Bands, the first classification of human social organization, consist of small groups of one hundred or less all related by blood or marriage. For the most part, hunter-gatherer groups live in these small societies. For most of our history as well, anthropologists suggest that all members of our species, Homo Sapiens, lived in bands.^[1] We were not the only ones, though. All our ancestors and our evolutionary cousins, Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis, lived in these family bands as well. 

Neanderthals lived in Europe and West Asia starting 130,000 years ago and going extinct 40,000 years ago. They evolved from a European variant of the hominin Homo Heidelbergensis while our species evolved from the African variant. Neanderthals lived much like we did for most of our history, hunting game and foraging for plants. They looked very similar to us, save for a larger, longer skull, a shorter stature, a larger nose, and large eyes.

 They were similarly intelligent to us and created sophisticated technology for both hunting and domestic uses.^[2] They were spiritual people and some archaeologists suggest that they buried their dead.^[3] We know they cared for their families, but until recently, we did not know how these families operated. From various genetic studies, anthropologists determined that Neanderthals lived in small groups of ten to twenty individuals.^[4] Yet, a study published in October 2022 expanded on this information and gave us a greater understanding of Neanderthal family structures. 

In Chagyrskaya Cave and Okladnikov Cave in Southern Siberia, hundreds of thousands of bones belonging to eighty individuals were found. All remains were of similar periods. The finding of this many individuals together is a massive discovery because if a community’s genomes are all studied in context with their relatives and neighbors, there will be greater insight into the community and lives of these people – not just their evolution. 

The excavation and sequencing of bones in Chagyrskaya cave led to the discovery of the first Neanderthal father/daughter pair found. All other individuals sequenced from that cave were secondarily related as well save for two individuals. The study also looked into the roles of the sexes within Neanderthal society. DNA sequencing showed that the diversity of mitochondrial DNA was up to ten times greater than the diversity of Y chromosome DNA. Mitochondrial DNA is passed down from a mother to her children only, so this evidence suggests that the women of the species were more mobile than the men, moving around to other groups when they found mates.^[5]

Genetic studies like this one from Chagyrskaya Cave can show an unknown side of behavior not yet seen before. Thrillingly, the excavation is not yet over. Only one-third of Chagyrskaya was excavated at the time of this study, and future discoveries only await further in the cave. 

1. https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/hunter-gatherer-culture/ 

2. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Neanderthal/Neanderthal-classification#ref339688

3.https://australian.museum/blog/amri-news/this-month-in-archaeology-did-neanderthals-bury-their-dead/ 

4.https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1901789116 

5.https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-05283-y 

Hunter-gatherer groups, also referred to as “bands,” are the first classification level of societies. In general, hunter-gatherer societies are mobile communities comprised of approximately 100 members. These communities are defined by their patterns of movement. These patterns of movement are directly tied to the seasons thereby allowing them to better hunt for food. Large areas of land are essential for this nomadic way of life. The large sums of land support and supply them with a diverse array of wildlife which they can then use to feed the members of their community. Additionally, the bands live in temporary, movable shelters as they do not settle in one area for a long period of time (National Geographic, n.d.).

One particular group of hunter-gatherers has been identified as the San people of Africa. The San are the earliest known hunter-gathers and established themselves within the region of the Kalahari desert. Within their bands there was no established hierarchy. Disputes between individuals or families were settled through open discussion. Additionally, no single individual had sole ownership of any track of land. Instead, the land that they settled was held by the community who resided on it for the common good (KrugerPark, n.d.).

The primary tool that the San used in hunting was the bow and arrow, seen in Figure 1. The arrow did not directly kill the animal. Instead, a portion of the tip of the arrow was coated in poison (Marshall, n.d.). This poison was a neurotoxin that took some time to incapacitate the prey. It should be noted that the poison did not spread throughout the animal but remained in the area closely associated with the arrow strike. This area was cut out and excised so that the remainder of the animal could be used to feed the San. The poison did not spread throughout the animal (KrugerPark, n.d.).

The San’s diet was very diverse and consisted of anything that provided sustenance. It ranged from vegetable matter to meat from zebras, fish, lions and even insects. No part of the animal went to waste. The meat was eaten, the hides were used for clothing and everyday life. And even the bones were consumed for their marrow (KrugerPark, n.d.).

The San rock art, seen in Figure 2, has been discovered in the KwaZulu-Natal, Eastern Cape and the Western Cape provinces (KrugerPark, n.d.). Much of the art depicts bodies in motion whether they be animal or human. The art holds deep spiritual and religious meaning and does not symbolize day to day life. Instead, their art is a vehicle that is used to communicate with the spirit world (Vea, 2011). The primary color employed in the rock art was red. This was interspersed with a spattering of yellow, white, brown and black (KrugerPark, n.d.).

While not a complete description of the many facets of San society, the within provides a small window into important aspects of the San’s everyday life.

Further Research Links:

https://blog.sa-venues.com/provinces/san-rock-art-in-south-africa/ 

https://www.zmescience.com/science/news-science/bushmen-poison-hunting-052543/

References:

“Hunter-Gatherer Culture.” n.d. https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/hunter-gatherer-culture.

Marshall, Micheal. n.d. “First Poison Arrows May Have Been Loosed 70,000 Years Ago in Africa.” New Scientist. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2250799-first-poison-arrows-may-have-been-loosed-70000-years-ago-in-africa/.

“San – Bushmen – Kalahari, South Africa…” n.d. https://www.krugerpark.co.za/africa_bushmen.html.

Vea, Tanner. 2011. “Drakensberg: Barrier of Spears ~ San Rock Art of the Drakensberg | Nature | PBS.” Nature. March 2, 2011. https://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/drakensberg-barrier-of-spears-san-rock-art-of-the-drakensberg/4634/.

On the banks of the Kalambo River in Zambia, a team of archaeologists have made a new discovery that reframes the way experts think about early hominid societies. The discovery in question are two wooden logs, overlapping at a right angle, and held together by a carved notch, and with additional markings believed to have been made by sharp, stone tools. This find is now possibly the oldest known wooden structure in the world, dated by experts at the University of Aberystwyth to 476,000 years ago. The site, a hard to access beach strip upstream of a 770 foot waterfall that flows into Lake Tanganyika, first hosted archaeological activity in 2006, that was later continued in 2019 by this team of archaeologists from universities and other organizations across the United Kingdom, Belgium, and Zambia. In addition to the remarkable wooden structure, the team also discovered more wooden artifacts, including a digging stick, a log cut on both ends, a wedge, and part of a trap. These finds were dated to around 390,000 years ago. This dates the artifacts as before homo sapiens, leading archeologists to speculate that these were created by an early human species, homo heidelbergensis (Sample 2023).

One of the factors that make this find so notable is the rarity of wood this old. In this case, these ancient wooden artifacts were preserved due to the waterlogged, oxygen-deprived sediment they were found in. The pieces were dated using a method called luminescence dating, as the finds were too ancient to be analyzed with radiocarbon dating or dendrochronology. Luminescence dating measures the energy of photons being released, and dates the last time the artifact was exposed to sunlight or extreme heat.

An additional factor in this artifact’s significance is what it reveals about ancient hominids. The fitted wood is theorized to have once been part of a larger structure, perhaps a walkway, raised platform for storing food, keeping fire off the wet ground, or a base for a house. No matter the purpose of the structure, the implication is the same: early hominids had the capacity to create plans for complex structures, and theoretically a language to communicate about these plans. Geoff Duller, a team member and co author of the study published about the find, remarked “It’s completely changed my view of what people were capable of that time” (Hunt 2023). This also calls into question the belief that early hominids were completely nomadic if they were creating structures such as this one. Furthermore, it also opens up the possibility that more structures like this existed, as the wood used to create them likely would not have survived. As of today, the artifacts are currently being conserved in the United Kingdom, but will be returned to Zambia for analysis. Finally, the archaeological team, along with the Zambian government are working to get the area acknowledged as a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

References:

Harris, Gareth. “World’s Oldest Wooden Structure Discovered in Zambia.” The Art Newspaper – International art news and events, September 21, 2023. https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2023/09/21/worlds-oldest-wooden-structure-discovered-in-zambia. 

Hunt, Katie. “Archaeologists Unearth Oldest Known Wooden Structure in the World.” CNN, September 21, 2023. https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/20/africa/oldest-wooden-structure-zambia-scn/index.html. 

“Luminescence Dating Laboratory.” Luminescence Dating Laboratory | U.S. Geological Survey. Accessed September 23, 2023. https://www.usgs.gov/labs/luminescence-dating-laboratory/luminescence-dating-laboratory. 

Sample, Ian. “‘Oldest Wooden Structure’ Discovered on Border of Zambia and Tanzania.” The Guardian, September 20, 2023. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2023/sep/20/oldest-wooden-structure-discovered-on-border-of-zambia-and-tanzania.

Further Reading:

MUSONDA, FRANCIS B. “100 YEARS OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH IN ZAMBIA: CHANGING HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES.” The South African Archaeological Bulletin 67, no. 195 (2012): 88–100. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23631395. 

Barham, L., Duller, G.A.T., Candy, I. et al. Evidence for the earliest structural use of wood at least 476,000 years ago. Nature (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06557-9 

A legend in her own right, Nefertari has left a significant mark and her burial has provided archaeologists with invaluable information. Queen of Egypt from 1295 BC to 1256 BC (Encyclopedia.com, n.d.), Nefertari was married to Ramesses II, the third pharaoh of ancient Egypt’s 19th Dynasty; she wielded significant power, working alongside her husband in political affairs (Popular Archaeology, 2019). After her death in 1256 BC, her influence lived on through the people of ancient Egypt who honored her with a magnificent tomb located in the Valley of Queens, a burial site for all the wives of pharaohs. 

Nefertari’s tomb was discovered and excavated by Ernesto Schiaparelli, an Italian archaeologist, in 1904 (Minerva Magazine, 2021). Though her tomb had been looted of many precious artifacts, there were still a good number of artifacts left behind, including: fragments of a pink granite sarcophagus lid, fragments of gilded wood coffin, wall paintings, well-preserved sandals, parts of a gold bracelet, shabti figurines, an amulet, and two mummified knees (Popular Archaeology, 2019). These artifacts alone show how highly revered Nefertari was, reflecting not only her wealth but powerful influence.

Archaeologists can derive many aspects of ancient Egyptian life, culture, and religion through the artifacts in her tomb. For instance, Nefertari was buried with an djed-pillar amulet with her name inscribed on the back. Made of gilded wood and blue vitreous paste, the amulet represents the spine of Osiris, the god of death and the afterlife; the necklace serves as a symbol of stability and eternal life, important aspects of ancient Egyptian religion (Minerva Magazine, 2021). 

Figure 1. The djed-pillar amulet found in Nefertari’s tomb (Minerva Magazine, 2021). 

Another artifact that tells us more about the afterlife is the Book of the Dead. In ancient Egyptian belief, life continues after death in the afterlife. They developed a set of funerary beliefs and practices to make sure the deceased reached spiritual paradise. The most commonly known practice is mummification, which helps preserve the body. Following this process, the ancient Egyptians put the body in a coffin, which was then placed into a tomb with provisions for the afterlife. One of the provisions was burying the dead with funerary books, which contained spells and utterances to help them reach the afterlife safely. Nefertari was discovered buried with the Book of the Dead, the most well-known Egyptian funerary text (Noma, 2022).

Figure 2. A papyrus page from the Book of the Dead (Britannica, 2023).

Nefertari’s tomb is “Egypt’s best artistic documentations of elite culture and the life and ways of one of its greatest queens” (Popular Archaeology, 2019). We know that burials are used to symbolize and serve the dead, but we often forget that burials are made by the living people; therefore, burials are expressions of the living people’s relationship with others still alive. They reflect people’s thoughts and attitudes toward the deceased; hence, they are not the most accurate representation of who that person was (Renfrew). Nonetheless, burials, like Nefertari’s, are excellent resources to uncover what life, culture, and religion was like during a certain time period. 

Reference List

Britannica. “Book of the Dead: Ancient Egyptian Text.” June 16, 2023. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Book-of-the-Dead-ancient-Egyptian-text.

Encyclopedia.com. “Nefertari (c. 1295-1256 BCE).” n.d. https://www.encyclopedia.com/women/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/nefertari-c-1295-1256-bce#:~:text=Nefertari%20(c.-,1295%E2%80%931256%20bce),beauty%2C%20judging%20from%20contemporary%20paintings.

Minerva Magazine. “Nefertari: into the Valley of the Queens.” The Past. January 10, 2021. https://the-past.com/feature/nefertari-into-the-valley-of-the-queens/.

Noma. “Queen Nefertari’s Egypt Highlights Ancient Egyptian Masterpieces.” February 3, 2022. https://noma.org/queen-nefertaris-egypt-highlights-ancient-egyptian-masterpieces/#:~:text=Presented%20in%20six%20sweeping%20sections,around%20death%20and%20the%20afterlife.

Popular Archaeology. “Nefertari’s Tomb.” July 19, 2019. https://populararchaeology.com/article/nefertaris-tomb/.

Renfrew, Colin, and Paul Bahn. 2018.  Archaeology Essentials: Theories, Methods, and Practice. Fourth edition. Thames & Hudson. 

Read More:

Hoon Shin, Dong. “Queen Nefertari, the Royal Spouse of Ramses II: A Multidisciplinary Investigation of the Mummified Remains Found in her Tomb (QV66).” National Library of Medicine. November 30, 2016. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5130223/.

Osirisnet. “Nefertari – QV 66.” n.d. https://www.osirisnet.net/tombes/pharaons/nefertari/e_nefertari_03.htm.

The Clovis-First theory of human migration, a once widely accepted theory of human migration to the Americas, states that human inhabitation of the continent began between 12,900 and 13,100 years ago (Lovgren, 2021). A basic overview of the Clovis-First theory is that the Clovis people—named for Clovis, New Mexico, where lithics were uncovered in 1934—were the first to migrate to the Americas, coming over an ice bridge in Beringia during the later stages of the last glacial maximum. Over time, these mammoth hunters would disperse across the continent with their distinctive lithics being discovered at several archeological sites.

Though there is evidence to support the idea that Clovis people migrated from Asia (Gilbert, 2008), there is little evidence to prove that they were the first. Furthermore, over recent years the discovery of further sites around the country lends credence to the theory that many different groups of humans migrated to the Americas over several periods of time. Though there are many to choose from, I am going to examine only two different archeological sites, both of which predate the Clovis people.

The first site to catch my attention while I was researching dates back 18,000 years, in what is now Oregon. Back in 2012, archeologists uncovered teeth belonging to a—since extinct—species of camel, which had been buried by the eruption of Mount St. Helens over 15,000 years ago (Pettigrew, 2023). As the researchers dug deeper, they also discovered a blade which had bison blood residue on it; due to stratigraphic position, it is thought to be even older than the camel’s teeth. Upon carbon dating the teeth, researchers discovered that the teeth themselves dated back to over 18,200 years ago, confirming that this site pre-dates the Clovis peoples by over 4,500 years at the low end.

The second important site that caught my attention was Coopers Ferry, a site in Idaho dating back over 16,000 years. At Coopers Ferry, over 200 artifacts were found, including stone tools, lithics, and bone fragments (Davis, 2019). Based on the fact that an opening in the ice caps across Canada would not appear for up to another millennium, it is likely that the people of Coopers Ferry arrived from the Pacific (Wade, 2019). Further credence is given to this theory based on the position of the site along a river, where humans likely came upstream from the ocean. Due to those facts, Coopers Ferry and Rimrock Draw fundamentally contradict the Clovis-First theory, and redefine the dynamics of human dispersal across the Americas.

References

Further Reading

• OPB Article
• National Geographic
• KOIN 6 Article

Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie was an influential archaeologist who primarily worked in Egyptology. He published around 1,000 pieces on ancient through medieval Egypt, but is most well-known for his work on ancient Egyptian pottery seriation. He is credited with inventing seriation as a whole, which is the practice of organizing artifacts in chronological order. In 1901, Flinders Petrie created a revolutionary pottery seriation chart based on predynastic burial sites at Abadiyeh and Hu, which organized pottery into different classes and ages. These classes include incised black, polished red, wavy-handled, and so on. His methodology combined stratigraphy and visual cues, but unfortunately, he often included personal biases and wild theories in his findings. Much of Flinders Petrie’s findings have been revised or debunked. However, his invention of seriation has been adopted by most archaeologists, and is still used today. It was the best form of dating before modern methods, such as radiocarbon dating.

Using seriation, Flinders Petrie aimed to determine the ages of various burial sites. He had assistants draw the pots he found, then he organized them into types and ages. He noted that though form stayed the same, styles varied, which allowed him to further narrow down the age of the graves. Because of the unique style of the burials (not mummies, positioned bodies, etc), Flinders Petrie actually decided that he had discovered a new race, rather than the graves being Egyptian. This demonstrates that although seriation can provide relative ages for sites, it does not determine what the content actually means.

Other than Egypt, Flinders Petrie worked on sites in Palestine and Britain, and made discoveries concerning Greece and Israel. On many of these occasions, he applied seriation. Aside from pottery, he conducted research on homes, the pyramids, ancient cities, papyrus scrolls, and much more. His life consisted of numerous important contributions to archaeology (he was even knighted for them), and he died at age 89 in Jerusalem.

Of course, seriation is not only used for pottery. It can be used for almost any artifact, at any site, and anywhere in the world. It can even be applied to disciplines such as art history. In the textbook, the example given was about gravestones in Massachusetts and how their design indicates what time period they were made. They are extremely far removed – physically and temporally – from predynastic Egypt, yet the same technique can be applied to both burial sites. Though Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie had his fair share of strange ideas, his invention of seriation has, and will, remain a staple of archaeological dating methods.

Sources:

https://the-past.com/shorts/the-picture-desk/flinders-petries-sequence-dating-chart/ (info + photo)
https://fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/explore-our-collection/highlights/context/patrons-donors-collectors/william-matthew-flinders-petrie (info)
https://www.whipplelib.hps.cam.ac.uk/special/exhibitions-and-displays/conflicting-chronologies/establishing-predynastic-egypt (info + photo)
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Flinders-Petrie (info)

Other references:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwYk9-U8H5k

https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/term/BIOG62763

Friday, September 16th, my group of classmates finished our fieldwork at the Kimlin Cider Mill and the remains of its horse-drawn cider press. The old mill served as a popular café destination for Vassar students of the early 1900s—our class returned to the mill to search for any signs of its historical mill or any material that would have pointed towards life in the early 20th century. We used methods of stratigraphy and other archaeological survey systems to do so, recording our observations in each 10 cm increment we created below the sod. After a while, we could see how the layers slowly began to change in soil makeup and earth density, as well as the age of artifacts we found. This method of layered ground work that we performed at the old cider mill was especially interesting to me, as it felt like a direct representation of the readings in our class textbook, and also made me question other areas of stratigraphic surveying and the history revealed beneath our feet. Our combined reading and layered ground work reminded me of the ancient sedimentary layers of the Grand Canyon, which stuck out to me when I visited the national park as a child. 

The Grand Canyon’s ancient and distinct layers of rock are some of the world’s clearest examples of prehistoric sedimentation. The canyon’s strata is separated into various ages and subgroups, which formed on top of each other over millions of years of erosion and sediment build up, creating the sharp lines seen in the image above. According to the Grand Canyon’s National Park services, the oldest of the Canyon’s visible rock layers are up to 1,840 million years old (Mathis, Bowman). The Grand Canyon’s rock stratification is significant because of its visual representation of archaeological and geological site history. Just by viewing the Canyon’s rock features, one is looking hundreds of millions of years into the past. 

Apart from the Canyon’s Geological stratification, the National Park is home to an extensive amount of human history and ancient relics. Up to eleven Native American groups have been associated with the Canyon over thousands of years. Among the remains of ancient Native American living spaces and stone houses, artifacts of pottery, tools and small animal figurines are among the most interesting of the Grand Canyon’s hidden relics (“Archaeological Resources”). I was reminded again of our fieldwork which brought us face-to-face with forgotten objects hidden below ground. 

Completing my fieldwork by observing layers of the ground below us helped me better understand some of our world’s most important examples of geological history. My connection with our class fieldwork and the Grand Canyon helped me connect our textbook definitions of archaeology to real world examples, and encouraged me to look deeper into the archaeological history of one of America’s most famous natural sites. After our fieldwork and my research on the Grand Canyon’s ancient sedimentary layers, I was able to put value to the phrase, ‘the deeper you dig, the older things get.’

Works Cited

“Archaeological Resources – Grand Canyon National Park (U.S.” National Park Service, https://www.nps.gov/grca/learn/historyculture/arch.htm. Accessed 17 September 2023.

Mathis, Allyson, and Carl Bowman. “Telling Time at Grand Canyon National Park (U.S.” National Park Service, 25 April 2018, https://www.nps.gov/articles/age-of-rocks-in-grand-canyon.htm. Accessed 17 September 2023.

Additional Resources:

“Grand Canyon Geology”

“Whose Land Am I On? Native American Tribes in the Grand Canyon”

Use-wear analysis is a technique employed by archaeologists, more specifically lithic analysts, to help understand the function of found tools. It is performed through macroscopic and microscopic analysis of these tool’s surfaces and edges in order to determine what the tools might have been originally used for. It is most commonly utilized for stone or rock tools but can be used on other materials as well, such as flint and bone. The term wear is generally defined as “the progressive loss of substance from surfaces as they move against each other”. (Adams, 2017.) and by studying this wear archaeologists are able to understand what purpose the tool served. Through use-wear analysis, questions such as “what material were these stones used on?”, “how were they used?’, and “why were they used?” are all able to be answered. (Texas Beyond History.)

An example of findings determined through use-wear analysis is the difference between pottery polishers and stone polishers. In a blog published by the Desert Archaeology Inc, Dr. Jenny Adams discusses how she was able to determine these slight differences using use wear techniques. “The stones selected for polishing pottery or stone are fine grained, meaning that the stone burnished the surface being polished rather than abrading it.” (Adams, 2017.) In contrast, “The shiny surface on a well-used pottery polisher has numerous abrasions caused by temper and other particles in the clay.” (Adams, 2017.) Archaeologists are even able to tell which parts of the tool were held in the hand of the person using it through microscopic analysis and studying the abrasions as seen below in Figure 1. When you compare Figure 1 and Figure 2, it is easy to see that Figure 1 is clearly much more rounded and smooth than the granular appearance in Figure 2. Hence, Figure 1 displays the area in which the used held the tool, whereas Figure 2 displays an unused area of the tool.

Figure 1: Granular, unused part of the tool (Adams, 2017.)

Figure 2: Rounded and smoothed part of the tool held in hand (Adams, 2017.)

The process used to conduct use-wear analysis varies for each study, but typically the artifacts are examined using “bright field microscopy” (Adams, 2017.) in their unwashed condition so that potential residues left over such as animal hair, blood, plant grains, wood fragments, can be identified and used as possible clues to help further understand the purpose of the artifact. Next, the scientists look at the striations on the rock as well as the bumps and abnormalities or smoothness on the edges of the rocks to understand where the rock bore the most force, and in turn how that translates to its use. By using residues as well as examining the striations imprinted on the tools, archaeologists can usually come to a conclusion and determine the tools’ use-actions which include “scraping, planning, slicing, whittling, boring, and cutting”. (Texas Beyond History.)

Reference List:

Adams, Jenny. November 30, 2017. “The Tell-tale Art: Recognizing Use-wear on Stone Tools.” Desert Archaeology, Inc. https://desert.com/use-wear/ 

Texas Beyond History. https://www.texasbeyondhistory.net/varga/images/use.html 

“Use-wear Analysis.” Newcastle University, The Cutting Edge. https://research.ncl.ac.uk/thecuttingedge/aboutourproject/use-wearanalysis/