B

University of Oregon Historical Atlas Resource

New Research Confirms 'Out Of Africa' Theory Of Human Evolution

enlarge

Homo sapiens originated in Africa 150,000 years ago and began to migrate 55,000 to 60,000 years ago. It is thought he arrived in Australia around 45,000 years before present (BP). Australia was, at the time, already colonised by homo erectus. This dispersal, from Africa to Australia through Arabia, Asia and the Malay peninsula, could have occurred at a rate of 1km per year. (Credit: Image courtesy of University Of Cambridge)

ScienceDaily (May 10, 2007) — Researchers have produced new DNA evidence that almost certainly confirms the theory that all modern humans have a common ancestry. The genetic survey, produced by a collaborative team led by scholars at Cambridge and Anglia Ruskin Universities, shows that Australia's aboriginal population sprang from the same tiny group of colonists, along with their New Guinean neighbours.

The research confirms the “Out Of Africa” hypothesis that all modern humans stem from a single group of Homo sapiens who emigrated from Africa 2,000 generations ago and spread throughout Eurasia over thousands of years. These settlers replaced other early humans (such as Neanderthals), rather than interbreeding with them.

Academics analysed the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and Y chromosome DNA of Aboriginal Australians and Melanesians from New Guinea. This data was compared with the various DNA patterns associated with early humans. The research was an international effort, with researchers from Tartu in Estonia, Oxford, and Stanford in California all contributing key data and expertise.

The results showed that both the Aborigines and Melanesians share the genetic features that have been linked to the exodus of modern humans from Africa 50,000 years ago.

Until now, one of the main reasons for doubting the “Out Of Africa” theory was the existence of inconsistent evidence in Australia. The skeletal and tool remains that have been found there are strikingly different from those elsewhere on the “coastal expressway” – the route through South Asia taken by the early settlers.

Some scholars argue that these discrepancies exist either because the early colonists interbred with the local Homo erectus population, or because there was a subsequent, secondary migration from Africa. Both explanations would undermine the theory of a single, common origin for modern-day humans.

But in the latest research there was no evidence of a genetic inheritance from Homo erectus, indicating that the settlers did not mix and that these people therefore share the same direct ancestry as the other Eurasian peoples.

Geneticist Dr Peter Forster, who led the research, said: “Although it has been speculated that the populations of Australia and New Guinea came from the same ancestors, the fossil record differs so significantly it has been difficult to prove. For the first time, this evidence gives us a genetic link showing that the Australian Aboriginal and New Guinean populations are descended directly from the same specific group of people who emerged from the African migration.”

At the time of the migration, 50,000 years ago, Australia and New Guinea were joined by a land bridge and the region was also only separated from the main Eurasian land mass by narrow straits such as Wallace's Line in Indonesia. The land bridge was submerged about 8,000 years ago.

The new study also explains why the fossil and archaeological record in Australia is so different to that found elsewhere even though the genetic record shows no evidence of interbreeding with Homo erectus, and indicates a single Palaeolithic colonisation event.

The DNA patterns of the Australian and Melanesian populations show that the population evolved in relative isolation. The two groups also share certain genetic characteristics that are not found beyond Melanesia. This would suggest that there was very little gene flow into Australia after the original migration.

Dr Toomas Kivisild, from the Cambridge University Department of Biological Anthropology, who co-authored the report, said: “The evidence points to relative isolation after the initial arrival, which would mean any significant developments in skeletal form and tool use were not influenced by outside sources.

“There was probably a minor secondary gene flow into Australia while the land bridge from New Guinea was still open, but once it was submerged the population was apparently isolated for thousands of years. The differences in the archaeological record are probably the result of this, rather than any secondary migration or interbreeding.”

The study is reported in the new issue of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Related Information

Australia's archaeological record provides several apparent inconsistencies with the “Out Of Africa” theory. In particular, the earliest known Australian skeletons, from Lake Mungo, are relatively slender and gracile in form, whereas younger skeletal finds are much more robust. This robustness, which remains, for example, in the brow ridge structure of modern Aborigines, would suggest either interbreeding between homo sapiens and homo erectus or multiple migrations into Australia, followed by interbreeding.

The archaeological data also indicates an intensification of the density and complexity of different stone tools in Australia during the Holocene period (beginning around 10,000 years BP), in particular the emergence of backed-blade stone technology. The first dingos arrived at around the same time, and it is thought both were brought to the continent by new human arrivals – leading to theories of a secondary migration that has resulted in disputes regarding the single point of origin theory.

Adapted from materials provided by University Of Cambridge.

Click here to read the Code of Hammurabi with definitions courtesy of the Avalon project at Yale University

 

Mesopotamia

Timeline and Definition

By K. Kris Hirst, About.com

Young Iraqis stand atop ancient ruins in the shadow of a Mesopotamian ziggurat, June 8, 2003 in Borsippa, Iraq.

Mario Tama / Getty Images

Mesopotamia is an ancient civilization that took up pretty much everything that today is modern Iraq and Syria, a triangular patch wedged between the Tigris River, the Zagros Mountains, and the Lesser Zab River. Mesopotamia is considered the first urban civilization, that is to say, it was the first society which has provided evidence of people deliberately living in close proximity to one another, with attendant social and economic structures to allow that to occur peaceably.

Generally, people speak of north and south Mesopotamia, most prominently during the Sumer (south) and Akkad (north) periods between about 3000-2000 BC. However, the histories of the north and south dating back to the sixth millennium BC are divergent; and later the Assyrian kings did their best to unite the two halves.

Mesopotamian Chronology

Dates before ca 1500 BC are under debate; important sites are listed in parentheses after each period.

• Ubaid¹ 5800-3700 BC (Telloh², Ur³, Ubaid, Oueili⁴, Eridu⁵, Tepe Gawra⁶, H3 As-Sabiyah⁷)
• Early Northern Uruk 4400-3600 BC (Brak⁸, Hamoukar⁹)
• Uruk 3800-3200 BC (Girsu/Telloh¹⁰, Umma, Lagash, Eridu¹¹, Ur¹², Hacinebi Tepe, Turkey¹³, Chogha Mish¹⁴, Iran)
• Jemdet Nasr 3200-3000 BC (Uruk¹⁵)
• Early Dynastic Period 3000-2350 BC (Kish, Uruk¹⁶, Ur¹⁷, Lagash, Asmar¹⁸, Mari¹⁹, Umma, Al-Rawda²⁰) [/link] Akkadian²¹ 2350-2200 BC (Agade, Sumer²², Lagash, Uruk²³)
• Neo-Sumerian (2100-2000 BC) (Ur, Elam²⁴, Tappeh Sialk])
• Old Babylonian and Old Assyrian Periods (2000-1600 BC) ([link url=http://archaeology.about.com/library/glossary/bldef_mari.htm]Mari, Ebla Babylon, Isin, Larsa, Asssur)
• Middle Assyrian (1600-1000 BC) (Babylon, Ctesiphon)
• Neo-Assyrian (1000-605 BC) (Nineveh)
• Neo-Babylonian (625-539 BC) (Babylon)

Mesopotamian Advances

Mesopotamia was first home to villages in the Neolithic period of around 8,000 BC. Permanent mudbrick residential structures were being constructed before the Ubaid period at southern sites such as Tell el-Oueili, as well as Ur, Eridu, Telloh, and Ubaid. At Tell Brak in northern Mesopotamia, architecture began appearing at least as early as 4400 BC. Temples were also in evidence by the sixth millennium, in particular at Eridu.

The first urban settlements have been identified at Uruk, about 3900 BC, along with mass-produced wheel-thrown pottery, the introduction of writing, and cylinder seals.

Assyrian records written in cuneiform have been found and deciphered, allowing us much more information about the political and economic pieces of latter Mesopotamian society. In the north part was the kingdom of Assyria; to the south was the Sumerians and Akkadian in the alluvial plain between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. Mesopotamia continued as a definable civilization right through the fall of Babylon (about 1595 BC).

Of most concern today are the ongoing issues associated with the continuing war in Iraq, which have gravely damaged much of the archaeological sites and allowed looting to occur, as described in a recent article by archaeologist Zainab Bahrani. \

This magnificent headdress is from the burial tomb of Lady Puabi, city of Ur, ca. 2500 BCUniversity of Pennsylvania Museum

Statue of a ram in a tree, Ur civilization, 2500 BCUniversity of Pennsylvania Museum

An engraved artifact from the cemetery at Ur, dated to 2500 BCUniversity of Pennsylvania Museum

 

Mesopotamian Sites

Important Mesopotamian sites include: Tell el-Ubaid, Uruk, Ur, Eridu, Tell Brak, Tell el-Oueili, Nineveh, Pasargardae, Babylon, Tepe Gawra, Telloh, Hacinebi Tepe, Khorsabad, Nimrud, H3, As Sabiyah, Failaka, Ugarit, Uluburun

Sources

Ömür Harmansah at the Joukowsky Institute at Brown University is in the process of developing a course on Mesopotamia, which looks really useful.

Bernbeck, Reinhard 1995 Lasting alliances and emerging competition: Economic developments in early Mesopotamia. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 14(1):1-25.

Bertman, Stephen. 2004. Handbook to Life in Mesopotamia. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Brusasco, Paolo 2004 Theory and practice in the study of Mesopotamian domestic space. Antiquity 78(299):142-157.

De Ryck, I., A. Adriaens, and F. Adams 2005 An overview of Mesopotamian bronze metallurgy during the 3rd millennium BC. Journal of Cultural Heritage 6261–268. Free download

Jahjah, Munzer, Carlo Ulivieri, Antonio Invernizzi, and Roberto Parapetti 2007 Archaeological remote sensing application pre-postwar situation of Babylon archaeological site—Iraq. Acta Astronautica 61:121–130.

Luby, Edward M. 1997 The Ur-Archaeologist: Leonard Woolley and the treasures of Mesopotamia. Biblical Archaeology Review 22(2):60-61.

Rothman, Mitchell 2004 Studying the development of complex society: Mesopotamia in the late fifth and fourth millennia BC. Journal of Archaeological Research 12(1):75-119.

Wright, Henry T. 2006 Early state dynamics as political experiment. Journal of Anthropological Research 62(3):305-319.

Zainab Bahrani. 2004. Lawless in Mesopotamia. Natural History 113(2):44-49

More Archaeology Quick Tips

This About.com page has been optimized for print. To view this page in its original form, please visit: http://archaeology.about.com/od/mterms/qt/mesopotamia.htm

©2008 About.com, Inc., a part of The New York Times Company. All rights reserved.

 

 

Web address:      http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/      080218155534.htm

Excavations In Iran Unravel Mystery Of 'Red Snake'

ScienceDaily (Feb. 26, 2008) — New discoveries unearthed at an ancient frontier wall in Iran provide compelling evidence that the Persians matched the Romans for military might and engineering prowess.

The 'Great Wall of Gorgan'in north-eastern Iran, a barrier of awesome scale and sophistication, including over 30 military forts, an aqueduct, and water channels along its route, is being explored by an international team of archaeologists from Iran and the Universities of Edinburgh and Durham. This vast Wall-also known as the 'Red Snake'-is more than 1000 years older than the Great Wall of China, and longer than Hadrian's Wall and the Antonine Wall put together.

Until recently, nobody knew who had built the Wall. Theories ranged from Alexander the Great, in the 4th century BC, to the Persian king Khusrau I in the 6th century AD. Most scholars favoured a 2nd or 1st century BC construction. Scientific dating has now shown that the Wall was built in the 5th, or possibly, 6th century AD, by the Sasanian Persians. This Persian dynasty has created one of the most powerful empires in the ancient world, centred on Iran, and stretching from modern Iraq to southern Russia, Central Asia and Pakistan.

Modern survey techniques and satellite images have revealed that the forts were densely occupied with military style barrack blocks. Numerous finds discovered during the latest excavations indicate that the frontier bustled with life. Researchers estimate that some 30,000 soldiers could have been stationed at this Wall alone. It is thought that the 'Red Snake'was a defence system against the White Huns, who lived in Central Asia.

Eberhard Sauer, of the University of Edinburgh's School of History, Classics and Archaeology, said: “Our project challenges the traditional Euro-centric world view. At the time, when the Western Roman Empire was collapsing and even the Eastern Roman Empire was under great external pressure, the Sasanian Persian Empire mustered the manpower to build and garrison a monument of greater scale than anything comparable in the west. The Persians seem to match, or more than match, their late Roman rivals in army strength, organisational skills, engineering and water management.”

The research is published in the new edition of Current World Archaeology and the periodical Iran, Journal of the British Institute of Persian Studies 45.

---

Adapted from materials provided by University of Edinburgh.

Need to cite this story in your essay, paper, or report? Use one of the following formats:

APA

MLA

University of Edinburgh (2008, February 26). Excavations In Iran Unravel Mystery Of 'Red Snake'. ScienceDaily. Retrieved October 24, 2008, from http://www.sciencedaily.com­ /releases/2008/02/080218155534.htm

 

 

 

Archaeology

Treasures from the Royal Tombs of Ur

Exhibiting the Woolley Collection

By K. Kris Hirst, About.com

This magnificent headdress is from the burial tomb of Lady Puabi, city of Ur, ca. 2500 BC

University of Pennsylvania Museum

During the early decades of the twentieth century, C. Leonard Woolley, Director of the University of Pennsylvania Museum, excavated at a site near the modern day city of Al-Nasiriya in southern Iraq. Known locally as Tell al-Muqayyar, this site has also been recognized as the capital city of ancient Sumeria called Ur.

Ur was likely first settled during the Ubaid period near the end of the 6th millennium BC. Over time a true city grew, until about 2500 BC, by which time the city was one of the transportation centers of the Sumerian civilization. In this, its heyday, Ur was an important harbor at the head of the Persian Gulf. Because of Ur's extensive trade contacts, the rulers of Ur had access to the wealth of Arabia, India, Iran, and Afghanistan.

Woolley concentrated on the cemetery from the mid-third millennium, specifically on sixteen tombs of Ur's elite, rulers buried with about eighty attendants. These tombs held what are some of the world's greatest treasures of the past: a golden dagger encrusted with lapis lazuli; a statue of a ram in a thicket; a lyre decorated with a bull's head; a crown of golden leaves and rosettes belonging to the Lady Puabi.

After excavation, the Ur treasures were divided in the 1920s and 1930s among the University of Pennsylvania Museum in Philadelphia, the British Museum in London and the Iraq Museum in Baghdad. Five years ago, the Museum of the University of Pennsylvania gathered artifacts from each of these museums to create a traveling exhibit which Director Thomas Hoving has called "the finest, most resplendent and magical works of art in all of America".

So far the exhibit has traveled to 12 locations throughout the United States, and from March 13 through September of 2004, it will be at the Museum, University of Pennsylvania.

This About.com page has been optimized for print. To view this page in its original form, please visit: http://archaeology.about.com/cs/museums/a/urexhibit.htm

©2008 About.com, Inc., a part of The New York Times Company. All rights reserved.