Mica Glantz - Neandertal Paleobiogeography Colloquium at UC Denver

Next Friday, February 5 2010 (2:30PM, in AD 200), the UC Denver Anthropology Department is hosting a colloquium by Dr. Mica Glantz on Neandertal paleobiogeography in Central Asia (here'a link to a 2007 interview on her work on John Hawks' blog). Details below.

***********************************

Neandertal paleobiogeography in Central Asia: Testing the validity of the Neandertal range

Prof. Mica Glantz
Department of Anthropology
Colorado State University

Abstract:

The present study is primarily concerned with outlining the possible biogeographical limits of the Neandertal range. Until recently, the site of Teshik-Tash Cave in Uzbekistan was considered the eastern outpost of European Neandertals. In 2007, the mtDNA sequence of one Okladnikov Cave hominin was found to be similar to that of the Teshik- Tash child. Okladnikov Cave in southern Siberia is roughly 15 degrees to the north and east of Teshik-Tash. The working hypothesis is that the geographical region due east of Okladnikov and Teshik-Tash Caves expresses biogeographical factors that significantly differ from the region due west of these Neandertal sites. If this hypothesis is upheld, then these factors may define the limits of the Neandertal range. Results indicate that the biogeography of the region and the existing archaeological and hominin fossil records contain no clear evidence of a delimitation of Neandertal territory and that of East Asian archaics.

When: Friday February 5, 2010 – 2:30PM
Where: Administration Building, Rm. 200, University of Colorado Denver

Fear and loathing in the Pleistocene

There are a couple of interesting items on Neanderthals coming our way today, courtesy of the National Geographic. First is this short video that presents the contrasting views of I. Tattersall and J. Hawks on modern human-Neanderthal interactions:

Now, I'm sure it was unintentional, but this cracked me up: as the narrator announces "Today, it’s obvious who dominates the planet" and pauses, the video cues to a shot of John standing in the middle of Times Square(?), looking straight into the camera! And it's only fitting, really, considering the refreshing perspective Hawks brings to the debate over competition between the two hominin groups (transcripted by yours truly):

"It would be insane to go out and pick a fight. You’re not a military organization going in, looking to conquer. You’re a small group yourself. You sort of have to find a way to live with the locals and, as you do that, you learn from them to some extent. And the locals learn from you.

I feel like the defense attorney for the Neanderthals sometimes. I’m trying to see the ways that they overlap with us and trying to add complexity to the story because any story that involves things happening over a continent over thousands of years has got to be complicated."

Good little video, overall, though I was a bit aggravated by the conclusions narrated towards the end of the video: "Fossils are inconclusive, the answer lies in DNA." Well, no, actually. DNA provides some information, fossils provide other types of information and archaeology provides yet other information, all of which is necessary and complementary to reach an adequate understanding of this process. I hammer this a lot to my students and in my work, but it really cheapens the practice of physical anthropology and archaeology when they're considered only as icing on the interpretive cake of evolutionary genetics. Bones and stones (to simplify) are not just ancillary evidence: they're critically important sources of data that need to be accounted for fully as opposed to simply made to fit in the models derived from other disciplines. It's often all too tempting to grant greater weight to the conclusions of disciplines that are more directly grounded in the life sciences, but it's important to realize that they're also fraught with internal tensions and debates and wide-ranging differences in interpretation.

This ties in neatly with the second NG item, namely a report on a new reconstruction of a Neanderthal female. Here's a shot of this beauty:



But what you should really check out is the set of photos related to this reconstruction. Five pictures in, there's an especially great shot of the Neanderthal woman (nicknamed Wilma) thrusting a spear and sporting an extensive set of black tattoos on her back and upper chest. Now, why is this so neat (beyond being the closest thing to Neanderthal fetish/alterna-porn you're likely to ever see - I mean, it's a naked chick with tats and a weapon!)? Because the reconstruction is based on genetics, skeletal anatomy and archaeology. You have the genetics that have informed the artists about the likely hair and skin color of the Neanderthal. You have the skeletal morphology dictating the overall look and posture of the thing. And finally, you have the archaeology contributing some additional behavioral information. In this specific case, the reconstruction draws on discussions about the fact that Neanderthal females may have been integral to large game procurement strategies (i.e., no sexual division of labor) and on the fact that Neanderthals appear to have used manganese as a coloring material to on their skin. Kudos to the artists for artfully integrating all three lines of evidence!

Four Stone Hearth, Vol. 38: The Early Bird Special Edition

It's that time again, when anthropologically-inclined bloggers congregate around the Four Stone Hearth to exchange digital perspectives about the stones they've been kicking around lately. It was a close competition between an "Early Bird Special" and a "Death of a Blogger" edition, but since I had the whole enchilada ready one day early, the EBS theme took home the cup. So, in the interest of being early birdy (and special!), let's proceed without further ado:

• At Archaeolog, invited poster Cornelius Holtorf tackles the thorny issue of whether archaeologists really want to be associated with characters such as Indiana Jones and Lara Croft in "Hero! Real archaeology and "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull"(and why doesn't anyone ever mention Sydney Fox in these debates!?). In related news, an April 1 post at by Thadd at Archaeoporn breaks the news that the new Indiana Jones movie will accurately depict the practice of archaeology... serious reading, that!
• Shifting the focus from what archaeologists do to what the people they study did, Archaezoo reviews a recent paper about Upper Paleolithic horse hunters at Le Solutré that suggests that horse remains accumulated at that site as the result of hunters ambushing large numbers of migrating equids. Alex Steenhuyse of Anthrosite Blog also talks about Paleolithic hunting, in this case focusing on research on shifts in reindeer body part representation at Grotte XVI across the Middle-Upper Paleolithic transition.
• In other 'humans killing critters' news, there has been a lot of blogging about the news that it appears that it was both climate and humans that jointly did the mammoths in. Various takes on the study are provided by Andrew Guerin at Artificial Habitat, Kambiz Kamrani at Anthropology.net, and Greg Laden at Greg Laden's Blog.
  
• For something completely different, check out what Jeff Medkeff the Blue Collar Scientist has to say about non-peer-reviewed claims that the Sumerians observed and accurately documented an asteroid impact event at Köfels, Austria. In other odd book news, you should most certainly have a look at what John Hawks has to say about a recent book by Lynch and Granger in which they talk at length about the "amazing" Boskops!
  
• Over at Remote Central, you can find some of Terry Toohill's thoughts on "Human Evolution on Trial - Evolution." Still at Remote Central, Tim Jones also presents a summary of new information about the ongoing excavations at Stonehenge.
  
• In other excavation news, Martin Rundkvist of Aardvarchaeology (and originator of the Four Stone Hearth carnival!) reports on the "big honking hoard" found in a humble Iron Age burial.
• At Shared Symbolic Storage, Michael Pleyer reviews some of the papers presented at the Evolang 08 conference, and talks about the importance of spatial cognition and genetic transmission in contemporary research on linguistic evolution.
  
• Paul Wren of Wanna Be An Anthropologist illustrates a contemporary case of people creating a material record of their discard behaviors as he looks for cultural universals. The one he proposes is that all humans litter.
• At Archaeoporn, Thadd Nelson explores claims that people make to link archaeology and the supernatural, based on recent work reviewing Neolithic well digging.
• Mike Smith of Publishing Archaeology provides some comments about a new open access general anthropology journal, in which authors pay to publish, as well as on sloppy editing in some edited volumes.
• Over at Testimony of the Spade, Magnus Reuterdahl offers some thoughts on the "an ear for an ear" judgment that has been served against a Finnish tourist for damaging one of the Easter Island statues.
• Martin Cagliani (Mundo Neandertal) and Kris Hirst (Archaeology Blog) shoot the... errr, well, discuss the discovery of 'human remains' (literally) on the coast of Washington State that predate the Clovis culture found later in North America.
• At The Ideophone, Mark Dingemanse discusses "Migration Stories" and presents some thoughts about current perceptions of recent transcribed oral accounts of the Cushite past of the Mawu people of present-day Ghana.
• And to conclude this installment of Four Stone Hearth, Daniel Lende of Neuroanthropology offers two related and thought-provoking posts on Human Biology and Models for Obesity and on Culture and Inequality in the Obesity Debate.

Thanks again to everybody who sent links! The next Four Stone Hearth will be held in 15 days' time at Hominin Dental Anthropology! Be sure to send Jason some links!