Australopithecine


Australopithecine

Australopithecines. (4-1 mya) Ape of South. 




Features. Gracile. 3 to 4ft. 30 to 70 kg. Africanus.

Features. Robust. Robustus

•9 species. vary in robusticity & size.
•Large premolars and molars. Small canines and small brain.
•Phylogenetic. Opinion divided on phylogeny by Donald Johanson and Timothy white two branches theory.  Alan Walker discovery led to 3 branch theory.
A. anamensis. Land Turkana. 

A. afarensis. Hadar. Laetoli.
A. or Kenyanthropus platyops

A. garhi. 2.5 mya = surprise

Au. africanus


Extinction of australopithecine

Chalcolithic

Copper stone age. 





Iron age

Iron age

Prehistoric Art

Prehistoric art

Lower Paleolithic India

Lower paleolithic India

Neanderthal

Neanderthal




Classic versus progressive neanderthal

Classic vs progressive neanderthal. 


Same post cranial features. 

Neo chalcolithic

Neo chalcolithic 3000 to 1000 BC with variations. 

Upper paleolithic India

Upper paleolithic India

Paleolithic India

paleolithic India

Middle paleolithic India

Middle paleolithic India

Ongoing evolution


Mt DNA and y chromosome analysis shows migration of Americans from Asia around 15,000 years ago. Paleo Indians. They have clovis and Folsom culture. hunted megafauna. 

Positives of agriculture. Larger population. Surplus food. Long term storage.

negative point land degradation. Pollution. Contract and competition among populations. Laws of wild species. Decline in biodiversity. Health and quality of life implications.

impact of agriculture on human biology. Larsen 2016

* as compared to hunter-gatherers. Short skull. Small and grease oil mandible. Small teeth. Many malocclusions. Little tooth wear. 

* small and less robust bones. Less osteoarthritis. Bones with lower second moments of area.

* Higher infections. Higher dental caries. child growth and development reduced. Enamelled effects and iron deficiency increased. Reduced adult height. 

H. Florensis.


H. Florensis.

* Hobbit.  Liang bua caves indonesia. Found in 2003. 18000 ya. 

* 400cc brain. 1 metre height. Peter brown regards it as long-term presence of archaic hominin species distinct from modern people. this group remained in isolation and evolved unique biological variation.

* Teuku Jacob alternatively argues that it was not part of different species but modern humans who suffered micro cephaly. This feature that are seen in living populations of the region and other features like small chin and rotated premolars resemble other people in the region.

* Requires more Fossil evidence from the past to create better phylogeny. 

H heidelbergensis

H heidelbergensis

China vs Java man

China vs Java man

Peking above. Java below. 



Paleolithic


Paleolithic age ranges from 3.3 mya lomekwi. ago till 12000 ya.







Lower Paleolithic 2.5 million till 300 thousand years ago. Homo erectus. H habilis. Core tools. 

Middle. 300kya to 40kya. Upper 40kya to 10kya.  H sapiens neanderthal heidelbergensis. 

Climate.  periodic glaciations. 

Tool culture - Oldowan and acheulian tools. Handaxe, cleaver chopping flake tools blades points burin. 



Material. Quartz. Quartzite. Bone. Jasper. Chalcedony. 

Oldowan by homo habilis and A. garhi. 2.5 to 1.7mya. changing diet from omnivorous to carnivorous scavenging due to dry climate and Savannah.  

Europe oldowon tradition is called as abbevillian. Split into clactonian flake tradition and acheulean hand axe tradition. Levallois technique emerged later.

Acheuloan tools 1.5 million till 1 million years ago.  uniform and standardized. Oldest from peninj river Tanzania 1.5 mya. Unlike oldowan, acheulian more large tools created in standard designs and shapes. Oldowan tools have sharp edges made by few blows but acheulian tools are created by knocking off flakes. 

Acheulian - hand axe common. It is tear drop shaped bifacial flacked tool with thin Sharp tip. Other tools : cleaver, Scrapers and picks. Earlier made from hard stone blow but later from soft hammer of bone or antlers - for better control over tool. Thin sharp and different shapes can be created. Lawrence Keeley show that and handaxe wer good for animal butchery, shaping wood and digging. Found in Africa Europe and West Asia.

Human evolution

H. erectus/ H. ergaster emerged about 1.8 million years ago. Homo erectus move from scavenging to hunting and hunting gathering. 

Home erectus found in all areas of old world but tool traditions differ from west to east. Like bifacial hand axe, cleaver and pick not found in eastern and southeast Asia. Yamaei 2000.

600,000 years ago behaviour and physiological changes lead to homo heidelbergensis. 

Heidelbergensis homo rhodesiensis and later archaic humans from swanscombe, steinheim, tautavel etc. 

Culture

Big game - elephants - hunting. Ambrona spain. FC Howell. Cooperative activity. 

Fire. Allowing winter area habitat. First evidence kenya 1.4 mya. Conclusive evidence in 8,00,000 ya Israel gesher benot. Cooking. Heating. Predator away. 

Location close to much vegetation, water resources and stalk of herbivorous animals. Campsites like terra Amata, Nice, France. Elephant stags oxen. 

Religion and rituals. Red ochre remains found in lower paleolithic sites. Dickson 1990. But unclear if home erectus buried there dead. 

Art. Engraved bone found

Regional variation. 

Europe clacton-on-sea and Terra Mata, France prominent. Abbevillian then Acheulian culture (400 - 100kya)  prominent

East Africa. Oldwan gorge chopper chopping tools. 

India Attirampakkam. (2.2 million years ago. Chopper chopping tools ), Sohan Valley, Madrasian culture. 

lower paleolithic ended about 300 thousand years ago when Technology, social structure and behaviour got more complex (prepared core technique and changes in hunting gathering ) and emergence of Homo sapiens - oldest Fossil in Morocco jebel irhoud( 2018 science. )

Upper paleolithic







Later stone age in Africa. Between 40,000 and 10000 years ago. 

Climate. humans in habitat tropical, subtropical, temperate, desert and after climates. Spread to Australia and America. Middle and late wurm glacial period. Mousterian pluvial period. Last ice age. Pleistocene megafauna ends - Mammoth rhinoceros and giant deers. 

Associated with Homo sapiens sapiens and some last populations of neanderthals. Denisovana. 

Technology. Blade Technology, elongated flakes by September aur indirect percussion technique. Scrapers burins and backed knives. Microlithic Technology seen during later stone age of Africa and Central and eastern Asia. 

Non lithic tools. Bone, and colour and ivory created borers needles and points.  Invention of bow and arrow, spheres and tiny replaceable blades. 

Cultures

Europe. Perigordian . Western Europe art and bone tools. Blunted Sharp borders of large tools. 

Aurignacian. Parallel to above but didn't plant their blades.

Solutrean. paper thin leaf points with pressure flaking.

Magdolian. Bone tools preferred. Azillion tradition developed microlith tools. 

Solutrian of Spain and France.

 Paleo Indian in the new world. - Clovis culture. 

Angara culture - Asia

Sites. CRO magnon and Solutre in France. Altamira in Spain. Zhoukoudian China. Mumba cave Tanzania. Lake mungo Australia. Blackwater draw New Mexico. 

India. Bhimbetka - flake technology and bone tools. Chintamani gavy - 90% bone tools Kurnool Andhra Pradesh. 

Architecture. Sites with hearths and widespread use of fire. Dense concentration largest population and regular habitation of sides.

Culture. Symbolic art. Representation of animals, humans and abstract geometric patterns. Paintings, carvings, drawing, modelling. pendants and beads made of shell bone tooth and stone. Creative explosion. Ridges and which one symbolism possible. Bhimbetka cave paintings and Lascaux France. 

Evidence of trade and relatively sedentary lifestyle.mellars 1994. 

Hunting gathering lifestyle with fisheries and band organisation. 

Paintings show lifestyle of hunting gathering, dance celebrations. Venus figurines. 

The  burials are more common and elaborate. Grave goods, jewellery and artefacts.

Middle paleolithic


300,000 to 40,000. Strauss 1989. 






Climate. Quaternary period. Spanning periodic glaciations ( mindel to wurm ). Neandertal to human. 

Tools. Acheulian and Levallois technique. Point tool. Side scraper. Borer. Hand axe and cleaver become smaller. Quartzite and softer tools : quartz, agate, Jasper, flint. 

Regional variations

India. Bhimbetka. Kurnool. Nevasa best - flake tools with levallois technique.

Euro. Mousterian culture (scrapers and points)  levallois technique. Side scrapers and points. Le moustier, France. Small number of hand axes and cleavers and big proportion of flakes. Re Touching of flakes seen. Possible hafting.  (Schick and Toth, 1993) 

East Africa. Post acheulian. Disappearance of handaxe and cleaver. Emergence of mousteroid culture with levallois technique. But handaxe continued in Uganda with flake technique it is called Sangoon tradition. Klasies river site. Point flakes. Parallel sided flaked blades. Burins. Scrapers. 

Social life. Hunting gathering light and efficient tools. Division of labour based on age and sex. Egalitarian society band organisation. First evidence of burial. Language development. More reliance on fire. Open air as well as cave life. Big game hunting like mammoth and elephants. Screening of animals like fox for clothing. 

Burial at le moustier and shanidar cave iraq. 

Lower Paleolithic

Lower Palaeolithic ended 300,000 years ago when technology and social structure became complex with emergence of Homo sapiens. Oldest fossil Morocco jebel irhoud 2018 Science. 

H erectus

Homo erectus. Upright man.

Culture. Acheulian tools. 


Dmanisi 2013 huge variation among skulls. So what if ergaster rudolphensis and habilis are also erectus. 


Habilis vs erectus




Human evolution

Human evolution


Models of origin


50,000 years ago species of humans were Homo sapiens neanderthal denisovans florensis luzonensis.

Luzonensis are Pygmy humans with teeth like humans but curved fingers and toe like australopithecus. Philippines. 




Erectus asia africa europe

Erectus asia africa europe


Homo erectus Asia. First 1890 Eugene. 

* earliest evidence is 5 skulls bones and tools in Georgia by Georgian paleontologist David L - Dmanisi. 650 cc brain size and large face. 1.8 mya. Asia. Compared to African homo erectus they had faces and jaw smaller and Browridge less developed. But very e similarities in other areas like mandible of ilret skull. Leg bones longer than arms.

* Kocabas village Turkey five hundred thousand years ago Fossil found. Massive brow ridge and sagittal keel. Signs of tuberculosis.

* Sanigiran Indonesia. 1000cc brain capacity with thick cranial bones and large brow ridges with slight sagittal keel similar to homo actors of Africa Asia and Europe. Large brain and small teeth. 

* therefore rapid spread from Africa to outside due to better intelligence reliable on on the material and social behaviour. Diverse diet.

* Gongwangling Fossil Shaanxi province. 1.2 million years ago. Well developed brow ridges and thick cranial bones with 800 CC capacity. Animal bones with butchery marks and stone artefact are found by RX Zhu. 

* Zhoukoudian. 1200cc.  1920 discovery 1940 excavation. 87 80000 years ago. 40 to 50 individuals. Stone tools and food remains. Franz Weidenreich.  

Homo erectus Africa. 1.8 and three hundred thousand.

    * Some australopithecines also around.

    * Nariokotome, Westside Lake turkana 80% Juvenile skeleton point 1.6 m y a. Turkana boy 1984

    * Short arms and long legs. Committed to terrestrial life with fully modern stride. Absence of sagittal crest. Smaller molars and thinner enamel reflecting soft diet. Some had robust bones while others had Gracile. 

    * Ilret footprints. Koobi fora footprints in Kenya. Just like modern human walking. Double arch, adducted big toe. long distance walking running and hunting very likely.

    * Other fossils from Olduvai Tanzania.

        * 1.2 mya. Daka place. Bodo 0.6 mya. very robust with thick cranial bones and large Browridge. 

        * Tim white sound linear marks on the left cheek with microscopic analysis it was caused by stone tools which means some ritual cannibalism. Ritual defleshing. OH 9 Fossil. 








Homeo actor special features

Home erectus special features

Homo habilis


Habilis. Habitual toolmaker. 






* 2.5 to 1 mya. 

* First homo. 

* Found in East Africa and South Africa. Lake turkana. Sterkfontein. 

OH 24 or Twiggy in Tanzania 1968 1.8 million years ago. Less protruding face and larger brain.

* OH 7 Tanzania 1960 1.75 million years ago small dental size, increase brain size. Johnny's child. Olduwai gorge. 

* Louis leakey Philip Tobias and John Napier studied and described as homo habilis from Tanzania Kenya Ethiopia Malawi and South Africa.

* homo habilis found on eastern side of lake turkana is called homo Rudolphensis. It is bigger than homo habilis.

* Smaller chewing complex and larger brain. Rounded skull. It Tim White studied differences between homo habilis and australopithecine and suggested that australopithecine garhi was its ancestor because says Jaw and teeth are mostly similar. Transition took between 3 and 2.5 million years ago. 

* Donald Johnson 1980 discovered skeleton apart from skull. Bipedal short legs in comparison to arms. 

* Intelligence and use of tools. Large brain small chewing muscles and smaller teeth then australopithecines. Dependence on tool used indication. 

Premolars with two ridges. 

Less massive mandible. 

    * stone tools are more common in homo habilis sites than australopithecus sites. Cognitive advancement proved by increased tool making and tool used. It tools were fundamental to their survival. Diverse diet. 

    * warming around 2.5 million years ago increased habitat diversity and increased food resources for homo habilis. Therefore it had died versatility. 2.5mya capacity for speech. 

    * 650 cc. Long arms. Less protruding face. Parabolic dental arch. Small teeth. 4.3 ft. 

Narmada man

Sankhyan 2016

Calvarium. Hathnora district 1982. Sonakia. 300 kya archaic hominin.
Clavicle. 1997. Sankhyan.  150 kya. Middle paleolithic flake tools and small body archaic type. H. narmadensis. 2013 sankhyan.
Femur and humerus fragments Netankheri. 2010. Sankhyan.

300 to 75 kya

Possibly three types of hominins.  First one is H. heidelbergensis and second is Homo narmadensis.
Small bodied hominins.


25 to 40 kya Andaman Pygmy separated from mainland Indian groups.

Femur and calvarium. Date 300kya. Archaic hominin. Acheulean mode 2.

Humerus 75kya.

Calvarium is female Kennedy 1991. 22 characters of home erectus are present like sagittal keel, separation of Inion from endinion. Well developed mastoid fissure, uninterrupted supraorbital Torus. Strongly developed occipital torus.

But features like small mastoid process, narrow post orbital constriction, prominent bilateral Torus angularis are uniquely present in Asian homo erectus. Kennedy 1991 classify the skull cap as archaic Homo sapiens Because cranial vault is relatively doll. Cranial capacity is between 1100 and 1400 cc. Maximum cranial length falls superior to inion.

Sankhyan think it is closer to home heidelberg.

Clavicle

1997. Shape of robust Homo sapiens. But the cross section at mid diaphysis is less round and has less axial twist than modern humans. compare this Fossil with the help of archaeological Anthropology survey of India and Andaman islanders tu arrived at conclusion.

Humerus

Gorilla vs man

Gorilla vs man





Sivapithecus

Miocene. Golden age of hominoids

Climate
Continental shifts. Collision between South Asian plate and Southern Asia was producing Himalayan plateau. Miocene considerable warmer than proceeding oligocene.

19 million years ago Arabian plate connected with North East Africa which allowed Migration of animals.

First Fossil in 19 century but complete in 1934. G Edward Lewis. He called it ramapithecus. 

Another find was made in Nepal on the bank of Tinau River, Butwal; a western part of the country in 1932. This find was named "Ramapithecus".

Sivapithecus genus. Ape of Shiwaliks. 

Time
Miocene ape. Fossils range from 12 and 7 million years ago.

Geographic distribution
Lufang valley China.  Turkey 5 skulls. Potwar plateau and Shiwaliks India - teeth and jaw.  Nepal Pakistan. lived in mixed Woodland grassland environment. 

Classification
Primate, hominidae, ponginae. Previously believed as human ancestor but now clear that Much closer to modern orangutan.

Species
S. parvada S. punjabicus S. sivalensis

Physical features

Debates




Ramapithecus. Miocene. 

Ramapithecus, fossil primate dating from the Middle and Late Miocene epochs (about 16.6 million to 5.3 million years ago). For a time in the 1960s and ’70s, Ramapithecus was thought to be a distinct genus that was the first direct ancestor of modern humans (Homo sapiens) before it became regarded as that of the orangutan ancestor Sivapithecus.


The first Ramapithecus fossils (fragments of an upper jaw and some teeth) were discovered in 1932 in fossil deposits in the Siwālik hills of northern India. No significance was attached to those fossils until 1960, when American anthropologist Elwyn Simons of Yale University began studying them and fit the jaw fragments together. On the basis of his observations of the shape of the jaw and of the morphology of the teeth—which he thought were transitional between those of apes and humans—Simons advanced the theory that Ramapithecus represented the first step in the evolutionary divergence of humans from the common hominoid stock that produced modern apes and humans.


Characteristics of Australopithecus africanus:

Characteristics of Australopithecus africanus:

Skull: Taken as a whole, the skull is a combination of small brain case and large jaws. The brain case lacks high vertical forehead of Homo sapiens and the high roundedness of the skull vault. This gives a simian appearance. But in bone feature it contrasts with pongidae and matches with hominidae. 

  1. The supraorbital height index shows that the relative high exceeds range of variation in anthropoid ape and actually comes within the range of hominid skull.
  2. The occipital torus and the inion occupy a low level as in hominid skulls. In adult apes this occipital torus forms a crest high up the occipital aspects of the skull, thus extending considerably the nuchal area for attachment of neck muscles. In Australopithecus the nuchal area is restricted as in homo.
  3. In Australopithecus the occipital condyles are forward in position relative to the total length of the skull and the auditory aperture. The occipital condyles of pongidae are behind the midpoint of the cranial length and also behind the auditory apertures.
  4. In all the Australopithecus skulls in which mastoid region are sufficiently well preserved, there is a well marked pyramidal process typical of hominid form.
  5. The brow ridges are poorly developed compared to that of the apes.
  6. The facial skeleton is however, large in relation to the brain case.
  7. The cranial bones of Australopithecus robustus are thicker than the Australopithecus africanus and the sagittal crest is developed. The zygomatic arches are expanded and flared.
  8. The jaws are also relatively large but no simian shelf.

Cranial capacity:

In cranial capacity, the range of variation is quite considerable. The skull of Australopithecus afarensis and Australopithecus africanus ranges from 400 to 500 cc and Australopithecus robustus ranges from 410 to 530 cc. 

Thus the general endocranial size of Australopithecus does not differ markedly from those of gorilla and chimpanzee. However in relation to the body size Australopithecus shows larger brain capacity proportion than the apes.

Dentitions:

Australopithecus dentition is essentially of hominid type. In all the adult specimens the dental arcades is evenly curved as in Homo sapiens with no diastimic intervals. The canine is reduced in size and spatulate in forms. Canines and incisors are almost in the same level.

The anterior upper premolars have two roots, the anterior lower premolars are non-sectorial and have one root (sectorial and two roots in apes). There is good evidence for the study of the immature specimens that the order of eruption of permanent teeth agrees with the Hominidae. In Homo sapiens the canine erupts before the second molar. This is reverse in the apes.

Pelvis:

The total morphological pattern of the pelvis of Australopithecus is hominid.

  1. The anterior inferior iliac spine is strongly developed.
  2. The ilium is much relatively broader than in the apes. The broad ilium lengthens the attachment of the gluteus muscles that makes important in maintaining balance of the trunk on the legs. The gluteus maximus becomes a fourfold extension muscle which is needed for erect bipedal locomotion. Whereas in monkeys and apes the gluteus maximus is an abductor muscle.
  3. The posterior extremity of the iliac crest is extended backward and downward in the sacral area.
  4. The angle of the sciatic notch (depression) is more acute in the pelvis of man and Australopithecus than that of the great apes. This is resulted in part due to development of prominent ischial spine.
  5. Ischial tuberosity is relatively high in man and Australopithecus and closer to acetabulum than that of the apes.
  6. Sacrum is shifted upward and closer to the acetabulum forming more or less a basin or funnel shaped pelvis which indicates the character of erect posture.
In all these characters the pelvic bone of Australopithecus contrasts with the apes and shows pattern for erect bipedalism. However the pelvis of Australopithecus is not fully developed like that of the modern man. Ischail tuberosity is not as quite closely approximated to the acetabulum as it is in Homo sapiens. The anterior superior spine extends further forward.

Limb bones:

In addition to the pelvis, the Australopithecus finds include many fossilized bones of leg, hand and feet. One group from Olduvai Gorge includes twelve of the major bones of a single foot and so perfectly preserved that the details of the foot are readily reconstructable. 

The foot of Australopithecus is much smaller than a human foot. But the metatarsals are hominid and the big toe points forward and not splayed out. The carpe bones and phalanges found in Olduvai Gorge also show hominid characters. 

Two specimens of the lower part of femur found at Stenfontein have been described. They show a combination of features such as the obliquity of the shaft, the alignment of the condyles, the forward prolongation of the intercondyler notches which confirm to the hominid femur. 

Upper extremity of one specimen, however shows certain Pongidae features, such as relatively small size of the articular head. A tibia and fibula found in Olduvai have relatively straight shafts conforming to hominid character.

Difference between Australopithecus africanus and Australopithecus robustus:

Character
Australopithecus africanus
Australopithecus robustus
Height
1.1 - 1.4 m.
1.2 - 1.4 m.
Weight
30 - 60 kg.
40 - 80 m.
Physique
Light build, probably relatively long arms, more human features; Probably less sexual dimorphism.
Very heavy build, relatively Long arms; marked sexual dimorphism.
Brain size
400 - 500 cc
410 - 530 cc
Skull form
Low, flat forehead, brow ridges less prominent.
Prominent crest on top and back of skull, long broad flattish face strong facial buttressing.
Jaw teeth
Small incisor like canine, no gap between upper incisors and canines, larger molars.
 Very thick jaws, small incisors and canine, incisors and canine, very large molars.

Phylogenetic Position:

Currently there are three main phylogenetic trees each with its own cadre of proponents. The problem of whether Australopithecus africanus represent early grade in homo lineage or a small brain hominid arising as a separate product of Ramapithecus radiation is yet to resolve. 

At the same time we also do not know how the two dimorphic forms i.e. gracile and robust Australopithecines are to be classed phylogenetically. Whether they reflect polytypic nature of single taxon or systematic enough to conceive as two taxa is still a question.

There is no generally accepted phylogenetic tree for human evolution. There are several proposal branching perhaps the major distinction between them is whether homo is perceived as late arrival or as early arrival.

In some phylogenetic, robust is consider to be on the same evolutionary line with Australopithecines and some consider robustus to be separate from the earlier gracile species in which Paranthropus robustus/promethecus is equivalent to Australopithecus robustus and Homo africanus equivalent to Australopithecus africanus.

This Pliocene and Pleistocene fossils have shown both hominid and ape like features. However the hominid features are overwhelming. The presence of ape like features can be accounted for by way of common inheritance from a hominoid or Pongidae ancestor.

The hominid characters however can be accounted for by way of independent acquisition demonstrating and highlighting the fact that these fossils were on a direct line of human evolution and not Pongidae line.

There are many schools of thought prevailing with reference to the course of evolution these australopithecine have taken. The most important of these are discussed below.

According to Donald C Johnson and Timothy white the east African fossils Australopithecus afarensis split into two branches and australopithecine line represented by A. africanus P. robustus, P. boisei and a hominid line represented by homo habilis, homo erectus and homo sapiens.

This split was supposed to have happened 3 million years ago. The australopithecine line progressively became robust. This pattern generally called two branched theory had its variants also. For some it is A. africanus which is the common link between the australopithecine line and homoline. For still others these two branch represent parallel evolution.

According to this two branch theory A. afarensis gave rise to A. africanus 3 million years ago of the same height living up to two million years ago.

Next arrived A. robustus which showed marked increased in the robustness of the body face , jaws and teeth and it had lined up to 2.3 to 1.8 million years ago. Finally the last and the most robust form A. boisei lived in east Africa from roughly 1.8 to 1 million years ago.

The second branch of this model the homo line also shows a shortening of the face but there is marked decrease in the size of both cheek teeth and the front teeth. There is a massive increase in the size of brain also. This line begins with ta transition form A. afarensis to H. habilis the first hominid who made and used tools and lived in Africa from 2-1.5 million years ago. They had human like teeth and larger brain than australopithecine (750 cc). however we can conclude that hominid evolution may not have been so simple, isolated and clear cut in tis operations. 

Instead there is a possibility that three or more hominid lineages may have been evolving and interacting with each other.

This two branch theory was widely accepted till the discovery of the new type of hominid skull - Australopithecus aethiopithecus in northern Kenya inn 1985 by Alan Walker. This skull is considered to be the most robust form ever discovered. It had massive teeth and ape like brain. 

The dating of the this specimen indicates that the family of a. boisei didn't evolve in the last leg of the australopithecine evolution as indicated by earlier theory but it originated directly from a. afarensis. Thus the revised theory holds a three line evolutionary sequence. One to boisei line second to Homo and third to africanus, robustus line having A. afarensis as the common ancestor.

The discovery of the youngest australopithecine - A. ramidus has added a new dimension to the three branch theory. It holds that A. afarensis is the common ancestor of Homo, P. boisei and P. robustus but it itself evolved from A. ramidus. With overspecialization of diet, competition for food with H. habilis and the latter's predation along with H.erectus led to the extinction of australopithecine group.

Why are the genera Australopithecus divided into two species?

At first, several discoverers of the various Australopithecus fossils named four to five different genera, but now the consensus of scientific opinion recognizes one genus Australopithecus and two species, one gracile form represented by Australopithecus africanus and other robust form represented by Australopithecus robustus, originally called Paranthropus. This division is made on the basis of their morphological feature. 

The gracile form are slenderly built and smaller; gracile form have probably relatively long arm, probably less sexual dimorphism, high forehead, shorter face, brow ridges less prominent. The incisors are also small with no gap between upper incisor and canines and have big molars; cranial capacity ranges from 410-530 cc. 

The robust form are large and roughly built. They have relatively long arm with moderate sexual dimorphisms, crest on top of skull, flattish face. The robustus have thick jaws, small incisors and canine, very large molars; the premolar is also large like molars. The cranial capacity ranges from 410- 530 cc.

What is the position of Australopithecus in the line of human evolution?

Different scholars have given different opinion about the position of Australopithecus in the line of human evolution. According to Johanson and White Australopithecus afarensis is regarded as the common ancestor of Australopithecine and Homo. 

Australopithecus afarensis rise to Australopithecus africanus and to Homo in one hand and directly to Australopithecus robustus in the other hand. Here Australopithecus africanus act as a transition form from Australopithecine to Homo.

According to L.S.B. Leakey, the common ancestor of both homo lineage and Australopithecine divided quite early. He considers Australopithecus afarensis as not the common ancestor. The homo lineage starts separately after 3 million years and Australopithecus a little bit early but also only 3 million years.

What is T. Robinson Dietary hypothesis?

Going by the dental fossil evidence found in East and South Africa, there are two adaptive groups which can be extended to families. These two adaptive groups are gracile and robust. They are quite distinct in morphological, ecological relationship and behavior.

T. Robinson sees a dichotonomy in cranio-dental form separating these two Australopithecines groups. Robust group has the large post canine teeth crowns, thick enamel, larger occlusal surface, well developed root and relatively flat occlusal surface (greater enamel has been damage).

Crowning and size reduction of the front teeth points to a primary dietary function of crushing and grinding. The massiveness of the entire mastigatory apparatus including the musculature and the wear of the teeth indicate use of a diet of rough material which needed much chewing. 

Hence robust was herbivorous or vegetarian. Gracile form shows none of these features rather their post canine teeth are smaller and anterior teeth larger. The needs for these in meat eating would be substantial until tool making had reached a fairly advanced level.

Homo evolution


Homo






Eugene dubois set background for paleo anthropology and study of early human evolution.

Habilis

•2.5 to 1 mya.
•First homo
•Found in East Africa and South Africa. OH 24 or Twiggy in Tanzania 1968 1.8 million years ago. Less protruding face and larger brain.
•OH 7 Tanzania 1960 1.75 million years ago small dental size, increase brain size.
•Louis leakey Philip Tobias and John Napier studied and described as homo habilis from Tanzania Kenya Ethiopia Malawi and South Africa.
•homo habilis found on eastern side of lake turkana is called homo Rudolphensis. It is bigger than homo habilis.
•Smaller chewing complex and larger brain. Rounded skull. It Tim White studied differences between homo habilis and australopithecine and suggested that australopithecine garhi was its ancestor because says Jo and teeth are mostly similar. Transition took between 3 and 2.5 million years ago.
•Donald Johnson 1980 discovered skeleton apart from skull. Bipedal short leads in comparison to arms.
•Intelligence and use of tools. Large brain small chewing muscles and smaller teeth then australopithecines. Dependence on tool used indication.
•stone tools are more common in homo habilis sites than australopithecus sites. Cognitive advancement proved by increased tool making and tool used. It tools were fundamental to their survival. Diverse diet.
•warming around 2.5 million years ago increased habitat diversity and increased food resources for homo habilis. Therefore it had died versatility.
•650 cc

Homo erectus

•1.8 mya to 300,000. Earliest Fossil by eugene dubois. Trinil Java.
•Large brow ridges, long and low skull. Bigger brain
•Left and colonized Asia and Europe.
•Maeur alps.
•Boxgrove UK
•Dmanisi Georgia
•Zhoukoudian China
•Trinil Java
•Olduvai Tanzania
•Homo erectus Africa. 1.8 and three hundred thousand.
•Some australopithecines also around.
•Nariokotome, Westside Lake turkana 80% Juvenile skeleton point 1.6 m y a. Turkana boy 1984
•Short arms and long legs. Committed to terrestrial life with fully modern stride. Absence of sagittal crest. Smaller molars and thinner enamel reflecting soft diet. Some had robust bones while others had Gracile.
•Ilret footprints. Koobi fora footprints in Kenya. Just like modern human walking. Double arch, adducted big toe. long distance walking running and hunting very likely.
•Other fossils from Olduvai Tanzania.
•1.2 mya. Daka place. Bodo 0.6 mya. very robust with thick cranial bones and large Browridge.
•Tim white sound linear marks on the left cheek with microscopic analysis it was caused by stone tools which means some ritual cannibalism. Ritual defleshing. OH 9 Fossil.
•

First hominin migration

Homo erectus Asia. First 1890 Eugene.

•earliest evidence is 5 skulls bones and tools in Georgia by Georgian paleontologist David L - Dmanisi. 650 cc brain size and large face. 1.8 mya. Asia. Compared to African homo erectus they had faces and job smaller and Browridge less developed. But very e similarities in other areas like mandible of ilret skull. Leg bones longer than arms.
•Kocabas village Turkey five hundred thousand years ago Fossil found. Massive brow ridge and sagittal keel. Signs of tuberculosis.
•Sanigiran Indonesia. 1000cc brain capacity with thick cranial bones and large brow ridges with slight sagittal keel similar to homo actors of Africa Asia and Europe. Large brain and small teeth.
•therefore rapid spread from Africa to outside due to better intelligence reliable on on the material and social behaviour. Diverse diet.
•Gongwangling Fossil Shaanxi province. 1.2 million years ago. Well developed brow ridges and thick cranial bones with 800 CC capacity. Animal bones with butchery marks and stone artefact are found by RX Zhu.
•Zhoukoudian. 1200cc. 1920 discovery 1940 excavation. 87 80000 years ago. 40 to 50 individuals. Stone tools and food remains. Franz Weidenreich.

homo erectus Europe. 1.2 till four hundred thousand ya

•Earliest from Western Europe, Sierra de Atapuerca Spain. Cave site of Sima del elefante 1.2mya. Also Gran Dolina 900,000
•Partial mandible and some teeth. Animal bones with cut marks from butchering. Many stone tools. Animal bones broken which means food was processed before consumption.
•Mauer jaw mandible and mostly teeth from heidelberg Germany five hundred thousand years ago.
•Boxgrove UK.

Homo erectus biological changes

•Increase body size from homo habilis. Heavier. Henry Mark Henry and katherine coffing - height increase by 33%. Mostly changes between 2 and 1.7 m y a.
•Body changes due to climate change and food supply. Adaptation of hunting and meat processing provide better food and nutrition.
•Pat Shipman. Olduvai gorge butchering and scavenging of animals was observed not hunting.
•Tools and social organisation allowed better food supply. So show body changed. Advance in tools and Society E due to brain expansion and complex Technology.
•Acheulian 1.8 mya. more sophisticated and made from wide variety of raw materials into greater range of tool types and functions. Different in variety raw material types and functions from Oldowan tools. Middle awash Valley of Ethiopia shows tools used to kill large animals like hippopotamus.
•Practice anthropology. Glynn Issac matched the microscopic real pattern of tools by watching the animals and they were the same as acheulian tools used by homo erectus.
•homo erectus versus habilis point reduction in teeth size. Face and jaw reduction relative to braincase. Increase brain size. Browridge increase. Thick cranial bones. Body increase size. Reduced arms in length. Increase in length. 650 versus 950 CC brain 33% increase. Brain is energy expensive and nutrition resulted from meat which is protein rich.
•Use of fire point 1 million years ago. F Berna from South Africa -Wonderwerk.
•Zhoukoudian fire evidence. Pyre allowed expansion of humans in cold regions.cooking made easy to chew and powerful Joe and large teeth were not necessary. Therefore middle pleistocene hominin head smaller jaw and teeth. food sharing in social organisation also allowed better nutrition for all.

Homo erectus pattern of evolution.

•Skull. Long low and wide at base point thick bone and large brow ridges.
•More robust with largest and thickest cranial bones. Sagittal keel present in in African homo erectus.

Feldhofer cave neander Valley Germany. 1856 discovery. Hermann studied the fossils and reported his findings. found some RK human features. Skull was long and low but similarities like brain size.

modern man has high and vertical forehead round and tall skull. Small Browridge. small face small teeth and projecting chin called mental eminence. below the neck modern humans are more glacial, narrower bones.

Archaic Homo sapiens had longer and lower skull. Larger brow range. Bigger and more projecting face. Taller and wider nasal aperture. Projecting occipital bone called occipital bun. Larger teeth and no chin. Thick post cranial bones. Eg. Skhul and herto hominins. 500,000 to 350,000.

Homo sapiens sapiens 160,000 to 25,000

Australopithecine vs apes

Australopithecines versus apps

New archaeology 1


Processual archaeology or "the new archaeology"

led by Lewis Binford in the 1960's, this was a critique of the culture history method of "describing" a culture.  Binford argued that we should not identify cultures and place them in a chronological period alone, but we should "Explain" why that culture was manifested in that way.  To explain processes of culture change, we need to take a positivist approach.  this means we must be scientific, develop hypothesis that can be tested, gather data, and test them! this also involves


Post-Processual

The post processualists were mainly a critique of the processulists claims of "objective" conclusions.


Processual archaeology has a method, the scientific approach to reach objective conclusions about cultural processes.

Post Processual archaeology really only critiqued that method.  the researchers from that camp have interpretive methods of their own, but they never actually countered the processual method with what they would call a better one. 

Culture change may be due to processes like climate change or ecology chagnge  this happened coz that happened  

Post processuralism says culure changes due to individual, their meaning, human nature. may’ve stumbled upon or change life due to competition or invent irrigation

Ethnoarchaeology 1


Ethnoarchaeology

Ethnoarchaeology AIMS explain behavioral traditions of early human past, by discovering irregularities in contemporary present. MLK Murty. 

Its basic principle is using analogy of present to explain the past like comma traditions, material culture, substance, land use, settlements, craft specialisation, trade networks, rituals and so on. But it should also be backed up by non analogical grounds. 

C Sinopoli. 1991. 

Main topics. 

  1. Site formation and depositional process.
  2. Studying traditional technologies and community settlement patterns.
  3. Human environment relation.
  4. Material implications of social systems, ideologies and beliefs. 

Studies. Pick one.


Malti Nagar 1970 studied ahar culture of chacolithic complex of Ahar culture banas Valley which is similar to to present a pottery in the region. She noted that design garments of bhil women are similar to designs of ahar pottery. Provided understanding of regional traditions and craft specialisation. 

Ansari studied mesolithic and chalcolithic culture of Ganga and belan Valley with current tribes in the region kol and Mallah. Studied their settlements, architecture, food refuse etc.

Art and craft. Saraswati 1978 studied potters, stone workers, metal casters in South Asia to study relationship between producers and consumers and their distribution and exchange system. This explains archaeological distribution of materials. Concluded that at North Indian pottery has continued from Harappan times till present. 

Criticism

Cannot make generalisation from single case. C Sinopoli. 1991

Should not view India as static and tribal culture is always changing. 

Material parallel do not always demonstrate social cultural and behavioral parallel. Allchin 1985.

The environment has also changed.

So, ethnoarchaeology is not a blue print for the past but a framework to understand the past. 

India Mesolithic

India Mesolithic

Pre australopithecine

Pre australopithecine

Chimps diverge 8 mya

Pre Australopithecines (7-4 mya)


Primate evolution

Primate evolution. Larsen 2016




First anthropoids


Oligocene


Miocene. 23 to 5 mya








Why bipedalism evolved

Why bipedalism


Hominin evolution

Hominins.

•bipedal & non honing chewing. main features. 
•secondary features. foraman magnum downward to bottom of skull. S shaped spine, ilium is short from front to back. legs loger than trunk & ARMS. HALLUX NOT OPPOSABLE BIG TOE. reconfigure gluteal muscles. angling of knees helps put feet below centre of gravity. arches on foot absorb shock. efficient walking. 
•non honing. no diastema(canine fits between third premolar & lower canine - this hones the canine & keeps it sharp), small incisors. small blunt non projecting canines. thicker enamel. 

Why hominins evolved

•Darling said bipedalism freed hands for weapons and reduced canine size. Increase intelligence and language. But tool use @3.3 mya & biped 6-8 mya. hunting also @ 2mya so not factor for evolution earlier.
•Rodman & McHenry patchy forest hypothesis. Grassland and forest with habitat lead to efficient locomotion like bipedalism. 
•Lovejoy provisioning hypotheisis. Mother's depended on meals to give them food. So males gave food, thus holding food and bipedal walking. natural selection. 

C neimitz. Amphibious lifestyle. 
•Philip Reno. Little sexual dimorphism observed in hominin bones. Thus cooperative behaviour present as primatolo9gy shows. 

Bipedalism benefits

•Ability to see greater distances. transporting food and children. Long distance running. Hands free to use tools and get skills.
•Negatively. Vulnerable to predators point more pressure on vertebral disc. Cause of injury. More pressure on heart to pump blood from the lens. It if one the person is disabled. But read of must have been very good.

Adaptive radiation in primates

Adaptive radiation in primates

Nocturnal. Insect eating. Wet nose. Claw on the finger for cleaning. Little lies. Leaping locomotion vertical clinging.

Diurnal. Prehensile tail. Swinging branch living. Various diet. V shaped dental arcade.

EPS 11 ground entries. Nakal walking or or brachiation. No tail. U shaped dental arcade. Diastema.  

Bipedalism. Different diet. Loss of body hair. Parabolic dental arcade. Hi cranial capacity. Precision group. Length legs longer than hands. Child maturation time is height. 


Prosimians. 2133
New world monkeys. 2133
Old. 2123

Denisovan and luzonesis


Primate behaviour

Primate behaviour. Goodall. 

Separation. 25 million years ago monkeys point 14 million years ago old world and new world monkeys. 18 gibbons and see among. 14 orangutan 12 Gorilla 8 chimpanzee. Larsen 2016. 

Evolution timeline

Evolution timeline

Why study primates

Why study primates. multidisciplinary involves Anthropology zoology sociology psychology biology. Robert sapolsky, Sue Rumenbach, Jane goodall. 

Humans position

Humans position

Primate

Prosimii vs Anthrpoidea


Hominoidea

Chimp and gorilla vs man

Divergence from old world monkeys At 25 million years ago oligocene miocene period. 18 to 20 million years ago gibbons diverse. Orrington 12 to 16 Gorilla 6 to 8 chimpanzee 4to 6. 

Locomotion adaptation

Locomotion adaptation

Sohanian vs Madrasian culture

Sohanian vs Madrasian

Apes vs man

Apes vs man

Similarities

Monkeys vs hominoidea

Monkeys vs hominoidea.

Similarities. Anrthropidea

Anthrpoidea apes

Anthrpoidea apes.

Diurnal. Varied diet. No tail. Nails on digits. 2.1.2.3. Large size. Dry rhinarium. 


Divergence from old world monkeys At 25 million years ago oligocene miocene period. 18 to 20 million years ago gibbons diverse. Orrington 12 to 16 Gorilla 6 to 8 chimpanzee 4to 6. 

Chimpanzee

Chimos vs man



Nose

Neck. Stout and strong
Chin is absent and simian shelf present. Large and massive mandible

Vertical column. Lacking curves. No precision grip. 13 pair of ribs. Long pelvis. Flat foot and poor opposibility of pollex and hallux. Sacral of ilium narrow in chimpanzee broad in humans. Brachial locomotion versus bipedalism


Primates

Primates



Due to anthropogenic activities like deforestation poaching and climate change 60% of primates like lemurs orangutans and gorillas are under threat. Estrada et al. 

Primates.







Prosimii vs anthropoid

Prosimii vs Anthrpoidea

Differences. Prosimii

Primate order 1

Primate order. O.S.I.P.S.F.S

Dates

66 Paleocene 56 warm eocene
34 cold oligocene 23 warm miocene
5.3 Pliocene 2.6 quarter Pliestocene.

Homo erectus culture

Homo erectus

Absolute dating

Absolute Dating:

Carbon Dating -


Pottassium- Argon (K-A40) Dating - radioactive method.

Thermoluminescence(TL) -


Optical luminescence dating. Huntly developed it. Particles gain charge as long as they remain in the dark and under the soil. This tells us how long the object has been in the soil so it can be dated. Advantages, no heating of the sample required. Sample is preserved. Used in dating arrival of humans in Australia. 

Obsidian daring 




Dendrochronology - AE Douglas. 

Electron Spin Resonance (ESR) -

Palaeomagnetic Dating - Robert DuBois. 1960.





Fission Track Technique - 

Amino Acid Racemisation Technique

Table-1:

Capabilities and limitations of major Chronometric Dating Method


roup>
Technique
Mostsuitablematerials
Effectivedatingrange
Majorlimitations
Radiocarbon,C14
Organicmaterials,inorganiccarbonates
20000to400000
yrsdepending on material
Poor sampling,
contamination byyounger materials
Potassium-Argon,
(K-A40)
Volcanicrock ormaterials
Unlimited,coarse calibration
Availabilityofunweatheredvolcanic rock,samplepreparation, contamination
Palaeomagnetism
Intactkilnor hearth
2000yrs
Calibration, limited applicability
Thermoluminiscence
Pottery
10000yrsor more
Range oferror,fewfacilities
Obsidianhydration
Obsidianartefacts
35000yrs
Requires calibrated regional frameworkframework
Amino acid racemization
Bone,marineshells
100000yrs
Experimental stageonly, fewfacilities
Varves
Sediments, Ice, laminae
15000yrsor more
Limited application
Dendrochronology
Treerings
7500yrs
Regionspecific

Relative and Absolute Dating methods

Relative and Absolute Dating methods

Definition of Chronology

Chronology is the science of measuring time and ordering of the things, events in time.

Types of Dating


1. Relative Dating:

  1. Stratigraphy
  2. Typology
  3. Cross dating
  4. Sequence dating
  5. Fluorine, uranium and nitrogen analysis
  6. Palaeontology
  7. Palynology
  8. Patination.

2. Absolute Dating

  1. Carbon Dating
  2. Potassium- argon Dating
  3. Thermoluminescence
  4. Dendrochronology
  5. Electron Spin Resonance
  6. Fission Track Dating
  7. Palaemagnetic dating
  8. Obsidian hydration
  9. Varve analysis
  10. Amino Acid Racemaization.

Distinction between Relative and Absolute Dating:

Stratigraphy -

Typology -

Sequence Dating -

Cross Dating -

Fluorine, Uranium, and Nitrogen analysis:

Palaeontology -

Palynology -

Patination -


Pottery – Evolution and significance 1

Pottery – Evolution and significance


https://www.civilsdaily.com/pottery-evolution-and-significance/

Pottery or ceramics or ceramic art refers to the creation of objects that are made up of hard brittle material produced from non-metallic minerals by moulding them while the material is wet and then firing them at high temperatures. They are often made up of clay, porcelain, steatite, etc.

Pottery plays an important role in studying culture and reconstructing the past. Historically with distinct culture, the style of pottery changed. It reflects the social, economic and environmental conditions a culture thrived in, which helps the archaeologists and historians in understanding our past. It holds significant value in understanding cultures where script was either absent or remains undeciphered. Understanding of presence of fire, cooking, storage, sedentary or migratory populace, social stratification can all be developed via studying pottery.

For people, pottery provided opportunity to store, cook, transport, trade and essentially became an expression of artistic creativity.

Pottery is majorly of two types

  1. Handmade
  2. Wheel thrown

Handmade pottery is rather a primitive style pottery developed in early ages which with time transforms to wheel thrown. The different motifs drawn on the surface plays an important role in understanding a culture and its beliefs.

Evolution of Pottery


I. Neolithic Age

We find the first reference of pottery in this age. Naturally it is hand-made pottery but during the later period footwheel is also used.




Features


II. Chalcolithic Age

Chalcolithic Era, the first metal age, is marked by the occurrence of distinct cultures in various parts of our country namely – Ahar culture in South Eastern Rajasthan, Malwa culture in Western MP, Jorwe culture in Western Maharashtra, etc.

People of this age used different kinds of pottery.

1. Black-and-red-ware Pottery

Black and red ware seems to have been widely used. Cultures like Ahar-Banas showed the presence of Black and Red ware pottery with white linear designs.




2. Black-on-red ware

Jorwe ware is painted black-on-red and has a matt surface treated with a wash.

3. Ochre Coloured Pottery (OCP)

OCP people are regarded as the junior contemporaries of Harappa.

This pottery is identified with the Copper Hoard Culture that was found in upper Ganga Valley and Ganga Yamuna doab area.





III. Harappan Civilization




Polished Ware Pottery with rough surface




1. Mature Harappa




Burial Pottery of Harappa 


2. Late Harappa

Ochre Colored Pottery (OCP) – As we know the late Harappan cultures(1900BC – 1200BC) were primarily chalcolithic. Some specific chalcolithic sites show the elements of late Harappan(like use of burnt bricks, etc). These sites have OCP.

Black-grey burnished ware produced on slow wheel – Found in Swat Valley. This resembles the pottery from north Iranian plateau.

Black-on-red painted and wheel turned pottery – Also found in Swat Valley. This shows a connection that Swat Valley was associated with Harappa.

Grey-ware and Painted Grey Ware, generally associated with Vedic people have been found in conjunction with some late Harappan pottery. It has less intricate designs as compared to the early and mature periods suggesting a dilution of the rich culture.




IV. Vedic Era – PGW

The Vedic Era saw the emergence of Painted Grey Ware(PGW) Culture. 

The Rig Vedic sites have PGW but iron objects and cereals are absent. Hence it is considered a pre-iron phase of PGW. On the other hand, the Later Vedic sites are considered iron-phase of PGW.

This pottery is an Iron Age pottery found in Gangetic plain and Ghaggar – Hakra valley, lasting from roughly 1200 BC – 600 BC. Mathura was the largest PGW site.








V. Later Vedic Era – NBPW

The later Vedic people were acquainted with 4 types of pottery – Black-and-red ware, black-slipped ware, painted grey ware and red ware.

VI. End of Later Vedic Era – NBPW

Towards the very end of Later Vedic Age around 6th century BC, we see the emergence of 2nd phase of urbanization(1st being Indus Valley Civilization). This era marked the beginning of the Northern Black Polished Ware (NBPW).




Map showing areas where NBPW pottery was found







A Bichrome pottery with two colours

VI. Megalithic Era

This culture is placed between- 3rd Century BC to 1st Century AD. Megaliths refers to monuments constructed of big (mega) stones (lith). This culture is particularly known for its large stone graves. In the South this age is characterized by the use of iron.




Megalithic Pottery found in Kerala




Neanderthal phylogenetic status 1


Neanderthal has phylogenetic status. Discuss in ember and ember 2016.

Fully bipedalism. did not look different from modern humans despite their sloping foreheads, large browridges, flat and brain case, large jaw and nearly absent chin. They had large brain than humans. 1450 cc. 

40000 year ago ancestors of Europe have many common features with neanderthals but do not have projecting bid face as much. 

1977 us and Germany study. Mitochondrial DNA study. 25 differences which is three times the difference between modern humans. This suggested that they must have diverged 600000 the go. Krings 1997. Chimpanzees have 55 differences. 

another difference from homosapiens. Do not have sophisticated tool Technology. Humans have better tools at the same time.

Neanderthals do not have microcephalin gene that is associated with brain development. Pennisi 2009. 

Similarity. Identical foxp2 gene mutations. Capacity for language. Indian Russell infants had the same feature that human infants by the age of 10.



But many genes in humans are common with neanderthals which means our evolution is not linear but multilinear as argued by christophe singer. 

Tool tech 1

Tool tech

Ethnoarchaeology




Read when jstor account works. 



https://www.jstor.org/stable/44147572

https://www.jstor.org/stable/26264790

https://www.jstor.org/stable/44147263

https://www.jstor.org/stable/44145448

https://www.jstor.org/stable/44147751

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263808126_An_Ethnoarchaeological_Study_of_Shell_Fishing_and_Lime_Manufacturing_Technique_at_Manikapatana_Orissa_India

Deccan School contribution. Read and extract studies.