Palaeolithic archaeologists are trained to recover and sort ancient material residues, and their interpretative frameworks stem primarily from cultural anthropology
Reading 1
Thesis: “Palaeolithic archaeologists are trained to recover and sort ancient material residues, and their interpretative frameworks stem primarily from cultural anthropology.” (pg 17, paragraph 1)
- Human paleontologist attributes morphological changes to natural science or gene flow.
- Paleontologists do reject biological explanations for the behavioral difference in modern humans.
- Cultural explanations downplay archeological evidence that human behavior grew with time.
Reading 2
Thesis: “these creatures are not the missing link we know from so many sci-fi tales” (pg 25, paragraph 1)
- They had no resemblance to humans, chimpanzees, or the hominin lineages.
- They had skills that set them apart from other primates
- These groups gave rise to other population of ape-like creatures
Discussion
The article by Richard Klein (2000) looks at archeology as the study of human behavior via the things we depend on for survival as well as material culture. The author notes that changes in behavior were among the fundamental factors in human evolution; thus, to understand the origin of mankind, archeology does have its importance. The article The Last Hominin by Agustin Fuentes looks at the last common ancestor between humans and chimps that lived over 10 million years ago. The article emphases that the creature had no resemblance to humans or even chimpanzees but did have common behaviors that created similarities to humans and chimpanzees. Both articles underline a similar concept of behavior being a key factor in understanding human origin. The focus of paleontologists on human behavior is seen as a step in the right track because the last hominin is differentiated from humans by its distinct behaviors.