Cengage Advantage Books: Understanding Humans: An ...taylor2/Chapter 1.pdf · 2 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION TO ANTHROPOLOGY Figure 1-1 We are complex products of both culture and biology

Licensed to:

Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).

Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

This is an electronic version of the print textbook. Due to electronic rights restrictions,some third party content may be suppressed. Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. The publisher reserves the right to remove content from this title at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. Forvaluable information on pricing, previous editions, changes to current editions, and alternate formats, please visit www.cengage.com/highered to search by ISBN#, author, title, or keyword for materials in your areas of interest.

Licensed to:

Understanding Humans: Introduction to Physical Anthropology and Archaeology, Eleventh Edition

Barry Lewis, Robert Jurmain, and Lynn Kilgore

Executive Editor: Mark Kerr

Acquiring Sponsoring Editor: Erin Mitchell

Developmental Editor: Lin Gaylord

Assistant Editor: Mallory Ortberg

Media Editor: John Chell

Marketing Program Manager: Janay Pryor

Content Project Manager: Cheri Palmer

Art Director: Caryl Gorska

Manufacturing Planner: Judy Inouye

Rights Acquisitions Specialist: Dean Dauphinais

Design, Production Services, and Composition: Hespenheide Design

Photo Researcher: Patti Zeman, Hespenheide Design

Text Researcher: Ashley Liening

Copy Editor: Janet Greenblatt

Cover Designer: Hespenheide Design

Cover Image: © Rosino / www.flickr.com/photos/rosino

© 2013, 2010 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this work covered by the copyright herein may be reproduced, transmitted, stored, or used in any form or by any means graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including but not limited to photocopying, recording, scanning, digitizing, taping, Web distribution, information networks, or information storage and retrieval systems, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without the prior written permission of the publisher.

For product information and technology assistance, contact us at

Cengage Learning Customer & Sales Support, 1-800-354-9706.

For permission to use material from this text or product, submit all requests online at www.cengage.com/permissions.

Further permissions questions can be e-mailed to [email protected].

Library of Congress Control Number: 2011945172

ISBN-13: 978-1-111-83177-6 ISBN-10: 1-111-83177-7

Wadsworth20 Davis Drive Belmont, CA 94002-3098 USA

Cengage Learning is a leading provider of customized learning solutions with office locations around the globe, including Singapore, the United Kingdom, Australia, Mexico, Brazil, and Japan. Locate your local office at www.cengage.com/global.

Cengage Learning products are represented in Canada by Nelson Education, Ltd.

To learn more about Wadsworth, visit www.cengage.com/wadsworth

Purchase any of our products at your local college store or at our pre-ferred online store www.CengageBrain.com.

Printed in the United States of America1 2 3 4 5 6 7 16 15 14 13 12



Licensed to:

Introduction to Anthropology

AnthropologyC H A P T E R1

© Dr. Robert Clouse

L E A R N I N G O B J E C T I V E S

After you have mastered the material in this chapter, you will be able to:

▶ Explain and give examples of the relevance of anthropology to modern everyday life.

▶ Describe the concept of biocultural evolution and explain why it is an essential component of understanding human evolution.

▶ Define basic anthropological concepts and understand their relationship to the goals of anthropological research.

▶ Describe the main similarities and differences between physical anthropology and archaeology as approaches for understanding the human past.

▶ Explain the logic of the scientific method as it is applied in anthropological research.



Licensed to:

2

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION TO ANTHROPOLOGY

Figure 1-1We are complex products of both culture and

biology. In many ways, the evolutionary his-

tory of modern humans left us better adapted

to life as a hunter-gatherer than as a modern

city dweller.

Here you are, taking an anthropology course about human origins and evo-lution. Why should you learn about “stones and bones”? It’s irrelevant to modern everyday life, right?

Think again. In Collapse: How Societies Choose to

Fail or Succeed, Jared Diamond says that he remains optimistic about the future because of the interconnected-ness of modern societies: “Past societ-ies lacked archaeologists and televi-sion” (Diamond, 2005, p. 525). His point is that we are much better prepared to face future challenges because, unlike our ancestors, so many of us know so much about how and why past societ-ies developed and failed. We have the opportunity to learn from these mis-takes and successes and, hopefully, to build a better, more sustainable, and brighter future for everyone.

On a more personal level, consider the recent rise of obesity as a serious health problem in many affluent coun-tries. The underlying causes are com-plex, but the human biological past is one important factor (Bellisari, 2008). All but a tiny fraction of the existence of our species was spent as physically active hunter-gatherers whose everyday staple foods tended to be low in fat, sugar, and salt and high in fiber, going from nature to table with minimal processing. Few

twenty-first-century lifestyles are like that, but our bodies are well designed for our biological past, not our very differ-ent present (Fig. 1-1). The more that we understand our biological past, the bet-ter we will understand many modern health issues.

This and many other examples dem-onstrate that modern humans are cultur-al and biological beings whose present and future reflect their past. Humans are also probably unique among animals in the capacity to ask the question why. We can learn about our deep, rich past, and by doing so we gain the opportunity to profit from the experience. These quali-ties are fundamental motivations for the field of anthropology and for this book as an introduction to the biocultural per-spective of human evolution.

Anthropology addresses the entire scope of the human experience and brings multiple perspectives to bear on the study of what it is to be human. Such a broad focus encompasses all top-ics related to behavior, including social relationships (for example, kinship and marriage patterns), religion, ritual, tech-nology, subsistence, and economic and political systems. Anthropology is also concerned with the biological and evolu-tionary dimensions of our species, such as genetics, anatomy, skeletal structure, adaptation to disease and other environ-mental factors, growth, nutrition, and, ultimately, all the evolutionary processes that resulted in the development of mod-ern humans.

In keeping with anthropology’s commitment to a broad perspective, aspects of this discipline rest firm-ly in both science and the humanities: Anthropologists answer many ques-tions by applying the scientific method, but they also apply interpretive meth-ods to achieve an understanding of such human qualities as love, individ-ual or group identity, compassion, and ethnicity.

The Biocultural ApproachThe concept of biocultural evolution underlies the anthropological perspec-tive. Humans are the product of the

© P

aul H

ariz

an /

Get

ty Im

ages

evolution A change in the genetic struc-

ture of a population from one generation to

the next. The term is also frequently used

to refer to the appearance of a new species.

anthropology The field of inquiry that stud-

ies human culture and evolutionary aspects

of human biology; includes cultural anthro-

pology, archaeology, linguistics, and physical

anthropology.

scientific method An approach to research

whereby a problem is identified, a hypothesis

(or hypothetical explanation) is stated, and

that hypothesis is tested through the collec-

tion and analysis of data.

biocultural evolution The mutual, inter-

active evolution of human biology and cul-

ture; the concept that biology makes culture

possible and that developing culture further

influences the direction of biological evolu-

tion; a basic concept in understanding the

unique components of human evolution.

culture All aspects of human adaptation,

including technology, traditions, language,

religion, and social roles. Culture is a set of

learned behaviors; it is transmitted from one

generation to the next through learning and

not by biological or genetic means.

species A group of organisms that can inter-

breed to produce fertile offspring. Members

of one species are reproductively isolated

from members of all other species (i.e., they

can’t mate with them to produce fertile

offspring).

© P

aul H

ariz

an /

Get

ty Im

ages



Licensed to:

3

THE BIOCULTURAL APPROACH

combined influences of biology and culture that have shaped our evolution-ary history over the last several million years. It is by tracing the changing inter-action between biology and culture and understanding how the process worked in the past and how it continues to work today that we are able to come to grips scientifically with what we are, how and why we came to be the animal that we are today, and the successes and failures we made along the way.

As we’ll emphasize in this book, humans have occupied center stage in only one short scene of life’s evolu-tionary play. Our role is fascinating, but many of the cultural factors that we point to as evidence of our extraor-dinary success as a species increas-

ingly threaten the existence of many plants and animals, including ourselves. Culture is therefore an extremely impor-tant concept, not only as it pertains to modern humans but also in terms of its critical role in human evolution, past as well as future.

Viewed in an evolutionary perspec-tive, human culture can be described as the strategy by which people adapt to the natural and social environments in which they live. Culture includes tech-nologies that range from stone tools to computers; subsistence patterns rang-ing from hunting and gathering to agri-business; housing types from thatched huts to skyscrapers; and clothing from animal skins to synthetic fibers (Fig. 1-2). Because religion, values, social

Lynn

Kilg

ore

Lynn

Kilg

ore

Lynn

Kilg

ore

NA

SA

/ S

pace

Tel

esco

pe S

cien

ce In

stit

ute

Figure 1-2(a) An early stone tool from East Africa. This

type of tool was used there about 1.5 million

years ago. (b) Hubble space telescope against

the earth’s horizon. (c) A Samburu woman

building a simple, traditional dwelling of stems,

plant fibers, and mud. (d) These Hong Kong

skyscrapers are typical of cities in industrialized

countries today.

© iS

tock

phot

o.co

m /

Jus

tin

Hor

ocks

(a)

(d)

(b)

(c)



Licensed to:

4


society A group of people who share a

common culture.

enculturation The process by which indi-

viduals, generally as children, learn the values

and beliefs of the family, peer groups, and

society in which they are raised.

adaptation Functional response of organ-

isms or populations to the environment.

Adaptation results from evolutionary change

(specifically, as a result of natural selection).

Enlightenment An eighteenth-century

philosophical movement in western Europe

that assumed a knowable order to the natu-

ral world and the interpretive value of reason

as the primary means of identifying and

explaining this order.

organization, language, kinship, mar-riage rules, gender roles, and so on, are all aspects of culture, culture shapes people’s perceptions of the external envi-ronment, or worldview, in particular ways that distinguish each society from all others.

One fundamental point to remem-ber is that culture is learned and not bio-logically determined. In other words, we inherit genes that influence our bio-logical characteristics, but those genes have no impact on cultural behavior. Beginning in infancy, each of us begins slowly to learn, through the process called enculturation, the language and dialect of our family and community, as well as the shared norms, values, beliefs, and other aspects of culture that we need to be a productive member of the society of which we are a part. Our worldviews are shaped much more by our respec-tive enculturation experiences than by our unique genetic ancestry. We are all products of the culture in which we are socialized, and since most human behav-ior is learned, it clearly is also culturally patterned.

As biological beings, humans are also subject to the same evolutionary forces that act on all living things On hearing the term evolution, many people think of the appearance of new species. Certainly, new species formation is one conse-quence of evolution; however, biologists see evolution as an ongoing process with a precise genetic meaning. Quite sim-ply, evolution is a change in the genetic makeup of a population from one gener-ation to the next. It’s the accumulation of such changes over considerable periods of time that can result in the emergence or extinction of species. In the course of human evolution, biocultural inter-actions have resulted in such anatomi-cal, biological, and behavioral changes as increased brain size, reorganization of neurological structures, decreased tooth size, and development of language, to list a few. Biocultural interactions are still critically important today; among other things, they are changing patterns of disease worldwide. As one example, changing social and sexual mores in many countries may have influenced the evolutionary rate of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. Certainly, these cultural

factors are influencing the spread of HIV throughout populations in both devel-oped and developing countries.

Biologists study all the biologi-cal aspects of humankind, including adaptation and evolution, but when such research also considers the role of cultural factors, it falls within the dis-cipline of anthropology. This approach recognizes that the human predisposi-tion to assimilate a culture and to func-tion within it is influenced by biologi-cal factors. But in the course of human evolution, as you’ll see, the role of cul-ture has increasingly assumed an added importance. In this respect, humans are unlike all other animals.

What Is Anthropology? Stated ambitiously but simply, anthro-pology is the study of humankind. The term itself is derived from the Greek words anthropos, meaning “human,” and logos, meaning “word” or “study of.” Clearly, anthropologists aren’t the only scientists who study humans, and the goals of anthropology are shared by other disciplines within the social, behavioral, and biological sciences. As we noted earlier, the main difference between anthropology and other relat-ed fields is anthropology’s broad per-spective, which integrates the findings of many disciplines, including sociolo-gy, economics, history, psychology, and biology.

In the United States, anthropology comprises three main subfields: cultural anthropology, archaeology, and physical anthropology. Additionally, many uni-versities include linguistic anthropology as a fourth subfield. Each of these sub-disciplines, in turn, is divided into more specialized areas of interest. The follow-ing section briefly describes the main subdisciplines of anthropology.

Cultural Anthropology

Cultural anthropology (also called social anthropology) is the study of all aspects of human behavior. Its beginnings are rooted in the Enlightenment of the eight-eenth century, which exerted consider-able influence on how Europeans viewed



Licensed to:

5

WHAT IS ANTHROPOLOGY?

ethnographies Detailed descriptive studies

of human societies. In cultural anthropology,

ethnography is traditionally the study of non-

Western societies.

paleoanthropology The interdisciplinary

approach to the study of earlier hominins—

their chronology, physical structure, archaeo-

logical remains, habitats, etc.

the place of humans in nature, ques-tioned the extent to which there exists a knowable order to the natural world, and introduced fresh concepts of “primitive,” or traditional, societies. These changes in political and social philosophy were par-ticularly felt in the spread of European colonial powers between 1500 and 1900.

The interest in traditional societies led many early anthropologists to study and record lifeways that are now mostly extinct. These studies yielded descrip-tive ethnographies that later became the basis for comparisons between societ-ies. Early ethnographies were narratives emphasizing such phenomena as reli-gion, ritual, myth, use of symbols, sub-sistence and dietary preferences, technol-ogy, gender roles, child-rearing practices, taboos, medical practices, and how kin-ship was reckoned.

The focus of cultural anthropology changed considerably with the global social, political, and economic upheav-als of the twentieth century. Researchers using traditional ethnographic meth-ods still spend months or years living in and studying various societies, but the nature of the study groups has shifted. For example, in recent decades, ethno-graphic techniques have been applied to the study of diverse subcultures and their interactions with one anoth-er in contemporary metropolitan areas. The subfield of cultural anthropology that deals with issues of inner cities is appropriately called urban anthropology. Among the many issues addressed by urban anthropologists are relationships between various ethnic groups, those aspects of traditional societies that are maintained by immigrant populations, poverty, labor relations, homelessness, access to health care, and problems fac-ing the elderly.

Medical anthropology is the subfield that explores the relationship between various cultural attributes and health and disease. Areas of interest include how different groups view disease processes and how these views affect treatment or the willingness to accept treatment. When medical anthropolo-gists focus on the social dimensions of disease, they may collaborate with phy-sicians and physical anthropologists. Indeed, many medical anthropologists

receive much of their training in physical anthropology.

Many subfields of cultural anthro-pology have practical applications and are pursued by anthropologists working both within and outside the university setting. This approach is aptly termed applied anthropology. Although most applied anthropologists regard them-selves as cultural anthropologists, the designation is also sometimes used to describe the activities of archaeologists and physical anthropologists. Indeed, the various fields of anthropology, as they are practiced in the United States, overlap to a considerable degree. After all, that was the rationale for combining them under the umbrella of anthropol-ogy in the first place.

Physical Anthropology

Physical anthropology (also called bio-logical anthropology) is the study of human biology within the framework of evolution and with an emphasis on the interaction between biology and cul-ture. The origins of physical anthro-pology are found in two main areas of nineteenth-century research. First, there was increasing curiosity among many scientists (at the time called natural his-torians) regarding the mechanisms by which modern species had come to be. In other words, they were beginning to doubt the literal, biblical interpreta-tion of creation. Although most scientists weren’t prepared to believe that humans had evolved from earlier forms, discov-eries of several Neandertal fossils (see Chapter 11) in the 1800s raised questions about the origins and antiquity of the human species.

The sparks of interest in biologi-cal change over time were fanned into flames by the publication of Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species in 1859. Today, paleoanthropology, or the study of human evolution, particu-larly as revealed in the fossil record, is a major subfield of physical anthropol-ogy (Fig. 1-3). There are now thousands of specimens of the remains of human ancestors housed in research collec-tions. Taken together, these fossils span at least 4 million years of prehistory; and although incomplete, they provide



Licensed to:

6


hominin A member of the tribe Hominini,

the evolutionary group that includes modern

humans and now-extinct bipedal relatives.

anthropometry Measurement of human

body parts. When osteologists measure

skeletal elements, the term osteometry is

often used.

us with significantly more knowledge than was available just 10 years ago. The ultimate goal of paleoanthropological research is to identify the various early hominin species, establish a chrono-logical sequence of relationships among them, and gain insights into their adap-tation and behavior. Only then will there emerge a clear picture of how and when humankind came into being.

Observable physical variation was another nineteenth-century interest that

had direct relevance to anthropology. Enormous effort was aimed at describ-ing and explaining the biological dif-ferences among human populations. Although some endeavors were misguid-ed and even racist, they gave birth to lit-erally thousands of body measurements that could be used to compare people. Physical anthropologists use many of the techniques of anthropometry today, not only to study living groups but also to study skeletal remains from archaeologi-

cal sites (Fig. 1-4). Moreover, anthro-pometric techniques have consid-

erable application in the design of everything from airplane

cockpits to office furniture. Today, anthropolo-gists are concerned

with human varia-tion because of

© R

usse

ll L.

Cio

chon

© R

usse

ll L.

Cio

chon

Lynn

Kilg

ore

Figure 1-3Paleoanthropological research at Omo,

Ethiopia.

Figure 1- 4This anthropology student is measuring the

length of a human cranium with spreading

calipers.



Licensed to:


genetics The study of gene structure and

action and of the patterns of inheritance

of traits from parent to offspring. Genetic

mechanisms are the underlying foundation

for evolutionary change.

primates Members of the mammalian

order Primates (pronounced “pry-may´-tees”),

which includes prosimians, monkeys, apes,

and humans.

primatology The study of the biology and

behavior of nonhuman primates (prosimians,

monkeys, and apes).

its adaptive significance and because they want to identify the evolutionary factors that have produced variability. In other words, some traits evolved as biologi-cal adaptations to local environmental conditions, including infectious disease. Others may simply be the results of geo-graphical isolation or the descent of pop-ulations from small founding groups.

Some physical anthropologists exam-ine other aspects of human variation, including how various groups respond physiologically to different kinds of envi-ronmentally induced stress (Fig. 1-5). Examples of such stresses include high altitude, cold, and heat. Others conduct nutritional studies, investigating the relationships between various dietary components, cultural practices, physiol-ogy, and certain aspects of health and disease. Investigations of human fertil-ity, growth, and development are closely related to the topic of nutrition and are fundamental to studies of adaptation in modern human populations.

It would be impossible to study evo-lutionary processes without an under-standing of genetic principles. For this reason and others, genetics is a cru-cial field for physical anthropologists. Modern physical anthropology wouldn’t exist as an evolutionary science if not for rapidly developing advances in the understanding of genetic mechanisms.

Molecular anthropologists use cutting-edge technologies to investigate evolu-tionary relationships between human populations as well as between humans and nonhuman primates. To do this, they examine similarities and differ-ences in DNA sequenc-es between individuals, populations, and species. In addition, by extracting DNA from certain fos-sils, they’ve contributed to our understanding of relationships between extinct and living spe-cies. As genetic technolo-gies continue to improve, molecular anthropolo-gists will play a key role in explaining human evolution, adaptation,

and our biological relationships with other species (Fig. 1-6).

Primatology, the study of nonhu-man primates, has important implica-tions for many scientific disciplines (Fig. 1-7). Because nonhuman primates are our closest living relatives, the iden-tification of underlying factors related to social behavior, communication, infant care, reproductive behavior, and so on, helps us develop a better understanding

© T

om M

cCar

thy

/ P

hoto

Edi

t

7

Figure 1- 5Researcher using a treadmill test

to assess a subject’s heart rate,

blood pressure, and oxygen

consumption.

© N

elso

n Ti

ng©

Nel

son

Ting

Figure 1-6Molecular anthropologist Nelson Ting collect-

ing red colobus fecal samples for a study of

genetic variation in small groups of monkeys

isolated from one another by agricultural

clearing.



Licensed to:

8


osteology The study of skeletal material.

Human osteology focuses on the inter-

pretation of the skeletal remains of past

groups. Some of the same techniques are

used in paleoanthropology to study early

hominins.

paleopathology The branch of osteology

that studies the traces of disease and injury in

human skeletal (or, occasionally, mummified)

remains.

forensic anthropology An applied anthro-

pological approach dealing with legal mat-

ters. Forensic anthropologists work with

coroners and law enforcement agencies in

the recovery, analysis, and identification of

human remains.

Figure 1-7Primatologist Jill Pruetz

follows chimpanzees in

Senegal.

of the natural forces that have shaped so many aspects of modern human behav-ior. Another important reason to study nonhuman primates is that most species are threatened or seriously endangered. Only through research will scientists be able to recommend policies that can bet-ter ensure their survival in the wild.

Primate paleontology, the study of the primate fossil record, has implications not only for nonhuman primates but also for hominins. Virtually every year, fossil-bearing geological beds in North America, Africa, Asia, and Europe yield important new discoveries. By study-ing fossil primates and comparing them with anatomically similar living species, primate paleontologists can learn a great deal about such things as diet or locomo-tion in earlier life-forms. They can also make assumptions about social behav-ior in some extinct primates and clarify what we know about evolutionary rela-tionships between extinct and living species, including ourselves.

Osteology, the study of the skeleton, is central to physical anthropology. In fact, it’s so important that when many people think of physical anthropology,

the first thing that comes to mind is bones. The emphasis on osteology is due partly to the importance of fossil analy-sis, which requires a thorough knowl-

edge of the structure and function of the skeleton before one can accu-

rately interpret such basic biologi-cal information as the probable

habitats and ecological niches of long-ago extinct species.

Bone biology and physiol-ogy are also of major impor-tance to many other aspects of physical anthropology. Many osteologists special-ize in studies that empha-size various measurements of skeletal elements. This type

of research is essential, for example, to the identification of

stature and growth patterns in archaeological populations.

One subdiscipline of osteolo-gy is the study of disease and trauma

in skeletons from archaeological sites. Paleopathology is a prominent sub-field that investigates the prevalence of trauma, certain infectious diseases (such as syphilis and tuberculosis), nutrition-al deficiencies, and many other condi-tions that may leave evidence in bone (Fig. 1-8). This research tells us a great deal about the lives of individuals and populations in the past. Paleopathology also provides information pertaining to the history of certain disease processes, making it of interest to scientists in bio-medical fields.

Forensic anthropology is directly related to osteology and paleopathology. Technically, this approach is the applica-tion of anthropological (usually osteolog-ical and sometimes archaeological) tech-niques to legal issues (Fig. 1-9). Forensic anthropologists are routinely called on to help identify skeletal remains in cases of mass disaster or other situations where a human body has been found.

Forensic anthropologists have been involved in numerous cases having important legal, historical, and human consequences. These scientists played a prominent role in identifying the skel-etons of most of the Russian imperial family, whose members were executed in 1918. And more recently, many foren-sic anthropologists participated in the

ruetz

ees in

the first thibones. Thepartly to thsis, which

edge of tthe ske

ratelcal

hao

so

exstat

archaOne

gy is the in skeletonPaleopath

field that intrauma, cer

© J

ulie

Les

nik



Licensed to:

9


overwhelming task of trying to identify human remains in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the United States.

Anatomical studies are another area of interest for physical anthropologists. In living organisms, bones and teeth are intimately linked to the muscles and other tissues that surround and act on

them. Consequently, a thorough knowl-edge of soft tissue anatomy is essential to the understanding of biomechani-cal relationships involved in movement. Knowledge of such relationships is fun-damental to the accurate interpretation of the structure and function of limbs and other structures in extinct ani-mals now represented only by fossilized

U.S

. Arm

y C

orps

of

Engi

neer

s, a

nd t

he R

egim

e C

rim

e Li

aiso

n O

ffic

eU

.S. A

rmy

Cor

ps o

f En

gine

ers,

and

the

Reg

ime

Cri

me

Liai

son

Off

ice

Figure 1-8(a) A partially healed fracture of the femur

(thigh bone) from a child’s skeleton (estimated

age at death is 6 years). Cause of death was

probably an infection resulting from this injury.

(b) Very severe congenital scoliosis in an adult

male from Nubia. The curves are due to several

developmental defects that affect individual

vertebrae. (This is not the most common form

of scoliosis.)

Figure 1-9These forensic anthropologists, working in a

lab near Baghdad, are examining the skeletal

remains of Khurdish victims of genocide.

They cataloged the injuries of 114 individu-

als buried in a mass grave, and some of their

evidence was used against Saddam Hussein

during his 2006 trial.

(b)(b)(a)

Lynn

Kilg

ore

Lynn

Kilg

ore



Licensed to:

10


artifacts Objects or materials made or

modified for use by hominins. The earliest

artifacts tend to be tools made of stone or,

occasionally, bone.

material culture The physical manifesta-

tions of human activities, such as tools, art,

and structures. As the most durable aspects

of culture, material remains make up the

majority of archaeological evidence of past

societies.

paleontologists Scientists whose study

of ancient life-forms is based on fossilized

remains of extinct animals and plants.

archaeological record The material

remains of the human past and the physical

contexts of these remains (e.g., stratigraphic

relationships, association with other remains).

sites Locations of past human activity, often

associated with artifacts and features.

remains. For such reasons, many physi-cal anthropologists specialize in ana-tomical studies. In fact, several physical anthropologists hold professorships in anatomy departments at universities and medical schools (Fig. 1-10).

Archaeology

Stripped to its basics, archaeology is a body of methods designed to under-stand the human past through the examination and study of its material remains. Its primary data are the artifacts and other material culture, associations, and contextual information created by past peoples and preserved to the extent that they can be reliably identified and interpreted by modern researchers. From this, it should be clear that archaeologists don’t study the fossils of nonprimate species such as dinosaurs or mammoths, a field properly claimed by paleontologists.

Given that archaeology is just a body of methods, you won’t be surprised to learn that there are lots of different kinds of archaeology. For example, classi-cal archaeologists study the Mediterranean world’s “classical” civilizations, such as those created by the Romans and Greeks (Fig. 1-11). These archaeologists tend

to be found in departments of art his-tory, classics, and architecture rather than anthropology. To these examples we could also add battlefield archaeol-ogy, industrial archaeology, underwater archaeology (Fig. 1-12), and many more; but you get the picture.

Anthropological archaeology, which is the kind of archaeology dealt with in this book, refers to the application of archaeological methods to the under-standing of the origins and diver-sity of modern humans. As such, its domain covers the entire span of the archaeological record—from the ear-liest identifiable hominin tools, and the sites in which these implements were deposited, to the trash cans in our kitchens.

Archaeology exists as a discipline because researchers can justify a key assumption: Many human activi-ties and their by-products tend to enter the archaeological record in pat-terned, knowable ways that reflect the behaviors, values, and beliefs of the individuals who created them. Given this assumption, archaeologists can study events and processes that are far removed in time from the modern world and interpret developments in the human past that happened at rates rang-

Lind

a Le

vitc

hLi

nda

Levi

tch

Figure 1-10Dr. Linda Levitch teaching a human anatomy

class at the University of North Carolina School

of Medicine.



Licensed to:

11


prehistory The several million years

between the emergence of bipedal hominins

and the availability of written records.

historical archaeologists Archaeologists

who study past societies for which a contem-

porary written record also exists.

ethnoarchaeologists Archaeologists who

use ethnographic methods to study modern

peoples so that they can better understand

and explain patterning in the archaeological

record.

© M

useu

m o

f Lo

ndon

Arc

haeo

logy

ing from months to millennia. This per-spective of the human past is unique to archaeology.

Archaeology is a historical science, much like geology and evolutionary biology. It is scientific because it answers many research questions by applying the scientific method, and it is inher-ently historical because its primary data cannot be divorced from their context in space and time. The past, as the late paleontologist and evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould (1989) liked to remind us, happened, and it won’t happen again. Consequently, archaeology (and pale-ontology) differs in several fundamen-tal aspects from such fields as physics and chemistry, where primary data are not anchored firmly in time and space (Dunnell, 1982).

As we’ve mentioned, archaeolo-gy is also rooted in the humanities. Archaeology in general—and anthropo-logical archaeology in particular—tries to answer many questions about the past that go beyond the search for expla-

nations of general trends and patterns. Understanding certain cognitive and symbolic aspects of the past requires additional interpretive tools from such humanities disciplines as history, art history, architecture, and comparative literature.

Anthropological archaeologists (from here on, simply called archaeologists) traditionally differ from other anthropol-ogists in their emphasis on the archae-ological record as their primary data source. But the boundaries between anthropological subfields are not sharp-ly drawn. Some archaeologists mainly study cultures that existed before the invention of writing (the era commonly known as prehistory). Other specialists, sometimes called historical archaeolo-

gists, examine the archaeological and documentary record of past cultures that left written evidence (Fig. 1-13). And ethnoarchaeologists blur the past-present dichotomy between archaeology and cultural anthropology by conduct-ing ethnographic research with modern

Figure 1-11Classical archaeologists recording the mosaic

floor of a Roman brick and timber building bur-

ied deep underneath a modern office structure

near St. Paul’s Cathedral in London, England.

The building dates between A.D. 100 and 200,

when London was the Roman settlement of

Londinium.

© M

useu

m o

f Lo

ndon

Arc

haeo

logy

Figure 1-12An underwater archaeologist places location

identification tags on artifacts at the site of an

11th century ship in the Mediterranean Sea off

the coast of Turkey. The white lines that crisscross

the photo are part of the excavation grid that the

archaeologists constructed across the site when

they began their fieldwork.

© J

onat

han

Bla

ir /

Cor

bis

© J

onat

han

Bla

ir /

Cor

bis



Licensed to:

12


antiquarian Relating to an interest in

objects and texts of the past.

peoples in projects designed to achieve archaeological objectives.

Like the other anthropological sub-fields, modern archaeology largely grew out of the Enlightenment in Europe. Although European awareness of the past can be traced to Roman times, it wasn’t until the eighteenth and nine-

teenth centuries that some scholars began to accept evidence that the exis-tence of living things, including humans, must be considerably older than previ-ously thought. They also began to devise instruments for measuring time as it’s reflected in the archaeological and fossil records. Once these factors came togeth-er with emerging evolutionary ideas in the mid-nineteenth century, the stage was set for the development of archaeol-ogy as the primary means by which the human past can be discovered.

Although the rise of American archaeology was greatly influenced by events in western Europe, it didn’t devel-op along precisely the same lines. In North America, early antiquarian inter-ests were fueled by the desire to explain the relationship between contemporary Native Americans and the archaeological record. Although this relationship seems obvious to us in the twenty-first centu-ry, it was by no means clear to colonists from the Old World or their descendants, even into the early twentieth century. In the United States, curiosity about the possible solution to this problem moti-vated what is generally agreed to be the earliest systematically conducted archae-ological excavation, conducted in 1782 by Thomas Jefferson (Fig. 1-14). He exca-vated a prehistoric burial mound on his property in Virginia not to find artifacts,

© Il

linoi

s S

tate

Arc

haeo

logi

cal S

urve

y, U

nive

rsit

y of

Illin

ois

© Il

linoi

s S

tate

Arc

haeo

logi

cal S

urve

y, U

nive

rsit

y of

Illin

ois

Figure 1-14Long before he became the third president of

the United States in 1801, Thomas Jefferson

conducted the earliest systematic archaeological

excavations in North America and published

his results.

© E

vere

tt C

olle

ctio

n In

c. /

Ala

my

© E

vere

tt C

olle

ctio

n In

c. /

Ala

my

Figure 1-13Archaeologists expose the foundation of a

nineteenth-century farmstead in Illinois.



Licensed to:

13


stratigraphic Pertaining to the depositional

levels, or strata, of an archaeological site.

archaeometry Application of the methods

of the natural and physical sciences to the

investigation of archaeological materials.

public archaeology A broad term that cov-

ers archaeological research conducted for

the public good as part of cultural resource

management and heritage management

programs; a major growth area of world

archaeology.

but to discover how it was construct-ed. Therefore, he took careful notes on what he found and on the stratigraphic relationships. He then published an account of his work and concluded that the mound had been built by the ancestors of modern Native Americans (Jefferson, 1853).

Few of Jefferson’s contemporaries on either side of the Atlantic took such care in their excavations, which is hardly sur-prising: For most early archaeologists, the questions that motivated their exca-vations were nearly as crude as their methods. By the early twentieth centu-ry, this situation had changed; archae-ologists began to exploit the patterned nature of the archaeological record as a way to measure the relative sequence of events in the human past and to explain how and why past cultures changed.

Archaeology reached a certain meth-odological maturity in the second half of the twentieth century. This process was greatly facilitated by the development of new dating techniques, such as radiocar-bon dating, and by technological possi-bilities created by the advent of comput-ers in the 1960s and 1970s. The breadth of questions asked of the archaeological record also expanded greatly through-out the twentieth century in response to theoretical changes in anthropology as a whole. In 1900, many archaeologists were satisfied simply to describe what their excavations revealed and perhaps to arrange these remains in time and space frameworks. By 2000, they also sought to understand how the people who created these sites lived. They asked how or why these groups of people dif-fered culturally from one another, what similarities they shared, and even why they held particular beliefs about them-selves, each other, and the cosmos—all this while simultaneously controlling for time and space in the archaeolog - ical record.

In addition to the social science per-spective of anthropology, archaeology established itself as a scientific disci-pline in the twentieth century, and it maintains strong ties with the natural and physical sciences. Contemporary archaeological research often involves the specialized expertise of many dis-ciplines. Remote-sensing technology,

including everything from GPS (glob-al positioning system) handhelds to ground-penetrating radar, may be used to locate or define sites. Geologists, soil scientists, and others assist in recon-structing a site’s ancient environment. In the subfield of archaeometry, archae-ologists work with physicists, chem-ists, engineers, and other scientists to apply the methods and techniques of their respective disciplines to the analy-sis of ancient materials. Many archaeol-ogy students combine their studies with training that prepares them to conduct specialized analyses of ancient plant and animal remains, GIS (geographical infor-mation system) spatial data, stable iso-topes, ceramics, textiles, and other mate-rials from the archaeological record (Fig. 1-15).

In the late twentieth century, public

archaeology emerged as an important development in American archaeol-ogy. This field includes efforts to reach out to communities and involve wider audiences through education and the media. Most public archaeologists are engaged in cultural resource manage-ment (CRM) and other heritage manage-ment programs. As mandated by gov-ernment environmental legislation since the 1970s, CRM archaeologists evaluate sites that may be threatened with dam-age from development and construction on public lands and in connection with

Bar

ry L

ewis

Figure 1-15Bioarchaeologist Kris Hedman

processes a bone sample for

analysis of strontium levels in

prehistoric human skeletons.



Licensed to:

14


private land projects that receive fed-eral funds or are licensed or regulated by a federal agency. CRM work utilizes a wide range of archaeological exper-tise, including that of prehistorians, his-torical archaeologists, field technicians, archaeological illustrators and writers, and laboratory specialists. Many archae-ologists in the CRM field are affiliated with environmental research and engi-neering firms, and others are employed by state or federal agencies or by educa-tional institutions.

A commitment to the scientific meth-od is also evident in the field of experi-mental archaeology, where researchers attempt to replicate ancient techniques and processes under controlled con-ditions so that they can better under-stand the past. Using these approach-es, archaeologists have reproduced the entire range of ancient stone tools and employed them in many tasks that repli-cate the tool wear and breakage patterns on similar tools made and used by pre-historic peoples.

Archaeology’s goals also continue to broaden as anthropology changes and as we learn more about the past. Today, anthropological archaeology has sev-eral primary goals. The first goal is to reconstruct culture history: This task orders the archaeological record in time and space and creates the archaeological equivalent of the chronologies of histo-ry. The second goal is to reconstruct and describe ancient lifeways, and the third is to understand the general processes of culture change and explain how and why past cultures changed in patterned ways. Finally, as an emerging area of research, archaeologists aim to examine and interpret the cognitive and symbol-ic aspects of past cultures (Demarrais et al., 2005).

As we should expect of any field in which basic goals continue to unfold, archaeologists are engaged in an on going negotiation of the discipline’s research priorities, the bodies of theo-ry that motivate research, and even the philosophical underpinnings of these theories. No single approach commands a clear consensus in archaeology; but this is a good sign of a healthy, growing, scholarly discipline, not an indication

that something is broken. Every option—from ways of knowing about the past to the inevitable conflict between what C. P. Snow (1965) called the “Two Cultures” of science and humanism—is on the table, and the early twenty-first century is an exciting time to be an archaeologist.

Linguistic Anthropology

Linguistic anthropology is the study of human speech and language, includ-ing the origins of language in general as well as specific languages. By examining similarities between contemporary lan-guages, linguists have been able to trace historical ties between languages and groups of languages; in this way, linguis-tic anthropologists can identify language families and past relationships between human populations.

There is also much interest in the relationship between language and cul-ture: how language reflects the way members of a society perceive phenom-ena and how the use of language shapes perceptions in different cultures. For example, language dialects can encode many meanings, including geographi-cal origins, identity, and social class. Such encoded meanings influence how a person is treated by those who do or do not speak the same dialects of this or a closely related language. For exam-ple, a teacher who speaks with the slow cadence or drawl of Vicksburg, Mississippi, may not be taken seri-ously by students in Minneapolis or Chicago, where the stereotypical image of the speakers of such dialects is that of hillbillies. However, in Southampton, England, or Adelaide, Australia, the same teacher’s voice may simply be viewed as wonderfully exotic, the main difference being cultural—in this case, the social meanings associated with the tones and cadence of speech.

Because the spontaneous acquisi-tion and use of language is a unique-ly human characteristic, the topic holds considerable interest for linguistic anthropologists, who, along with spe-cialists in other fields, study the proc-ess of language acquisition in infants. This research is also important to physi-cal anthropologists because insights into



Licensed to:

15

THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD

science A body of knowledge gained

through observation and experimentation;

from the Latin scientia, meaning “knowledge.”

empirical Relying on experiment or obser-

vation; from the Latin empiricus, meaning

“experienced.”

data (sing., datum) Facts from which conclu-

sions can be drawn; scientific information.

quantitatively Pertaining to measurements

of quantity and including such properties as

size, number, and capacity.

hypothesis (pl., hypotheses) A provisional

explanation of a phenomenon. Hypotheses

require repeated testing.

scientific testing The precise repetition

of an experiment or expansion of observed

data to provide verification; the procedure by

which hypotheses and theories are verified,

modified, or discarded.

theories Well-substantiated explanations of

natural phenomena, supported by hypoth-

esis testing and by evidence gathered over

time. Theories also allow scientists to make

predictions about as yet unobserved phe-

nomena. Some theories are so well estab-

lished that no new evidence is likely to alter

them substantially.

the process may well have implications for the development of language skills in human evolution.

The Scientific MethodScience is a process of understanding phenomena through observation, gener-alization, verification, and refutation. By this we mean that there is an objective, empirical approach to gaining infor-mation through the use of systematic and explicit techniques. Because physi-cal anthropologists and archaeologists are engaged in scientific pursuits, they adhere to the principles of the scientif-ic method, whereby a research question is identified and information is subse-quently gathered, analyzed, and inter-preted to provide an answer.

The gathering of information is referred to as data collection, and when researchers use a rigorously controlled approach, they can accurately describe their techniques and results in a man-ner that facilitates comparisons with the work of others. For example, when scientists collect data on tooth size in hominin fossils, they must specify precisely which teeth are being mea-sured, how they are measured, the validity and reliability of these mea-sures, and what the results of the measurements are (expressed numeri-cally, or quantitatively). Subsequently, it’s up to the investigators to ana-lyze, interpret, and draw inferences about these measurements. This body of information then becomes the basis of future studies—possibly by other researchers, who can compare their own results with those already obtained. The eventual outcome of this type of inquiry is the acceptance or rejection of proposed answers to the questions that motivated the research.

Once observations have been made, scientists attempt to explain them. First, a hypothesis, or provisional explana-tion of some aspect of the natural world, is developed. To be analytically useful, a hypothesis must be tested by means of data collection and analysis. Indeed, the testing of hypotheses with the possibili-ty of proving them false is the very basis

of the scientific method. Everything that scientists accept as true is always a “working” or “conditional” truth, because subsequent testing may demon-strate it to be false.

In anthropology, the scientific test-

ing of hypotheses may take several years or longer and may involve researchers who weren’t connected with the origi-nal work. In subsequent studies, other investigators may achieve similar results, or their findings may be incompatible with those of the initial study. For exam-ple, the archaeologist V. Gordon Childe argued in the 1920s that the earliest pre-historic Near Eastern plant and animal domestication events took place soon after the end of the last Ice Age around the oases, or water holes, of the region (Childe, 1929). Later, Robert Braidwood (1960; Braidwood and Howe, 1960) test-ed Childe’s hypothesis in the field and found that the oldest evidence of Near Eastern plant domestication was actu-ally to be found not around the oases, as Childe’s hypothesis predicted, but in village sites scattered among the foot-hills of the Zagros Mountains in Iraq and Iran. Braidwood’s research effec-tively refuted Childe’s hypothesis (just as Braidwood’s tentative explanation was itself refuted by subsequent research, which is a story that we’ll take up in more detail in Chapter 14). This exam-ple illustrates that although it’s easier to repeat original studies conducted in lab-oratory settings, it’s no less important to verify research results based on data col-lected outside of tightly controlled labo-ratory situations.

After repeated testing, some hypoth-eses become so well accepted that they’re unlikely to be changed by new evidence. At this point, such hypotheses, perhaps combined with others, are accepted as theories. In common everyday usage, the word theory often means a hunch or guess. But in scientific terms, a theory is a statement or explanation that hasn’t been falsified, or shown to be false, by currently available evidence. Of course, theories, or parts of theories, may be altered over time as new technologies and information allow for repeated test-ing, but in general, they’re sustained. For example, it’s a fact that when you drop



Licensed to:

16


a stone it falls to the ground. That fact is explained by Isaac Newton’s theory of gravity, proposed in 1687. But if you were in earth orbit on board the space shut-tle and you dropped a stone, it would seem to float because, even though it would still be influenced by the earth’s gravitational field, that field would be weaker on the shuttle than it is on earth. Since 1687, Newton’s theory has been enhanced by a greater understanding of the attraction of masses to one anoth-er as expressed mathematically. But even after more than 300 years, the the-ory of gravity remains intact with little modification.

Use of the scientific method permits the development and testing of hypothe-ses, and it also permits various types of bias to be addressed and controlled. It’s important to realize that bias occurs in all studies. Sources of bias include the researcher’s personal values; how the investigator was trained and by whom; what particular questions interest the researcher; what specific skills and tal-ents he or she possesses; what earlier results (if any) have been established in this realm of study and by whom (for example, the researcher, close col-leagues, or those with rival approach-es); and what sources of data are avail-able (for example, accessible countries or museums) and thus what samples can be collected.

Bias cannot be entirely eliminated from research, but it’s possible to mini-mize its effects through careful research design, in which the researcher con-sciously works to identify and control for possible bias effects. Anthropologists, like all researchers, strive to minimize bias in their research outcomes as well as in the articles and books they write.

Science is an approach—indeed, a tool—used to minimize bias, enable the replication of relevant tests by other researchers, and maximize the validity and reliability of the results. Application of the scientific method thus requires vigilance by all who practice it. The goal isn’t to establish “truth” in any absolute sense, but rather to generate ever more accurate and consistent explanations of how the world around us works.

At its very heart, scientific method-ology is an exercise in rational thought and critical thinking. The development of critical thinking skills is an important and lasting benefit of a college educa-tion. Such skills enable people to evalu-ate, compare, analyze, critique, and syn-thesize information so they won’t accept everything they hear at face value. A good example of the need for critical thinking in everyday life is how we eval-uate advertising claims. For example, people spend billions of dollars every year on “natural” dietary supplements, basing their purchasing decisions on marketing claims that in fact may not have been tested. So when a salesperson tells you that, for example, extracts made from the roots of echinacea help prevent colds, ask if that statement has been sci-entifically tested—and if so, how, when, and by whom and how valid and reliable the test results are—before you decide to try this herbal remedy. Similarly, when politicians make claims in 30-second sound bites, check those claims before you accept them as truth. In other words, be skeptical.

The Anthropological PerspectivePerhaps the most important benefit you will derive from this textbook is a wider appreciation of the human experience. To better understand humans, how our species came to be, and why modern humans are the way we are, we need the anthropological perspective to broaden our viewpoint across space (comparing indi-viduals, populations, and even species) and through time (considering the past, with special emphasis on evolutionary factors).

From the overview presented in this chapter, we can see that physical anthro-pologists focus on varied aspects of the biological nature of Homo sapiens and that archaeologists discover and inter-pret the cultural evidence of hominin (including modern human) behavior from sites ranging in age from over 2 million years old up to the present



Licensed to:

17

THE ANTHROPOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

ethnocentric Viewing other cultures from

the inherently biased perspective of one’s

own culture. Ethnocentrism often results

in other cultures being seen as inferior to

one’s own.

day. Modern humans represent one con-temporary component of the vast bio-logical continuum of life on earth. Yes, we’re just another animal, but we’re also an extraordinary form of life. Like many other organisms, we’ve been bio-logically successful when viewed across the depths of evolutionary time. Unlike other organisms, we are conscious of that fact, aware of the responsibilities that our success engenders, and com-pelled to learn more about how and why it happened.

Answering the question—How and why did humans become so successful?—provides the main theme of this textbook. Humans are the only species to develop complex cul-ture as a means of buffering the chal-lenges posed by nature, and we’re the only species that spontaneously acquires and uses spoken language as a very complex form of communica-tion. Consequently, physical anthro-pologists are keenly interested in how humans differ from and are similar to other animals, especially nonhuman primates. For example, in Chapters 4 and 16, we will discuss how aspects of human nutrition have been influenced by evolutionary factors. Today, most of the foods people eat are derived from domesticated plants and animals; but these dietary items were unavailable prior to the development of agriculture more than 10,000 years ago. And yet, human physiological mechanisms for chewing and digesting, as well as the types of foods humans are predisposed to eat, are variations of patterns that were well established in nonhuman primate ancestors long before 10,000 years ago. Indeed, these adaptations probably go back millions of years.

In addition to differences in diet prior to the development of agriculture, earlier hominins might well have dif-fered from modern humans in average body size, metabolism, and activity pat-terns. How, then, does the basic evolu-tionary “equipment” (that is, physiol-ogy) inherited from our hominin and prehominin forebears accommodate our modern diets? Clearly, the way to under-stand such proc esses is not simply to

look at contemporary human respons-es, but to place them within the context of evolution and adaptation through time. Indeed, throughout this book, we’ll focus on the biocultural interactions that came about after the development of agriculture, an event that was one of the most fundamental revolutions in all of human prehistory. By studying human behavior and anatomy from the broader perspective provided by an evolutionary context, we’re better able to understand the factors leading to the development of the human species.

Archaeologists trace the evolution of culture and its ever-expanding role in human affairs over the past 2.5 mil-lion years. Information from archaeo-logical research is frequently combined with biological data to explain how cul-tural and biological factors interact-ed in the past to produce variations in human adaptive response, disease pat-terns, and even the genetic diversity that we see today. From such a perspective, we can begin to appreciate the diver-sity of the human experience and, in so doing, more fully understand human constraints and potentials. Furthermore, by extending the breadth of our knowl-edge, it’s easier to avoid the ethnocentric pitfalls inherent in a more limited view of humanity, a view that isolates mod-ern humans from other human groups and places them outside the context of evolution.

We hope that the following pages will help you develop a better under-standing of the similarities we share with other organisms as well as the bio-cultural proc esses that shaped the traits that make us unique. We live in what may well be the most crucial period for our planet in the last 65 million years. We are members of the one species that, through the very agency of culture, has wrought such changes in ecological sys-tems that we must now alter our tech-nologies or face potentially disastrous consequences. In such a time, it’s vital that we attempt to gain the best possi-ble understanding of what it means to be human. We believe that the study of physical anthropology and archaeology is one endeavor that aids in this attempt.



Licensed to:

18


Critical Thinking Questions

Summary of Main Topics

▶ The chapter objective was to intro-duce the fields of physical anthro-pology and archaeology and place them within the overall context of anthropology, a social science that also includes cultural anthropology and linguistics as major subfields.

▶ Physical anthropology studies aspects of human biology (empha-sizing evolutionary perspectives), nonhuman primates, and the hom-inin fossil record. Physical anthro-pologists are interested in how hominins came to possess culture and how this process influenced

the direction of human evolution. Especially regarding the study of early hominins, physical anthropol-ogists work in close collaboration with many specialists from archae-ology, geology, chemistry, and other disciplines that form the interdisci-plinary field of paleoanthropology.

▶ Archaeology provides time depth for our understanding of humans as biocultural organisms. Systematic examination of the archaeological record provides the basis for archae-ologists’ interpretations of extinct lifeways as well as the construction

of cultural chronologies, explana-tions for observable cultural chang-es, and interpretations of the cog-nitive and symbolic patterns that mark our past. Like the larger field of paleoanthropology (which also draws heavily on archaeological methods), archaeological research involves input from many related disciplines. This collaborative exam-ination of the archaeological record yields nearly all we know, if not all we are likely to ever know, about prehistoric human behavior and activities.

1. Why does American anthropology describe itself as a three- (often four-) field discipline that includes cultural anthropology, physical anthropology, and archaeology?

2. Is it important to you, personally, to know about human evolution? Why or why not?

3. Why is the biocultural perspec-tive important to understanding human evolution?

4. What fundamental assumption about the relationship between human behavior and the archaeo-logical record makes archaeology’s study of the human past possible? Can archaeology exist as a valid

and reliable source of understand-ing the past if this assumption is true only sometimes or only under certain conditions?

5. Do you think that understanding the scientific method and develop-ing critical thinking skills can ben-efit you personally? Why?



Documents

Cengage Advantage Books: Understanding Humans: An ...taylor2/Chapter 1.pdf · 2 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION TO ANTHROPOLOGY Figure 1-1 We are complex products of both culture and biology