds in the states of the northeast such as Bahia,Maranhão and Pará, although information is still inadequate toinclude them in the typical sambaqui occupations of the Braziliancoast (Prous, 1992; Lima, 1999e2000; Tenório, 2003; Wagner,2009b).
Thearcheologicalsitesconsideredtobe sambaquisexistonlyonthe coast of the south and southeast regions of Brazil and includethe states of Espírito Santo,Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo,Paraná, SantaCatarinaandRioGrandedoSul(Fig.1).Thisarcheologicalcultureischaracterized by the outstanding technical quality of stone pol-ishing, seen in zoomorphic sculptures of signi?cant aesthetic andartistic value. These sculptures are called zooliths, and they wereconsidered as fossil guides to identify sites pertaining to the sam-baqui archeological culture.
However, research of the sambaquis of the Brazilian coast hasnotbeendoneinahomogeneousfashionovertheyears.Duringthe1950s, research was concentrated in the south and southeastregions with an emphasis on the states of São Paulo and Paraná.During the following decades, the investments and the interestswere relocated toward the state of Santa Catarina, and during the1980s and 1990s research emphasis shifted toward Rio de Janeiro.Currently most of the research attention is geared toward SantaCatarina. The research in the border states of the sambaquiarcheological culture, Espírito Santo and Rio Grande do Sul, have
dFig. 1. Map of Brazil and the Brazilian states mentioned in the text.G. Wagner et al. / Quaternary International 239 (2011) 51e605
received isolated efforts and have been restricted to a few institu-tions, especially in the 1960s and then in the 1980s.Attempts to achieve synthesis have been proposed, both fromthe perspective of the material culture as well as from the bio-archeological point of view (Schmitz, 1984; Netto, 1885; Neves,1988; Ihering, 1904; Prous, 1992; Lima, 1999e2000; Okumura,2008). However, the burial patterns, the archaeofaunal assem-blages, the material cultures, the settlement patterns, and theexplored environments are very diverse, hampering the ability tode?ne the characteristics of speci?c cultural areas.Sambaquisarede?nedasarcheologicalsitesthatcontainaspeci?ctool set made of shells, bones, and stone associated with a matrixmade up of mollusc shells and ?sh bones, where also are normallyencounteredburials.Actually,this ismerelyageneralway to de?netheseoccupationsthatextendalongthesouthandsoutheastcoastofBrazil, where regionally speci?c characteristics, in cultural materialaswellastheinternalstructureofthesites,demonstratethediversityoftherelatedculturalcontexts.Theterm“shellmounds”willbeusedin this paper to refer to the archeological sites made up of layers ofshells related to any other of the archeological cultures that areseparatefromthesambaquimound-builders.
Intermsoftheculturalconnectionbetweenthesambaquisthatare found in this vast territory, Gaspar (2000) states that at leastthe sambaquis of the south and southeast of Brazil were built bygroups that shared the same ethnic identity. Comparing the dataof more than 900 sambaquis, Gaspar discovered that they existsimultaneously as a living area, a burial spot, and an intentionalcollection of animal remains. Although there are unique regionalcharacteristics, this “triple space association” is the key thatallows the population that built sambaquis to be de?ned as anethnic group that is distinct from other populations that weretheir contemporaries.
2. History of sambaqui research in Brazil
The ?rst references to the existence of sambaquis along theBrazilian coast date as far back as the 16th century. Since then, these archeological sites have been the target of research andspeculation, providing current archeologists with an extensive setof information about the peoples that built them and theirculturalcontents.
The information produced during the 16th, 17th, and 18thcentury is characterized by the observations from travelers, cler-gymen, and members of the colonial administration that some-times witnessed the events related to the sambaquis. An intensedebate about the origins of the sambaquis was started during the19th century. The opinions were divided between three majorschools of thought:
1) The naturalist, represented primarily by Hermann von Iher-ing, advocating the ideas of the natural origin of the sambaquis asa result of the marine oscillations and the coastal rising (epi-rogenisis) dating back to the Tertiary period, and
2) The artificialist, represented primarily byLadisláu Netto,whobelieved the sambaquis were the results of pre-historic humanactivity. The ?rst thirty years of the 20th century were marked bya heated debate and the strengthening of a conciliatory positionbased on the observations of the artificial sambaquis placed on topof the natural accumulation of mollusc valves
.3) The mixed school of thought, ?nally, contributed to clarify theissue and bring an end to the debates (Wagner, 2009a).During the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, a modern scienti?capproach was applied to sambaqui archeology, primarily throughthecontributionsofforeignresearcherssuchasEmperaire,Laming,Hurt and Bryan. The excavations carried out by these researchersstimulated many Brazilian archeologists from the universities andmuseums of the states of Santa Catarina, Paraná, São Paulo and Riode Janeiro, promoting more intense excavations and systematicresearch as well as comparative studies between different samba-quis (Prous,1992; Lima,1999+2000).
New Archeology and Processual Archaeology considerablyin?uenced the research of Brazilian sambaquis from the 1980sexploring human adaptation to different environments and thespeci?c exploitation strategies of the resources, as well as thedevelopment of research themes such as zooarcheology and bio-archeology.OnlyduringthistimeperiodwerethesambaquisofRioGrandedoSulthetargetofsystematicresearch,connectingthemtothe group of sambaqui occupations of the Brazilian coast (Lima,1990+2000).
3. Sambaquis of the Brazilian coast
The Sambaquis of the State of Rio Grande do Sul, in the south-ernmost region of Brazil, have been targeted for archeologicalresearch since the final years of the 19th century, when naturalists(andlaterethnologists)begantravellingintheregion.TheworksofT. Bischoff (1887), C. von Koseritz (1884), E. Roquette-Pinto (1906)and A. Serrano (1937) are among the most important. The areasurrounding the cities of Tramandaí and Torres, along the state’snorthern coast (Fig. 2), is the area of the highest frequency ofsambaquis (Wagner, 2009b).
The lithic assemblage includes polished axe blades, polishers,weightsfor fishingnets andlines,hammerstones,flakes,aswellasthermophores and lithic vessels of different shapes (Kern, 1997).The raw materials used as support were the acidic stones such asbasalt and dolerite, as well as different types of sandstone andbeachrock (Wagner, 2009a). The Torres sites were mined for limeextraction from the beginning of 19th century, and only somecollectionssurvive,savedandstoredbyresearchinstitutionsinSãoPaulo and Rio de Janeiro, in museums of Porto Alegre, or in privatecollections. However, during the miningof these sites ?fty zoolithswere discovered (Kern, 1970; Prous, 1977). Tools made from boneare rare but typical artifacts made of this material are needles andprojectile points from mammal bone, hooks from fish bones,spatulas from cetacean bone, and pendants from the Carcharhini-dae family of sharks (Jacobus,1997).
The malacological content of the sites in Rio Grande do Sul isuniquewhenitiscomparedtotheregionsintherestofthecountry.The shells of the Mesodesma mactroides (yellow clam) species,representtheonlyshellcomponentofthesesiteslayers,withsomerare occurrence of Donax hanleyanus (wedge clam) or the evenmore rare gastropod species. This peculiarity is due to a uniquecharacteristic of the State’s littoral zone and shoreface, character-ized by a gradual slope creating an extensive intertidal zone (Rios,1994).
The environments that were chosen for sambaqui occupationare the plateaus on top of beach-ridges in the area between thecoastal lakes and the Atlantic Ocean. The few Rio Grande do Sulsites with radiocarbondating available point to arecent occupationbetween 3420 ? 60 BP (sambaqui do Camping), 3350 ? 50 BP(sambaqui do Recreio), and 1110 ? 40 BP (sambaqui da Dorva)(Wagner, 2009b).
Set at an altitude of 22 m, on top of a rocky outcrop, the sam-baqui de Itapeva is an exception when compared to the sambaquisettlement pattern of the region. However, the radiocarbon date of3130?40BPplacesthesitewithinthesamechronologicalhorizonof the sambaquis settlement in the far south of Brazil.Between southern Santa Catarina and Espírito Santo State, thecoast is marked by a series of rocky outcrops that belong to theSerradoMar.Theseformationsconstrainthedevelopmentofsandyplateaus and ample beaches. In these regions, the sambaquis areconcentrated along the lagoon areas and in the inland portions oflarge bays.
In the State of Santa Catarina, the geomorphological settingsupon which the sambaquis were built are characterized by diverseenvironments such as islands, the inland portion of bays,mangroves, channels, beach-ridges, rocky outcrops, and sandy dunes. The information acquired so far suggests that the firstsettlementwas around 7570-7320 cal BC (Rio Caipora), continuinguntil 710 ? 95 BC (sambaqui da Caieira), showing an ample chro-nological frame of around 6000 years, preceding the beginning ofEuropean colonization by 200 years.
The subsistence pattern denotes an exploitation of marine andterrestrial environment. The molluscs that make up the archeo-logical layers originate from the bay and the mangrove areas.Among the most utilized are the berbigão (Anomalocardia bra-siliana), the oyster (Ostrea sp.) and the bacucú (Modiolus brasi-liensis). The fishing activities are represented by a variety of toolsmade of bone in the shape of hooks, lances, harpoons, and needlesformaintenanceofthenets.Fishingnetweightsfromstonepebblesare commonly found with polished, perforated, or flaked grooves.Adzes and polished ax blades suggest that boats were built allow-ing for the exploration of the various environments from themultitudeofseaandriverislandsoccupiedbythesambaquigroupsalong the coast of Santa Catarina, Paraná, São Paulo, and Rio deJaneiro. In Santa Catarina sites there is the occurrence of realisticzoomorphic stone sculptures, pecked stones, hammer stones,grindstones on fixed support and lithic vessels with differentshapes.
The gathering of plants was also part of the dietary assemblageof the sambaqui peoples. Research carried out on human teethindicatesthattheconsumptionofvegetableswasimportantfortheMorrodoOuroandRioCompridosites(Fig.3).Thepresenceofstarchgrains from Discorea sp. (yams), identified in skeleton teeth of thesambaqui Morro do Ouro is an example of this consumption(Wesolowski, 2000, 2007).
The southern region of the State of Santa Catarina is character-ized by the presence of monumental sambaquis with sites 30 minheight and 500 m in length. Sixty-five sambaquis in the area havebeen studied, all dating to between 5270 ? 60 BP (Ilhotinha) and710?95BP(sambaquidaCaieira)(Fig.4),andsetalongthemarginsof palaeo-lagoons that were the epicenters of the occupation(Kneip, 2004; Giannini et al., 2010). The sites vary in format,volume, distribution, and composition, where the older ones aresmaller,indicatingasingleconstructionepisode.Duringtheperiodbetween 4000 and 2000 BP, there was an increased demographicexpansion and an increase in the amount of sambaquis. It is duringthis period, between 2890 ? 55 and 1805 ? 65 BP, that the sambaqui Jabuticabeira II (one of the largest and considereda communal cemetery), was built using superimposed layers ofshells and sediment over burials (Villagrán, 2008). The sambaquiswerea ritual space related tothe dead and wereprimarily built fortheir symbolic meaning (Gaspar, 2000). Based on these regionalcharacteristics, DeBlasis et al. (2007) suggest that the group ofsambaquis people developed a series of more elaborate socialorganization characteristics using communal efforts for publicbuildings and ceremonial activities as well as the development ofsocialinequalityintheformofhierarchiesandstronglyestablishedleadership.Theauthorssuggestthatbetween2000BPand1500BPthere were changes in the depositional characteristics of the siteswith the progressive substitution of shells for other organics sedi-mentsandwoodcharcoalintheupperlayers.This period coincideswith the settlement of other archeological cultures in the regionand environmental changes such as the progressive drying up orreduction in extension of the lagoons, which resulted in a lowersaline concentration of thewater and the decrease in the supply ofsalt-water molluscs.
In Florianópolis along Santa Catarina’s central coast, a researchproject focused on the mobility of the mound-builders in the areasurrounding Conceição Lake. The project sought to relate perma-nent and temporary settlements to the main productivity of thelagoon environments and to identify seasonality bystudying stableoxygen isotopes, shell coloration, and stable 13/12C and 15/14Nisotopesfromcollagenremovedfromhumanandanimalbones.Theresults indicated that these populations had a low level of mobilityand a diet based on the consumption of ?sh (DeMasi, 2001).In the sites established in the inland portion of the bays, forexample the Babitonga Bay of the northern coast (sambaquiEspinheiros II in Joinville), Micropogonia furnieri (croaker) andBairdiella sp. (perch) (Figuti and Klökler, 1996) are the mostcommon ?shes. For sites established on sandy beaches facing theocean (sambaquis da Enseada I and Bupeva II, São Francisco do Sul)the species most consumed were the Trichiurus lepturus (belt?sh)and the Conodon nobilis (Bared Grunt). There was also theconsumptionofcrustaceansbuttheirpreservationinthesambaquisdeposits is more problematic (Bandeira,1992, 2004).
At the sambaqui Cubatão I, located at the mouth of the CubatãoRiver in Joinville, fragments of braided vegetable ?berand woodenstakes were found in the early strata, suggesting the existence ofa complex architectural structure. The study of this sites showsa construction process using two different techniques that corre-spond to two different strata: the ?rst is made of layers composedbyusingplantmaterialandstonefragments(stacksandknotswithwoodand?bers)andthesecondmadefromaddingdifferentlayersof mollusc shells and sediment (Bandeira et al., 2009).The archeological research in the State of Paraná began to beeffectiveinthe1950s(EmperaireandLaming,1956),andduringtheearly years of the following decade (Hurt and Blasi, 1960). Theeffortswereintensi?edafterthestartof theNationalArcheologicalResearch Program (PRONAPA), between 1965 and 1970 whenseveral sambaquis excavations were started in the Paranaguá Bay(Rauth, 1967, 1971). On the basis of the paleoenvironmentalreconstructions proposed by Bigarella (1950e1951), Rauthattempted to identify the way of life and the group establishmentpatternsofthesambaquispeopleinthegiantNhundiaquarapalaeo-bay, which was gradually reduced due to sediment accretion (silt-ing) from rivers deposits that transformed it into the Paranaguá(Fig. 5).
Similarly to the sambaquis of Santa Catarina State, the sites inParaná were basically built using accumulated shells of Anom-alocardia brasiliana, Ostrea sp. and Modiolus brasiliensis, sometimesresultinginmoundsmorethan21mhigh.Thechronologythatwasobtained for these sambaquis indicates that the occupation periodwas between 6540 ? 150 BP (sambaqui do Ramal), 6030 ? 130 BP(sambaqui Porto Maurício) on the central coast and 1540 ? 150 BP(sambaqui Ilha dos Ratos), on the southern coast (Parellada, 2008).The lithic tools found during excavation include polished axeblades, hammer stones, pecked stones, choppers, chopping tools,zoolithes and grindstones (Hurt and Blasi, 1960). The bone-madetools include harpoon points, spatulas, and adornments. Projectile points made from oyster valves were also found and these areunique to the sambaquis of this region.Thesambaquisfoundonthecoastof theState ofSão Paulowerethe subjects of detailed research since the ?rst decades of the 20thcentury (Krone, 1914), and this research was intensi?ed as of the1950s and 1960s through international excavation programs(Emperaire and Laming,1956).
The most researched areas were Cananéia-Iguape where 107sambaquis were found, all located on the continent and adjacentislands (Krone, 1914; Uchôa and Garcia, 1983). A main part of theresearcheffortwastheunderstandingofthestratigraphicconstructofthesites.Accordingtosomeauthors,layerscomposedofasingleshell taxon were linked to episodes of rapid accumulation whilemore heterogeneous layers were considered to be the result oflonger occupation periods. Efforts were also spent to reconstructthechronologicalsequenceoftheoccupations,usingthesambaquisas spatial-temporal markers for the variation of sea levels (Martinet al.,1984; Callipo, 2004).
The malacological composition of these sambaquis, generallymatches the species found in the Santa Catarina and Paraná, withOstreasp.valvesbeingthemaincomponent.Inthesouthernregion,sambaquis made of Anomalocardia brasiliana are also found. Themost common lithic tools of the sambaquis of São Paulo Stateinclude simple used quartz ?akes, scrapers, ground stones (gener-ally obtained from basalt and diabase) hammer stones, stonepolishers, grooved abraders and zoolithes.
The state of São Paulo stands out because of the presence ofsambaquis that are dated before the Alithermal (6500-5000 BP):Maratuá dated at 7803 plus or minus 1300 BP (this date is often considereddoubtful) and Cambriu Grande dated 7870 plus or minus 80 BP (Fig. 6).The coast of Rio de Janeiro is characterized by heterogeneity,both in the distribution of the sambiquis as well as their geo-morphologic character. A detailed evaluation of the site locationsallowscertainareastobeobservedwheretheoccupationsoccurina concentrated fashion.
The region of the cities of Parati and Angra dos Reis, in IlhaGrande Bay, has a jagged coastline, with several coves, bays, andsmall peninsulas as well as rocky islands. The beaches and thesandy stretches are not very developed, and the sites are predom-inantly located in mangrove ?ood plains, estuaries, or islands.On one of the islands is the Algodão site, one of the oldest sitesof the Brazilian coast dated at 7860 ? 80 years BP (Fig. 7). A morerecent layer was dated at 3350 ? 80 BP, a date much closer to thetypical chronology of the region: 3060 ? 40 BP for the sambaquisIlhote do Leste and Ponta do Leste around 2880 ? 40 BP (Tenório,2003).
On the Guaratiba plain, about 100 km to the north there isanother region of concentrated sites. The region is an area oftransition between a marine environment and a continental one,crisscrossed by several tidal channels. The sambaquis observed inthis region are primarilyassociated with the tidal channelsand aresmallisolatedreliefs in themidstof sandyplains. The onlyexistingdatingisfromthesambaquiZéEspinhothatindicatesanoccupationat around 2260 ? 160 BP.
On the east bank of the Guanabara Bay there are two sambaquiconcentration areas: on the Magé plain and the Itaipu beach. TheMagé plain is characterized by a low-lying area with marineterraces, ?ood plains and river deltas where the sambaquis arelocalized in mangrove groves(Fig. 8). On theItaipu beach therearesites on the sand formation that separates Camboinhas Lake fromthe Guanabara Bay. The sambaqui de Camboinhas has one of theoldestdatesfortheBraziliancoast:7958?224BP.Thesitealsohastwo more dates, 2562 ? 160 BP and 2,328 ? 136, closer to thechronology of the surrounding sambaquis such as Duna PequenaToward the northeasternpart of the State, there are fewer sites.Thesitesbegintoreappearafter50kmofcoastline,nearthecityofSaquarema,wherethelakeregionofRiodeJaneirobegins.Thisareais characterized by crystalline rock relief that act as dividersbetween the two major drainage basins that feed Saquarema Lake.Herethe sambaquis are concentrated along the plains of the inlandsandbanks,facingthelake(Barbosa,2007).Afterabout50kmthereis another concentration of sites, located on the Cabo Frio Cape. Inthis region the sambaquis are found in groups located on beaches,channels, or rocky outcrops with an elevation of up to 50 m asl.TheSãoJoãoRiverplainischaracterizedbyaslightlyinclinedareasubjecttoconstant?oodingduetothetidesystem.Mostofthesitesare found inland, between 3 and 10 km from the current coastline.They are connected to palaeo-lagoons, small rivers and lowlands,andtheyhavebeendatedbetween3670?80ontheIlhadaBoaVistaII and1920 ? 60 BP for theIlha da Boa Vista IV (Tenório, 2003).The analysis of the material culture distribution found in thesambaquis of Rio de Janeiro state allows certain patterns to beobserved. Lithic tools include portable grinders, axe blades,grooved abraders, mortars, hammer stones, anvils, grindstone on?xedsupportandquartz?akeswithusededgesfordirecthandling.The lack of pendants is notable in the Saquarema, Cabo Frio Cape,and the São João plain regions. Dyed pebbles were not found ineither the Cabo Frio Cape or the São João plain. In terms of bone-made artifacts, several points and double points are part of theassemblages, but only a few perforated vertebrae and teeth werefound in the sites of the São João plain. Teeth with multiple perforations, spatulas, and stingray points were more commonlyfound at the Ilha Grande Bay and the lakes region of Saquarema.Finally,the malacological artifacts are less frequent, and differentlydistributed.Theelementthatstandsoutthemostaretheelaboratescrapers made of Callista maculata. These are only found in certainsites of the Ilha Grande Bay, the Cabo Frio bay, and the São Joãoplain. It is worth noting the presence, along the coast of Rio deJaneiro (except the Cabo Frio Cape) of Strombus costatus (milkconch) with cut marks.
The coast of the state of Espírito Santo, on the northern edge ofthesambaquiextent,hasnotbeenmuchresearchedyet.Ingeneral,the sambaquis found in this area are along Vitória Bay or on thesandyplainsofthenorth,linkedtothemainriverdeltasupto8kmfrom the coast. The layers of these sites are mostly made up ofOstrea sp., but Anomalocardia brasiliana, Crassostrear hizophorae(oyster), Mytella sp. and Lucina pectinata (thick lucine) can also befound (Salles-Cunha,1963; Orssich,1964; Perota,1971,1974).The most common lithic artifacts are quartz ?akes made fromdirect percussion without any additional ?nishing, cutting instru-ments,andscrapers.Therearealsopolishedandsemi-polishedaxeblades made of quartz, used ?akes, pecking stones, choppers,shopping tools and scrapers. The bone artifacts include projectilepoints, pendants made of different mammal teeth and perforated?sh vertebrae. Burials are typically found in cemented levels ofshells with a high content of wood charcoal and ashes, covered bya red substance and with polished axe blades (Salles-Cunha,1963;whencomparedtotheothersambaquisinthestate.Theyarefoundin low-lying areas, subject to flooding, in the middle of mangroveand they have very pronounced terrigenous strata (Orssich,1964).A date of 1435 ? 80 shows the recent occupation of the region(Perota,1974).These are sometimesgroupedas “pre-ceramic sites”andconsideredasseparatefromtherestofthegroupofsambaquis.4. Bioarchaeology(biological anthropology)of thesambaquisAlthough the researchcarried out in the sambaquis of Brazil hasspanned several aspects that characterize thesesites,including thefauna, the settlement pattern and formation processes, the ?eld inwhich the most research and knowledge has been produced is,unquestionably, bioarcheology. The skeletons found in the samba-quis have always caught attention, both from the layman and theacademic world. Indeed, for a long time, these sites have beenconsideredcemeteriesandforthisreasonitisimportanttopresentmore details about this research.
Traditionally, the analysis of human bone material from coastalBrazilian sites was focused on the description or quanti?cation ofthe dental pathologies (e.g. see Salles-Cunha, 1963; Araujo, 1969,1970) or contagious and nutritional pathologies (e.g. see Mello-Alvim and Gomes, 1989). Only during the last few decades hasmore systemic and comparative palaeopathological research beencarried out, which includes post-cranial material for a betterunderstanding of the disease patterns of these populations(Machado,1984; Hubbe, 2005; Okumura and Eggers, 2005).Studies regarding dental pathologies in sambaquis peoplerevealed the presence of reoccurring occlusal wear, both moderateand severe, on most specimens. These patterns were probablycausedbytheinvoluntarilyingestionofsandandphytolithswiththefood (Boyadjian et al., 2007; Wesolowski, 2007). The abrasive material was also responsible for periodontal disease, because thehigh levels of dental wear as well as the frequency of calculationswould have contributed to a rise in the in?ammation and theresulting infection of the soft tissues (gums). The severe occlusalwear would also lower the substrate level, thus lowering theoccurrenceofocclusalcavitiesinthesepopulations.Indeed,withtheexception of some skeletons fromsites in Santa Catarina and Coro-ndó(RiodeJaneiro),mostoftheindividualsfromtheBraziliancoastdonothavecavities (Machado,1984; Wesolowski,2000,2007).Analysis of post-cranial material from these populationsrevealed a high occurrence of bone lesions related to infectiousprocesses.Thehighpositivecorrelationbetweeninfectiousdisease,population density, and the level of sedentism is well known.Therefore, the disease pattern seems to indicate that these groupshad low levels of mobility and a relatively high population density(Mendonça,1995; Hubbe, 2005; Okumura and Eggers, 2005).Comparative cranial studies between pre-historic groups of theBrazilian coast are still rare, but several authors support the ideathat there was a morphological unity between the populations ofthe coast. However, these studies are based on a small sample ofsitesandarenotstatisticallysound(Okumura,2008).Neves(1988),after considering the archeological record and the morpho-cranialvariability of the sambaquis people, suggested that between7000 BP and 6000 BP hunter-gatherer populations from the inte-rior of Brazil, probably belonging to the Humaitá tradition (e.g.Schmitz,1984), arrived on the coast between the modern states ofParaná and São Paulo. From there, two migration routes started,one following a northern direction and another followingasouthernone,givingbirthtothelargestsambaquis.Thesambaquisto the north of São Paulo tend to be smaller and fewer (Neves,1988).
Neves’ hypothesis is fundamentally based on the idea that thegroups that occupied the coast of Rio de Janeiro and Espírito Santoformed a single biological unit, different from those groups thatsettled the coast of Paraná and Santa Catarina, while the sambaquipopulations of São Paulo held an intermediary position. Okumura(2008) was able to corroborate this hypothesis after analyzingcranial measurements of approximately 700 individuals, as well asnon-metric data of approximately 1000 individuals. Thus, theresults of this study point toward two separate main groups, withtwo distinct cranial morphologies, where the separation betweenthetwohappensalongtheParanácoast.TowardthecentralcoastofSanta Catarina Okumura (2008) observed a relative differencebetweenthegroupofthesettlementwithpotteryandthosethatdonot have pottery, reinforcing the hypothesis of the existence ofa socio-cultural unity among the sambaqui mound-builders of thesouth and the southeast regions of Brazil.
5. Conclusion
Fromthissummaryonthesambaquisarchaeologicalevidence,itis apparent that more intense work on the Brazilian coastal sam-baquis is a priority. Several coastal regions have not been targetedfor research as yet, making it impossible to de?ne the exact areacovered by the sambaquis people and the origin of their archeo-logical culture. The existing chronology re?ects the rhythm of theresearch, which has been intense in certain regions, and providesseveral dates for few sambaquis or, short periods of research overvast areas that supply only minimal data to reconstruct thesettlement system of the Brazilian coast.
Nevertheless, the in-depth research carried out on the samba-quis from the South and Southeast coasts allows the establishmentofsomepatternsinthedistributionoftheculturalelements,whichreinforces the hypothesis of the existence of a socio-cultural unitamong the sambaqui mound-builders. It is important to point outthetriplespaceassociationofburials,theintentionalityintheshellmounds building with malacological layers of many metres ofthicknessandthejointoccurrenceofthesambaquisasasettlementpattern. Bioarcheological data have reinforced the hypothesis ofa differentiation among the sambaqui mound-builders, the pop-ulations with pottery and the hunter-gatherers from the Brazilianinland areas. Although the regional lithic industries showeddifferences in the use of raw materials (diabase and basalt at RioGrande do Sul, Santa Catarina, Paraná and São Paulo, and quartz atSão Paulo, Rio de Janeiro and Espírito Santo) and peculiar stonetools from each region, the occurrence of speci?c instrumentsthroughout the coast sites suggests the existence of a social andcultural unity. Important are the presence of grindstones on ?xedsupportmainlyinRiodeJaneiroandSantaCatarina,theoccurrenceof zooliths in São Paulo, Paraná, Santa Catarina and Rio Grande doSul, the concentration of scrapers in Rio de Janeiro and Paraná,choppers and chopping tools in Paraná and Espírito Santo and?nally, the shaped recipients such as plates, bowls and mortars inSanta Catarina, Rio Grande do Sul and Rio de Janeiro.Future research should seek to understand the variations of thematerialcultureofthesesites.Researchdatafromtheearlydecadesof the 20th century show that lithic and bone-made tools can befound in some sites but are vary rare in others. How can this vari-ation be explained? How do we explain hundreds of burial sitesconcentrated in a single sambaqui while there are hundreds ofkilometers of coast with hundreds of sambaquis that have none?G. Soares de Sousa noted the use of sambaqui shells forconstruction purposes during the colonial period. After threecenturies, in 1884C von Koseritz denounced the economic exploi-tation of the sites in Rio Grande do Sul. Currently, the legal mech-anismstoprotectthisarcheologicalheritageareprecarious,andthelackofspeedinthejudicialproceduresleadstothelossofpreciousinformation. It is up to the archeologist to intensify the efforts so thatthecontextoftheseancientsettlementscanresistdestruction,allowing society in the future to continue the research.
References
Araujo, E., 1969. Análise do material ósseo humano do sambaqui do Rio Lessa(SC.LF.39). Anais do Instituto de Antropologia 2, 175e188.
Araujo, E., 1970. Afecções dentárias: hipercementose e abrasão das populações dolitoral de Santa Catarina. Anais do Museu de Antropologia 3, 71e90.
Bandeira, D., 1992. Mudança na estratégia de subsistência. O sítio arqueológicoEnseadaI-umestudodecaso.DissertaçãodeMestrado,UniversidadeFederaldeSanta Catarina, Brasil.
Bandeira, D., 2004. Ceramistas pré-coloniais da baía da babitonga, SC e arqueologiae etnicidade. Tese de Doutorado, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Brasil.
Bandeira,D.,Oliveira,E.,Santos,A., 2009. Estudoestratigrá?co doper?lnordestedoSambaqui Cubatão I, Joinville/SC. Revista do MAE 19, 119e142.
Barbosa, M., 2007. A ocupação pré-colonial da região dos lagos, RJ: sistema deassentamento e relações intersocietais entre grupos sambaquianos e gruposceramistas Tupinambá e da tradição Una. Tese de Doutorado, Universidade deSão Paulo, Brasil.
Bigarella, J.,1950e1951. Contribuição ao estudo dos sambaquis no Estado do ParanáI, regiões adjacentes às baías de Paranaguá e Antonina. Arquivos de Biologia eTecnologia 5e6, 231e292.
Bischoff,T.,1887[1928].SobreosSambaquisdoEstadodoRioGrandedoSul.Revistado Arquivo Público e Museu Júlio de Castilhos 21, 11e42.
Boyadjian, C., Eggers, S., Reinhard, K., 2007. Dental wash: a problematic method forextracting microfossils from teeth. Journal of Archaeological Science 34,1622e1628.
Callipo, F., 2004. Os sambaquis submersos de Cananéia: um estudo de caso dearqueologia subaquática. Dissertação de Mestrado, Universidade de São Paulo,Brasil.
DeBlasis, P., Kenip, A., Scheel-Ybert, R., Giannini, P., Gaspar, M., 2007. Sambaquis epaisagem Dinâmica natural e arqueologia regional do sul do Brasil. ArqueologiaSuramericana/Arqueologia Sul-Americana 3 (1), 29e61.
DeMasi, M., 2001. Pescadores coletores da costa sul do Brasil. Pesquisas 57, 1e136.Emperaire, J., Laming, A., 1956. Les sambaquis de la côte méridionale du Brésil,(campagnes de fouilles 1954e1956). Journal de la Société des Américanistes 45,5e123.
Fairbridge, R., 1976. Shell?sh-eating preceramic Indians in coastal Brazil, radio-carbondatingsofshellmiddensdisclosesarelationshipwithHolocenesealeveloscillations. Science 191, 353e359.
Figuti, L., Klökler, D., 1996. Aspectos da formação de um sambaqui: análise dossedimentos. Revista do MAE 6, 169e187.
Gaspar, M., 2000. In: Zahar, Jorge (Ed.), Sambaqui: arqueologia do litoral brasileiro,p. 89. Rio de Janeiro.
Giannini, P., Villagran, X., Fornari, M., Nascimento Jr., D., Menezes, P., Tanaka, A.,Assunção, D., DeBlasis, P., Amaral, P., 2010. Interações entre evolução sed-imentar e ocupação humana pré-histórica na costa centro-sul de Santa Cata-rina, Brasil. Boletim do Museu Paraense Emilio Goeldi 5 (1), 105e128.
Hubbe, M., 2005. Análise biocultural dos remanescentes ósseos humanos do sam-baqui Porto do Rio Vermelho 02 (SC-PRV-02). Tese de Doutorado, Universidadede São Paulo, Brasil.
Hurt, W., Blasi, O.,1960. O sambaqui do Macedo A.52.B.-Paraná-Brasil. Universidadedo Paraná, Curitiba.
Ihering, H., 1904. Archeologia comparativa do Brazil. Revista do Museu Paulista 6,519e569.
Jacobus, A., 1997. A utilização de animais e vegetais na pré-história do RS. In:Kern, A. (Ed.), Arqueologia pré-histórica do Rio Grande do Sul. Mercado Aberto,Porto Alegre, RS, pp. 63e88.
Kern, A., 1970. Escavações em sambaquis do Rio Grande do Sul. Estudos Leo-poldenses 15, 203e215.
Kern,A.,1997. Pescadores-coletorespré-históricos do litoral norte.In: Kern, A.(Ed.),Arqueologia pré-histórica do Rio Grande do Sul. Mercado Aberto, Porto Alegre,RS, pp. 167e190.
Kneip, A., 2004. O povo da lagoa: uso do sig paramodelamento e simulação na áreaarqueológicadoCamacho.TesedeDoutorado,UniversidadedeSãoPaulo,Brasil.Koseritz, C., 1884. Bosquejos ethnológicos. Typographia Gundlach e Companhia,Porto Alegre, 83p.
Krone, R., 1914. Informações ethnographicas do valle do rio Ribeira de Iguape. In:Botelho, C. (Ed.), Comissão Geográ?ca e Geológica, Exploraçãodo Rio Ribeira deIguape, second ed. Rothschild & Company, São Paulo, SP, pp. 23e34.
Lima,T.,1999e2000. Embuscadosfrutosdomar:ospescadores/coletoresdo litoralcentro-sul brasileiro. Revista USP 44, 270e327.
Machado, L., 1984. Análise de remanescentes humanos do sítio arqueológicoCorondó, RJ. Aspectos biológicos e culturais. Instituto de Arqueologia Brasileiro,Rio de Janeiro.
Martin, L., Suiguio, K., Flexor, J., 1984. Informações adicionais fornecidas pelossambaquis na reconstrução de paleolinhas de praia quaternária. Revista de Pré-História 6, 128e147.
Mello-Alvim, M., Gomes, J., 1989. Análise e interpretação da hiperostose poróticaem crânios humanos do sambaqui de Cabeçuda (SC - Brasil). Revista de Pré-Mendonça, S.,1995. Estresse, doença e adaptabilidade: estudo comparativo de doisgrupos pré-históricos em perspectiva biocultural. Tese de Doutorado, FundaçãoOswaldo Cruz, Brasil.
Netto, L., 1885. Investigação sobre archeologia brazileira. Archivos do MuseuNacional do Rio de Janeiro 6, 257e554.
Neves, W., 1988. Paleogenética dos grupos pré-históricos do litoral sul do Brasil(Paraná e Santa Catarina). Pesquisas, Antropologia 43, 176.
Okumura, M., Eggers, S., 2005. The people of Jabuticabeira II: reconstruction of theway of life in a Brazilllian shellmound. Homo 55, 263e281.
Okumura, M., 2008. Diversidade morfológica craniana, micro-evolução e ocupaçãopré-histórica da costa brasileira. Pesquisas 66, 1e306.
Orssich, A., 1964. Relatório arqueológico do Espírito Santo. Revista de Cultura 19,45e64.
Parellada,C.,2008.RevisãodossítiosarqueológicoscommaisdeseismilanosBPnoParaná: discussões geoarqueológicas. FUMDHAMentos 7, 117e135.
Perota, C., 1971. Dados parciais sôbre a arqueologia norte espírito-santense. Pro-grama Nacional de Pesquisas Arqueológicas, Resultados preliminares do quartoano 1968e1969. Museu Paraense Emilio Goeldi 15, 149e162.
Perota, C., 1974. Resultados preliminares sobre a arqueologia da região central doEstado do Espírito Santo. Programa Nacional de Pesquisas Arqueológicas,Resultados preliminares do quinto ano 1969e1970. Museu Paraense EmilioGoeldi 26, 127e140.
Prous,A.,1977.Lês sculturespréhistoriquesdusud-brésilien. Bulletindela sociedadPréhistoriques Française, Z117 (210), 1e62.
Prous, A., 1992. Arqueologia brasileira. Universidade Nacional de Brasília, Brasília,pp. 605.
Rauth, J., 1967. Nota prévia sobre a escavação do sambaqui do Porto Maurício.Programa Nacional de Pesquisas Arqueológicas, resultados preliminares doprimeiro ano 1965e1966. Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi 6, 47e54.
Rauth, J., 1971. Nota prévia sobre a escavação do sambaqui do Ramal. ProgramaNacional de Pesquisas Arqueológicas, Resultados preliminares do quarto ano1968e1969. Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi 15, 115e132.
Roquette-Pinto,E.,1906. Relatório deexcursão ao litoral eàregiãodas lagoasdo RioGrande do Sul. UFRGS, Porto Alegre, 80p.
Rios, E.,1994. Seashells of Brasil.FundaçãoUniversidade de Rio Grande, Rio Grande,pp. 368.
Salles-Cunha, E., 1963. História da odontologia no Brasil, 1500e1900, sambaquis-Lagoa Santa-Tupis (aspectos de patologia alvéolo-dentária). Cientí?ca, Rio deJaneiro, pp. 441.
Schmitz, P., 1984. Caçadores e Coletores da Pré-História do Brasil. Universidade doVale do Rio dos Sinos, São Leopoldo.
Serrano, A., 1937. Subsídios para a Arqueologia do Brasil Meridional. Revista doArquivo Municipal, 36 (2), 5e42.
Souza, A., 1991. História da arqueologia brasileira. Pesquisas 46, 1e157.Tenório, M., 2003. O lugar dos aventureiros: identidade, dinâmica de ocupação, esistema de trocas no litoral do Rio de Janeiro há 3.500 A.P. Tese de Doutorado,Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande Do Sul, Brasil.
Uchôa, D., Garcia, C., 1983. Cadastramento de sítios arqueológicos da baixadaCananéia-Iguape, litoral sul do estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Revista de Arqueo-logia 1 (1), 19e29.
Villagrán, X., 2008. Análise de arqueofáies na camada preta do sambaqui Jabutica-beira II. Dissertação de Mestrado, Universidade de São Paulo, Brasil.Wagner, G., 2009a. Sambaquis da barreira da Itapeva, uma perspectiva geo-arqueológica. Tese de Doutorado, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do RioGrande do Sul, Brasil.
Wagner, G., 2009b. A evolução paleogeográ?ca e a ocupação dos sambaquis nolitoral norte do Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil. In: Ribeiro, A., Bauermann, S.,Scherer, C. (Eds.), Quaternário do Rio Grande do Sul, integrando con-hecimentos. Sociedade Brasileira de Paleontologia, Porto Alegre, RS,pp. 243e254.
Wesolowski, V., 2000. A prática da horticultura entre os construtores de sambaquisa acampamentos litorâneos da região da Baía de São Francisco, Santa Catarina:uma abordagem bio-antropológica. Dissertação de Mestrado, Universidade deSão Paulo, Brasil.
Wesolowski, V., 2007. Cáries, desgaste, cálculos dentários e micro-resíduos dadietaentre grupos pré-históricos do litoral norte de Santa Catarina: É possívelcomer amido e não ter cárie? Tese de Doutorado, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz,Brazil

Intersecciones en antropología
versión On-line ISSN
1850-373X
Intersecciones antropol. v.10 n.2 Olavarría jul./dic. 2009

Neotropical Zooarchaeology and Taphonomy, edited by A. Sebastián Muñoz and Mariana Mondini. Quaternary International, Volume 180, Issue 1, March 2008, pp. 1-158. ISSN 1040-6182.

Reseña de László Bartosiewicz.

Institute of Archaeological Sciences. Loránd Eötvös University, Múzeum Krt. 4/B. 1088 Budapest, Hungary. E-mail: bartwicz@yahoo.com

Archaeological excavators are latecomers by vocation, and given good preservation, much of the finds are animal bones. Taphonomy, the critical evaluation of bioarchaeological information in archaeology through understanding site formation processes, has become one of their chief tools in dealing with bone remains. A concept introduced in paleontology (Efremov 1940), taphonomy has not only become the indispensable first step in archaeozoological inquiry, but also the best common denominator linking various studies of human-animal relationships across chronological periods and continents. This aspect of taphonomy is especially important in presenting geographically diverse areas with a rich and varied archaeological heritage such as the Neotropical region that includes what is historically known as Latin America and the southern United States around the Gulf of México. Immense latitudinal and altitudinal variability of habitats has made taphonomy the lingua franca between archaeozoologists - sometimes even within geographically varied countries such as Argentina (Gutiérrez et al. 2007).

This volume is a clearly structured collection of papers submitted to the session entitled "Neotropical Zooarchaeology and Taphonomy" organized by the volume editors at the 10th International Conference of the International Council for Archaeozoology in México D.F. in 2006. While the session abstract promised to highlight "specific research problems in the region from ecological, evolutionary, and biogeographic points of view" (Polaco et al. 2006: 11), this volume is also a collection of scholarly papers that represent broader, general trends in human-animal interactions in the Neotropical region throughout the late Quaternary.

The introductory paper by A. Sebastián Muñoz and Mariana Mondini, offers a clear defi nition of the region extending on either side of the Equator with the Pacific to the west and the Caribbean/Atlantic to the east. They point out that south of the isthmus of Panama, South America has a triangular shape narrowing toward the south. This geometry coincides with simpler ecological and structural systems and the increasing climatic influence of oceans southwards. The Andes, meanwhile, stop westerly winds sweeping across the continent and much of the precipitation is lost on its western slopes. At the same time, the availability of land decreases on the narrowing landmass. This geographical setup offers outstanding biodiversity and excellent preservation in some areas while taphonomic challenges dominate in others. These contribute to the immense variety of zooarchaeological topics available for investigation.

This rich geographical and archaeological landscape is depicted in further anthropological detail by Peter W. Stahl, keynote speaker of the session, who offers a thought provoking review of zooarchaeology in the neotropics in terms of historical ecology. Placing this paper at the beginning introduces important culture historical and ethical points for outsiders, especially researchers from densely inhabited, industrialized Europe. Even if we are aware of the pitfalls of ethnographic analogy, the reminder that "‘traditional small-scale societies’ [ in the Neotropical region[occupy marginalized environments because of historical circumstances… Not only do they possess a history,… but they may be inappropriate analogs for constructing inferences about peoples of the past" sets the tone for reading the rest of the volume. Functional similarities between riparian habitats in Amazonia and the prehistoric taskscapes in the marshy Great Hungarian Plain could be explored only on an abstract, theoretical level (Whittle 2007: 743-744).

The peopling of the Americas offers a powerful research paradigm for archaeologists working in this region. Adauto Araujo et al. interpret palaeoparasitological evidence in light of the latitudinal climatic variability from east to west along the continent. The authors conclude that some prehistoric thermophilic parasites must have been introduced by human hosts along migration routes alternative to the Bering region. Another scientific problem of this early period, the extinction of Pleistocene megafauna, is addressed in the study by Alejandro García et al. who studied the dietary composition of Hippidion at two sites in Argentina. Both studies rely on nonosteological, laboratory methods for the recovery of biological evidence.

The authors of the next set of papers review natural taphonomic factors (some of them in the form of actualistic studies), something that has been standard practice in paleontology. The importance of such research to archaeozoology is that by excluding anthropogenic effects, the natural elements in the process become recognizable and may later be identified in more complex, cultural deposits. The differential preservation of bird and mammal bones was studied by Isabel Cruz in southern Patagonia. Her analysis of rich natural deposits formed under extreme climatic circumstances helps make clear fundamental differences in preservation between the two vertebrate classes, which are frequently distorted by human decision-making (prey selection, carcass processing, etc.) in archaeological assemblages (Bartosiewicz and Gál 2007). The detailed survey of natural massmortality processes in guanaco herds caused by winter stress in Southern Patagonia, analyzed by Juan Bautista Belardi and Diego Rindel, is reminiscent of the classical work by Weigelt (1927), who long before the explicit definition of taphonomy recognized the research potential of documenting contemporary mass deaths of animals as part of paleontological inquiry. These authors attempt to establish forensic criteria for the identification of mass mortality in archaeological deposits. Mariana Mondini and A. Sebastián Muñoz contributed a review of bone damage inflicted by pumas. Variability in puma taphonomic action needs to be understood within the context of the local fauna in areas that are as diverse as the neotropical region. Actualistic studies on large felids as taphonomic agents, thus, have implications for the interpretation of the composition of archaeofaunal assemblages.

Recognizing the effects of action by non-human predators is fundamental in appraising early prehistoric human subsistence patterns focusing on the largest prey with the best yield in areas characterized by low faunal diversity such as northwestern Patagonia where Pablo Marcelo Fernández studied faunal exploitation during the last 3500 calibrated years. These archaeological bone assemblages originated from sites representing low energy environments in the Sub-Antarctic forest zone and the extra-Andean Patagonian steppe region. Large vertebrates revealed fat-oriented carcass processing. Guanaco bones associated both with ceramic and aceramic technologies displayed no change in carcass processing. Similarities in the evidence of bone fat extraction suggest boiling prior to the introduction of pottery.

Taphonomic analysis was used as a key to the interpretation of Brazilian archaeofaunas by Albérico Nogueira De Queiroz and Olivia Alexandre De Carvalho. Their study encompasses vast geographical distances and a time interval ranging between ca. 9500-2600 BP. They have shown that modification by non-human predators on microvertebrates was more significant in Amazonian sites and in the south. Evidence of humans exploiting small animals, however, was obvious in archaeological sites from the northeast of Brazil, where animal bones were abundant in hearths and also show marks of butchering.

The emphasis in the following cluster of papers is placed on the exploitation of aquatic resources. The Neotropical region includes the possibly narrowest filter in the migration of terrestrial organisms: the isthmus of Panamá, linking the landmass of North to South America. On the other hand, until the 1914 opening of the Panama Canal, this narrow strip of land isolated two oceans representing radically different aquatic environments -a major attraction during the first ever ICAZ meeting in Latin America, that of the Fish Remains Working Group, held in Panamá in 1997. Taphonomy at two coastal rock shelters in Parita Bay on the Pacific side was studied by Diana Rocío Carvajal-Contreras et al. with a special focus on fishing and fish curing as well as coast-inland transport of the processed product. However, the composition of the fish bone assemblages was also interpreted within the broader context of marine transgression (ca. 7000 BP) and coastal progradation (after ca. 4000 BP). Preliminary taphonomic analyses suggest that the studied sites were used for curing fish between 2200 and 1900 BP. At that time, geomorphological conditions favored such activities making them profi table in a wider, probably chiefdom-scale, economic system. In the next paper, Pedro Volkmer de Castilho reviews evidence for the utilization of cetaceans in shell mounds from the southern coast of Brazil. It is worth mentioning that partly due to excellent preservation created by their calcareous matrix, shell middens played a key rolein the emergence of zooarchaeology in both the Old and New Worlds (Forchhammer et al. 1851-1856; Wyman 1868). The author of this paper analyzed cetacean remains from at least nine species found at six shell mound sites along the Atlantic coast in Santa Catarina State, estimated to date from 5020 to 2670 BP. The results suggest that there was sporadic exploitation of scavenged carcasses (mainly whales) and capture of smaller odontocetes, probably using fish nets. In addition, information on anthropogenic taphonomic effects such as butchery as well as palaeopathology are discussed. In addition to marine fauna, studies of fresh water fishing in this volume are represented by the analysis of fish remains from the Bolivian shore of Lake Titicaca by José M. Capriles et al. Following the rigorous evaluation of sampling, a many-sided taphonomic evaluation is provided that shows reduction in the importance of aquatic resources throughout the Formative Period (1000 BCAD 400). While standardization in fish exploitation and processing characterize the Middle Formative, by the Late Formative, there was a clear reduction in the importance of fish in the diet as the intensification domesticate exploitation continued. This trend is evaluated within the context of the interface between environmental change and socioeconomic complexity in the Lake Titicaca Basin.

This latter paper leads the reader to animal husbandry in the high Andes, a topic that is continued by Silvana A. Rosenfeld in a way that is unusual for many working outside the region: the exploitation of guinea pigs. (My personal experience with the topic is that when I made an inquiry on the ZooArch mailing list in relation to cut-marks on a hamster find from Hungary, I was inundated by dozens of helpful emails from Latin America; Bartosiewicz 2003). In her paper, Rosenfeld proposes that prolific guinea pigs were crucial in the diet at the site of Conchopata in the Peruvian Andes around AD 600-1000 because they represented an additional, easily renewable source of fat i.e. calories, especially during the wet season at this settlement located at 2760 m asl. The result is an exemplary study of seasonality and its implications on the consumption of fat in the pre-Columbian Andean diet. Looking at another, more contested case of domestic animal exploitation, Andrés D. Izeta reviews the relationship between humans and camelids. These connections have changed from extractive techniques at the end of the Pleistocene to production of domesticated camelids in herds. The author studies thelatter using assemblages from two different eco-zones in Northwestern Argentina. Signs of Late Holocene camelid exploitation differed during the three observed periods. The earliest period is characterized by the use of llama, guanaco and vicuña in both zones with a dominance of adult remains. Lower biodiversity is evident during the second period with more species variability in the puna and in some lower valleys. The Late period is characterized by the presence of adult camelids in the puna, while subadults become preponderant in other localities and valley assemblages do not reveal major changes during the three periods in camelid demography or taxonomic diversity. This difference allowed the reconstruction of two models of camelid use in the studied region.

In the final research paper in the volume, Eduardo Corona-M. reviews the exploitation of vertebrates in Xochicalco, an important Mesoamerican urban, ceremonial and military center between AD 700-900. The site is located in the transition zone between the Nearctic and Neotropic zoogeographical regions in México. This borderland location is reflected in the mixed zooarchaeological assemblage. Social hierarchy, another source of species variability at this complex site was also taken into consideration in a multivariate analyses that directed attention to a few species coming from the Neotropical area (e.g., pecarí, jaguar and American crocodile), that seem to have been used by elites as social markers in distinguished locations. Thus, species composition at individual loci on the site offers a unique glimpse at the interaction between zoogeographic affinity and social hierarchy.

Finally, the archaeology of the Neotropics is briefly summarized by Luis Alberto Borrero who acted as discussant at the end of this rich conference session. Representing a apparently environmental archaeological perspective he asserts that there is a role for archaeology in the Neotropical region in tracing how species and landscapes that interact with humans change. Moreover these processes all include a taphonomic component. He offers an insider’s view of the individual papers in their original, Latin- American context rather than with reference to Old World developments as I have here.

Comparing these two views historically explains why this volume is of particular importance. As mentioned above, archaeozoology emerged and became strong with research on shell middens in both the Old and New Worlds at the end of the 19th century. The influence of immigrant Europeanscholars such as Robert Lehman-Nitsche, a naturalist, physician and ethnographer from Germany, was instrumental in linking research between these two far-flung regions (Bilbao 2004). Relations between megafaunal extinctions and the appearance of the first humans in South America also greatly inspired zooarchaeological research (e.g., Lehman-Nitsche 1899). Archaeological interpretations of animal remains also included a study of osseous industries that was cutting-edge for its time (e.g., Lehman-Nitsche 1904). A post-World War II renaissance in archaeozoological studies in Central Europe became synergetic with New Archaeology in the anglophone world by the late 1960s, and stimulated faunal research in both North and South America through integrating personalities such as Wheeler Pires-Ferreira and Kaulicke 1976. This trend was probably not independent of the vested interest of processual archaeologists in understanding subsistence and the emergence of food production in the Near East that increased the world-wide importance of zooarchaeology (Bartosiewicz and Choyke 2002). External influences evolved in quiet symbiosis with local work in various countries in the Neotropical region and resulted in strong communities of zooarchaeologists whose international impact has increased significantly outside the continent over the last decades. As is clearly demonstrated by the papers in this volume, the diverse Neotropical region has offered research opportunities for everyone. Natural science oriented, taphonomic research became very strong in Patagonia, while Mesoamerica has developed into the scene of zooarchaeological research in connection with important projects on the archaeology of complex societies. Studying similar state formations as well as European colonial influences in the Andes and surrounding Andean regions were integrated within the Camelid Working Group (Grupo Zooarqueología de Camélidos), established in 1993. The group has been active within ICAZ since 1995.

Zooarchaeology, a narrow discipline, is particularly dependent on global communication. Exposure of the excellent work by specialists in Latin America has indubitably benefited from an increasing number of publications in English. In 2004, a remarkable collection of 12 papers on zooarchaeology in South America, was edited by Guillermo Mengoni Goñalons. In the introduction to that volume, he pointed out that many contributors already belonged to the "second generation of zooarchaeologists" (Mengoni Goñalons 2004: 5). Less than fi ve years later, it is especially welcome that Quaternary International, the official journal of the International Union for QuaternaryResearch (INQUA), dedicated its March 2008 issue to a session of the 2006 ICAZ conference offering a complementary review. It is to the credit of the editors (both of the special issue and the journal itself) that they managed to kill two birds with one bola: maintain the integrity of the symposium and guarantee the properly accredited quality of contributions.

This informative volume marks yet another high point in an important trend: the First Latin American Zooarchaeology meeting that will take place during the 13th Anthropological Congress in Bogotá, Colombia in October 2009.

REFERENCES CITED

1. Bartosiewicz, L. 2003 A millennium of migrations: Protohistoric mobile pastoralism in Hungary. In Zooarchaeology: Papers to Honor Elizabeth S. Wing, edited by F. Wayne King, and C. M. Porter, pp. 101-130. Bulletin of the Florida Museum of Natural History 44, Gainesville.

2. Bartosiewicz, L. and A. M. Choyke 2002 Archaeozoology in Hungary. Archaeofauna 11: 117-129.

3. Bartosiewicz, L. and E. Gál 2007 Sample size and taxonomic richness in mammalian and avian bone assemblages from archaeological sites. Archeometriai Műhely 1: 37-44.

4. Bilbao, S. 2004 Rememorando a Roberto Lehmann-Nitsche. Buenos Aires, La Colmena.

5. Efremov, I. A. 1940 Taphonomy: a new branch of paleontology. Pan- American Geologist 74: 81-93.

6. Forchhammer, G., J. Steenstrup, and J. Worsaae 1851-1856 Undersøgelser i geologisk-antikvarisk retning. København, Kongliga Hofbogtrykker Bianco Luno.

7. Gutiérrez, M. A., L. Miotti, G. Barrientos, G. Mengoni Goñalons, and M. Salemme (Eds.) 2007 Taphonomy and Zooarchaeology in Argentina. BAR International Series 1601. Archaeopress, Oxford.

8. Lehmann-Nitsche, R. 1899 Coexistencia del hombre con un gran desdentado y un equino. Revista del Museo de La Plata IX: 455-473.

9. Lehmann-Nitsche, R. 1904 Nuevos objetos de industria humana encontrados en la Caverna Eberhardt en Última Esperanza. Revista del Museo de La Plata XI: 57-70.

10. Mengoni Goñalons, G. L. 2004 Introduction: An overview of South American zooarchaeology. In Zooarchaeology of South America, edited by G. L. Mengoni Goñalons, pp. 1-10. BAR International Series 1298. Archaeopress, Oxford.

11. Polaco, O. J., J. Arroyo Cabrales, F. J. Aguilar, and A. F. Guzmán (Eds.) 2006 Abstracts. International Council for Archaeozoology, 10th Conference. México D.F., Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia - Escuela Nacional de Conservación, Restauración y Museografía, México D.F.

12. Weigelt, J. 1927 Rezente Wirbeltierleichen und ihre paläobiologische Bedeutung. Leipzig, Verlag von Max Weg.

13. Wheeler Pires-Ferreira, J. C. and P. Kaulicke 1976 Preceramic animal utilization in the Central Peruvian Andes. Science 194: 483-490.

14. Whittle, A. 2007 On the waterfront (With a contribution by László Bartosiewicz). In The Early Neolithic on the Great Hungarian Plain: investigations of the Körös culture site of Ecsegfalva 23, County Békés II, edited by A. Whittle, pp. 727-752. Varia Archaeologica Hungarica 21.

15. Wyman, J. 1868 An account of some kjoekkenmoeddings, or shell-heaps, in Maine and Massachusetts. American Naturalist 1/11: 561-584.

© 2012 Universidad Nacional del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Sociales

Avda. del Valle 5737
(B7400JWI) - Olavarría - Pcia. de Buenos Aires
República Argentina

The same types of shellmounds (with skulls similar to some of the Brazilian ones, and the owners of the skulls similarly tending to be shorter than their ancestors)are of course found all around the Caribbean and in Florida, and in the Southern US, easpecially around the Mississippi river delta, as a variety of the Archaic. As mentioned in the last prio blog entry, there is a continuity of some of these Archaic types up into the Hopewell Moundbuilder period.

sambaqui-sharkteeth

I had mentioned that sharkteeth were important in Atlantean cultures and the trait of using sword-like clubs studded with shark teeth (or their substitutes in chipped stone) were also widespread and presumably descended from an Atlantean source. I had not known then that the ttrait was a common "Moundbuilder" trait in both North and South America nor yet that some of the concave-based Archaic arrowheads were supposedly meant to represent shark teeth. The same points also occur in the Capsian of Northern Africa, with similar serrations around the sides.

Serrated "sharktoothed" arrowhead or dart point.

The sharktooth-edged swordclubs: at Cahokia, the shaped flint "Sharkteeth" later fulled the purpose but shark's teeth was still also imported to set to the edges of the club-swords. The wooden handles with the embedded teeth have been found intact in "Moundbuilder" burials.

Frontiers of Anthropology

First Americans: were they Iberian, not Siberian?

New evidence suggests Stone Age hunters from Europe discovered America

Reassessment of Atlantean Agriculture

Plant Domestication

Animal Domestication Table

Agricultural transition

Domestication of plants

Agriculture in Papua New Guinea

Agriculture in Asia

Agriculture in the Fertile Crescent

Agriculture in Africa

Agriculture in the Americas

Domestication of animals

Domestication of animals in the Middle East

Consequences

Social change

Subsequent revolutions

Disease

Technology

Archeogenetics

References

Further reading

Yams Out of Africa and the Origins of Agriculture

Sunken PreFiji

Pre-European Contact Society

Roots of American R1 Y DNA

Sandra Antunes' Portugese Polished Stones

gipuzkoakultura.net

'Witness to the Deluge'

Continuing Evidence For Landbridges And Longrange Oceanic Crossings in Ancient Times

Sea Monkeys Are the Tip of the Iceberg: More Biogeographical Conundrums for Neo-Darwinism

Casey Luskin March 3, 2010 8:00 AM

Brazillian Moundbuilders