{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Final study guide - Lecture Lecture 9 Homo erectus...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Lecture Lecture 9 Homo erectus innovations – 1.4 mya -mode 2 tools (Acheulean) -fire in east Africa Mode II distribution -geographic: Africa, Europe, Western Asia (rare in East Asia) -temporal: 1.4 mya-c. 200 kya Mode II (Acheulean) tools -standardized, symmetrical tools -careful raw material selection -large flake removal [>10 cm] -large number of flake scars -new tool types -specialized tools -sites with large numbers of tools -weapons, including spears Standardization -discoid tool -cleaver tool What do these tools mean? -their characteristics suggest that there is knowledge being shared about how to make the tool, what materials to use, etc. -with mode II, they imagine the shape and have to execute the plan -does mode II technology indicate use of language? do you have to have language to convey the information to make these tools? -some of these tools were very large Possible uses of hand axes -butchering large animals -digging up roots and rubbers -working wood -missiles -possible sources of flakes Olorgesailie, Kenya -1.0 to .4 mya -a great mode II tool site -when occupied, it was on the banks of a freshwater lake
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
-lots of raw material brought in but just left there, about a half ton brought in from about 50 km away -suggests they were preparing for something in the future and that this was a shared vision, lots of people felt this way -layers: .9 mya occupational debris and skulls, .7 mya ash fall, .6 mya cobble “storage”, modern surface Ratio of animal bones to stone tools at Olduvai gorge -many more tools than bones at Acheulean sites, opposite at Oldowan sites Things Mode II doesn’t tell us -mode II doesn’t always replace mode I, do the tools reflect intellectual/functional differences or cultural/tribal differences? -mode II shows minimum intellect of the maker, not the maximum Control of fire -humans were probably already familiar with natural fire -around 1.4 mya we see two sites with evidence of localized burn areas and cutmarked bones, processed bones within a burned area -Chewsowanja in Kenya is an example, we see what looks like a hearth and cutmarked bones -Swartkrans is another example Advantages of fire -defense and protection -used to drive large areas into an area where they could be killed -provides light, extends the day -provides a focus for activities Europe information -Ceptrano, Italy: .8 mya erectus -Isernia la Pineta, Italy: .7 mya: Home base site: mode 1 tools, a buchery site -Atapuerca, Spain: 1.4 mya-.3 mya: H. antecessor, H. heidelbergensis Atapuerca, Spain -lower level remains show a species called H. antecessor -pieces have been shattered and there aren’t very many details -antecessor shows less prognathism than erectus, has a hint of a chin (shows that the jaw is getting smaller) -antecessor bones are cannibalized, cutmarks on the bones made by stone tools, they are broken up into small pieces -this shows a kind of cannibalism that comes from when an enemy is conquered (exocannibalism) Cenozoic climate changes -in the late Cenozoic, there were many back and forth trends of warming and cooling -major human entry was the first interglacial between the first and second ice ages
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}