Ancient Mummies Cause a Stir in Modern China

Recently an article was published in the New York Times discussing the Tarim mummy exhibit in Urumqi, located in the Chinese territory Xingjiang. They have on display 4 well-preserved mummies, some of which are nearly 4,000 years old. Because of the dry climate they were found in, these mummies are remarkably well preserved with most of them still having intact hair, skin and clothing. This preservation helps scientists to determine the age of the mummies as well as their area of origin. Surprisingly, many of these mummies have high cheekbones and light hair as well as a style of textiles that seems to imply a Central Asian origin (Georgia, Russia, or Turkey). This is potentially wonderful news to the Turkic speaking ethnic group, Uighur, but causes a problem for the Chinese government.

For hundreds of years, this area of China has been a great source of tension between the Chinese and the Uighur, a Muslim ethnic group numbering nine million in Xinjiang. The Uighur are a distinct ethnic group with origins in Central Asia. They are predominantly Muslim, which is a huge cause of conflict between them and the Chinese government. Although Islam is established as one of China’s 5 recognized religions, it is most heavily restricted in this area because of the large amount of Islamic practitioners. Some officials even believe that the Uighur are one of the biggest security threats to China today. However, the Uighur believe that it is their right to live in this area and a variety of insurgent groups have emerged. Not surprisingly, Chinese officials are unwilling to give up control of the area. One of the main reasons for this is because of the presence of oil and gas in this region. It is the hope of the Uighur that these mummies will show that their people have inhabited this land for thousands of years and therefore they claim possession of it.

The majority of research performed on these mummies seems to indicate that many have a Central Asian origin, which would support the Uighur claims on the area. Many of the mummies display light hair and high cheekbones, which are Central Asian features. The textiles found with the mummies also share resemblances to cloth found in Central Asia from this same period. However, some mummies do show East Asian characteristics, which suggest a greater mixing of people and do great damage to the claims of the Uighur.

This story is an example of how archaeology can be used by governments today as a political tool. In this case, both the Uighur and the Chinese want to claim the mummies as their ancestors because it will help show that their people have been in the area for thousands of years and therefore deserve to be in control of it and its resources. However, it is difficult to determine exactly who the mummies were because depending on who does the research and who is funding it, the results can turn out quite differently. The Uighur are hoping the mummies to be of a Central Asian origin and have even created a popular song about one of the mummies demonstrating these hopes. If it is decided that the mummies are their ancestors it gives them a stronger claim to the area. Yet, the Chinese scientists claim that the mummies show Eastern Asian characteristics and therefore come from Eastern Asia, which would give the Chinese the right to this area. Either way, it seems that both the Chinese and the Uighur believe that they are right and it will be quite some time before a consensus is reached.

Examples of Recent Human Evolution

The Seeds Article that I mentioned in my last post, about the basics of evolution, talks at length about the idea that natural selection is an ongoing process in modern human populations. Their information primarily comes from a publication in PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Science) written by John Hawks, Eric T. Wang, Gregory M. Cochran, Henry C. Harpending, and Robert K. Moyzis. Their article, “Recent acceleration of human adaptive evolution” argues that the rate of evolution has accelerated in modern humans because a larger population is capable of producing a greater number of random gene mutations. Hawks and colleagues suggest that between 7 and 10% of the human genome is currently evolving at the maximum rate. They argue that natural selection is still an active factor in human evolution because trends of change visible in HapMap (a massive survey of the genetic differences between selected populations from around the world) seems too consistent from person to person to be the result of genetic drift. You might say, “Yeah, that’s just common sense.” However, the idea that human evolution is still active is contradictory to the popular scientific thought of the past several decades that argued that the development of culture got rid of the need for evolution to adapt to our environments. Many scientists today are still arguing for this approach to human evolution. So where can we find evidence to support the newer theory that evolution is still active in modern humans? I can think of two relatively recent examples off-hand: the development of the ability for adult humans to digest milk and the development of the CCR5 gene variant that protects against HIV infection.

The first is probably the most well known to the general public just because of it’s prevalence in our daily lives. How often do you reach for a glass of milk with dinner, or pour milk over your cereal in the morning without thinking twice about it? The ability to drink milk without feeling sick as an adult doesn’t apply to everyone in the world. There’s an interesting table originally published in an article by Robert McCracken that shows the percentages lactose intolerant adults in different ethnic groups. According to McCracken, Sweden, at 4%, has the overall lowest percentage of lactose intolerant adults while Native Americans and Asian Americans have some of the highest percentages of lactose intolerant adults with 95% and 95-100% respectively. The National Digestive Disease Information Clearinghouse reports similar numbers with up to 80% or African Americans, 80-100% of Native Americans, and 90-100% of Asian Americans being lactose intolerant. The general trend overall is that European adults can drink milk while most adults in the rest of the world can’t. Why is this? Looking at the question from an evolutionary perspective we would probably immediately make a hypothesis that the ability to drink milk is the result of a genetic mutation in the past for certain human groups.

Scientists believe that before the domestication of cattle and other milk-producing herds all human adults were incapable of drinking milk because there was no need to drink milk. Children stopped drinking their mother’s milk after their first few years of life and in hunter-gatherer or foraging societies before herd domestication people didn’t have access to milk as a food source. Once nutrient-rich non-human milk became available to humans in pastoralist societies, adults with a genetic mutation that allowed them to consume milk had an additional food source, and thus a survival advantage over adults without the mutation in pastoralist societies. This mutation would then have been selected for because it provided a fitness advantage. Over time, probably the past 3,000-6,000 years, the percentages of adults with the ability to drink milk became what it is today. Two other, more technical hypotheses for why the ability to drink milk as an adult spread so successfully throughout many European societies are discussed in an article by Clare Holden and Ruth Mace.

A second interesting example is the CCR5 gene variant which might protect carriers against HIV. It is probably a much more recent mutation. Scientists believe today that this genetic mutation initially developed and was selected for in Europe during the time of the Black Death or bubonic plague. In their article, “Evaluating plague and smallpox as historical selective pressures for the CCR5-Δ32 HIV-resistance allele,” by Alison P. Galvani and Montgomery Slatkin provide a great discussion about this gene mutation and what scientists are discovering about its development and implication. Both of these mutations have developed and been selected for in recent human history, well after the development of culture. This suggests that using culture to adapt to our environments, technology, and modern medicine alone are not enough to stop evolution in its tracks. Perhaps Hawks and his colleagues are even correct in arguing that evolution is speeding up in humans today because our population size has gotten so big. We can look eagerly to seeing what scientists have to say about this hot topic in the coming future!

Here are some additional resources that I found helpful! -

Robert McCracken’s Article that I mentioned can be found here:

Robert D. McCracken, "Lactase Deficiency: An Example of Dietary Evolution,"
Current Anthropology 12 (Oct.-Dec. 1971, pp. 479-517) and Norman Kretchner, "Lactose
and Lactase," Scientific American 277 (Oct. 1972, pp. 71-78).

More information on Nutritional Adaptation:

http://anthro.palomar.edu/adapt/adapt_5.htm

Clare Holden and Ruth Mace’s article on the Lactase Gene:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3659/is_199710/ai_n8778998/pg_1?tag=artBody;col1

Evaluating plague and smallpox as historical selective pressures for the CCR5-Δ32 HIV-resistance allele:

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=299980

Scientists see a mysterious similarity in a pair of deadly plagues: http://www.nytimes.com/specials/women/warchive/980526_2007.html

Review of the Archaeology Channels Recently Posted Videos with Regard to Pre-Clovis Evidence.

The Archaeology Channel recently posted two short videos to their website about pre-Clovis evidence that is just now gaining traction and beginning to challenge the long held ‘Clovis First’ theory that has long dominated North American archaeology. This new evidence points to an earlier time frame for the population of the Americas, contrary to the date that has accepted as fact for so long in American archaeology.

The first video, titled Ice Age Discoveries: New Evidence , deals with various theories associated with the population of the Americas. This includes a brief introduction to the Beringia theory (that humans migrated over the land bridge between Russia and Alaska, then spread through modern day Canada or along the coast to populate the lower regions of North America and into South America) and the Solutrean Hypothesis, both of which have holes. It’s argued that the Solutrean theory stands only on similarity found between lithic technologies in mainland Europe and remains found in the eastern regions of Canada. Where this hypothesis is unlikely due to the duration of such a voyage by sea and the harshness of traveling along glaciated ice packs, the Beringia theory lacks the technological continuity that should be found if people really did migrate from Europe though Asia and finally into North America. Pre-Clovis evidence begins with the Topper site in South Carolina is reviewed, for its wealth of Paleo-Indian artifacts (and the fact that it is a chert quarry) including a modest selection of Pre-Clovis stone tools (picture).

The real turning point for a pre-Clovis theory came with the opening of the Cactus Hill site in Virginia. Fortunately two independent expeditions converged on Cactus Hill, one lead by Joseph and Lynn McAvoy and the other headed by Michael Johnson. I say fortunately because these two teams worked independently of each other and were able to verify the others findings through stratigraphy, lithic analysis and absolute dating methods independently of one another. After Johnson’s team hit the Clovis level they stopped digging, because at this point pre-Clovis inhabitation was just a wild hunch. Where Johnson stopped, McAvoy’s team (Cactus Hill, AREA B) continued to dig below the Clovis level and discovered pre-Clovis blades. At which point Johnson’s team mounted another expedition to Cactus Hill in 96’ to continue work and eventually discovered more pre-Clovis artifacts in their original area (Cactus Hill, AREA A). Both teams demonstrated extreme caution in the uncovering and recording of artifacts, taking care to measure and plot every minute detail during the excavation, lending to the integrity of Cactus Hill as a pre-Clovis site.

The beautiful stratigraphy at Cactus Hill lent further credibility to the pre-Clovis supporters. The stratigraphy at Cactus Hill involved a sterile layer (layers containing no artifacts or evidence of human habitation) between the Clovis artifact bed and the pre-Clovis discovery, indicating no disturbance in the layers. This ensured there could be no doubt about whether or not the pre-Clovis artifacts were actually assemblage from another layer that had migrated into lower levels as critics might suggest. It is not unusual for artifacts to move, depending on soil density (dense artifacts can actually ‘sink’ in the earth toward denser soil horizons), vegetation (tree roots), or rodent burrowing.

While Cactus Hill is not the first site to suggest a pre-Clovis human habitation, it is the oldest accepted evidence of pre-Clovis peoples on the East Coast. The first discovery of Pre-Clovis artifacts was at the Meadowcroft rock shelter in Pennsylvania by Dr. Jim Adovasio, but where Meadowcroft was the first evidence of pre-Clovis assemblage, Cactus Hill helped to reinforce the idea that people inhabited the Americas long before 11,000 years ago. The Meadowcroft rock shelter covers a 30,000 year period but the stratigraphy is complex and contains several reversals (a detail not mentioned in the video) which cast some doubt on the credibility of its Pre-Clovis assemblage. Another problem with Meadowcroft is its proximity to a coal seam, and some worry coal dust from the seam has affected radiocarbon dates for the site.

The second video, titled Ice Age Discoveries: the Investigators, deals more with the proponents of the pre-Clovis theory. It also includes more discussion of the theory and evidence itself, rather than focusing on the debate between Clovis First and pre-Clovis. Although it isn't the first thing that comes up in the second video, the lithic technology found at Cactus Hill holds continuity with what a pre-Clovis technology (in this case reflected in spear points) should look like. The basic shape of a pre-Clovis spear point is similar to a Clovis spear point, only shorter, thinner, and less technically sophisticated. Pre-Clovis points do not exhibit the characteristic channel flake from its base (a hallmark of Clovis points) nor is there any evidence of basal grinding. Pre-Clovis tools also tend to be made of poorer quality stone than that used by Clovis peoples. This shift in stone quality may be attributable to people discovering and utilizing new and better stone sources. It makes sense, after all people had thousands of years between the pre-Clovis and Clovis markers to practice making better stone tools with finer stone.

All in all, the videos present a solid argument for pre-Plovis, the stratigraphy eliminates doubt about the integrity of Cactus Hill. Lithic technology fits into the pre-Clovis construct, moving from less technically proficient (pre-Clovis from Cactus Hill) to more technically proficient (Clovis type points from various areas.) Relative dating puts the pre-Clovis artifacts in the right area, absolute dating indicates pre-Clovis inhabitation and phytolithic concentrations seem to concur with all other lines of evidence that people were in North America before 11,000. All of these are well represented in the second of the two videos. The first video was less informative with regard to the pre-Clovis theory, choosing instead to explain the various theories with North/South American population and giving the viewer a sense of where the Clovis First and pre-Clovis theories with regard to the larger history of man. Although the later half of the video gets back on topic and focuses back in on pre-Clovis theory. Overall, the videos posted on the Archaeology Channel website are very informative, cover their bases with regard to the budding pre-Clovis theory but are blatantly for pre-Clovis. They neglect to mention the heated debate associated with much of the evidence advanced to support pre-Clovis theories.

Also, the music is atrocious.

Link to the Archeology Channels website.

"The Making of Black Harvest" and the Rights of Anthropologists

Recently in my ethnology class here at Luther College, we watched a film trilogy about the Ganiga tribe in Papua New Guinea. This trilogy is a series of documentaries created by the anthropologists Bob Connolly and Robin Anderson, which focus on the introduction of western culture to the indigenous Ganiga tribe. The first film, First Contact, centers on the exploration of inner Papua New Guinea by the Leahy brothers in the 1930s. While there, they encountered a group of indigenous people who had never seen white people before. First Contact tells this story by using actual footage from the 1930s expedition in addition to interviews gathered 50 years later from people who were there when the Leahy brothers arrived. The second film, Joe Leahy’s Neighbors, tells the story about the son of one of the explorers and a Ganiga woman, Joe Leahy, and his interactions with the local people. This film focuses especially on how Joe has assimilated into white culture and the troubles that creates. Black Harvest is the last film in this trilogy and it focuses on a business deal between Joe Leahy and the Ganiga where they enter a cooperative business agreement to co-own a coffee farm. Unfortunately, the coffee prices drop significantly, which produces incredible tension between Joe Leahy and the Ganiga, ultimately, causing him to leave the area by trying to move to Australia.

One of the most striking things about this series, especially in the last two films, is the technique used by anthropologists Bob Connolly and Robin Anderson. Instead of having a script, they let the events naturally unfold and tried to film them whenever possible. As one article puts it, “Their breakthrough observational film is so good that most Australian documentary filmmakers wish they had directed it themselves.” Very rarely do you hear the anthropologists themselves speaking. Instead, there are numerous interviews with Joe Leahy and other Ganiga tribe members in addition to images from their everyday life which tell the story. The final effect is a very moving documentary that lets the images and the people speak for themselves.

Although these films received rave critical reviews, the filmmakers themselves were unsure about whether they had the right to go in and document these people’s lives. A recent book by Bob Connolly, Making Black Harvest, explores the concept more in depth with the help of diaries recorded at the time of filming. In this book Connolly describes the guilt he and Robin Anderson felt in trying to remain objective and wanting things for the good of the movie even when it conflicted with the good of the people. He also writes about how when one of his friends was wounded during a fight, one of the first questions he asked was, “Can we film?” He says that this question still haunts him.

The issue of trying to remain objective while living with and learning about a group of people is something that almost all anthropologists must think about. Where do you draw the line between collecting objective data and becoming an actual member of the community? What gives anthropologists the right to enter these people’s culture and document it? This is still an issue that I myself have trouble with. On one hand, I think that it is important to learn about people of other cultures in order to better understand the world and our own lives. Yet, I think that by becoming part of a community, there are certain responsibilities that conflict with being an objective observer. For instance, I think that it is a breach of friendship and respect to use information you gather to advance your own career, especially when nothing is given back to the people being studied. Oftentimes the people being studied receive little to no benefits and do not even see the final product. Also, being an objective observer can conflict with helping others in need or to put the anthropologist’s needs and wants above that of the people being studied. This can be seen in Making Black Harvest, when Anderson and Connelly wished for the coffee prices to remain low in order to help their movie’s plot. Although Connelly and Anderson later feel guilty for wanting this, it just further illustrates the fine line between being an objective observer and being an active member of the community being studied.

King Solomon’s Mines Found

Thomas Levy of UC San Diego and Mohammad Najjar of Jordan's Friends of Archaeology announced, on Oct. 28^th, that their dig at a large-scale copper works, called Khirbat en-Nahas (Arabic for “ruins of copper”), in the biblical land of Edom is three hundred years older than previously thought. This readjusted timeline would place the extensive copper-smelting site squarely in the hypothesized reign of King Solomon, around 900 BC. Also, the dating challenges the long held assertion that Edom didn’t enter the Iron Age until 600 BC.

The three-stratum site has been dug down through 20 feet of slag and smelting waste to virgin soil. Egyptian artifacts found on the site leads Levy and Najjar to identify the source of the foreign goods as the military campaign of Pharaoh Sheshonq I, who’s vast campaign sought to control Egypt’s neighbors to the North, specifically Israel and Judah after the death of Solomon. The middle layer, from which the Egyptian artifacts were found, dates to 910 BC and identifies a pause in copper production.

The problem with the association of King Solomon is that there is uncertainty of his existence and the existence of his father King David. If one was to go into the field with a trowel and a Bible, the Bible is not going to explain everything one would find. The Bible has an overt message extolling the supremacy of the Israelites, if the text matches with the archaeological record or agrees with extra-biblical sources it would be assumed to be correct, but one cannot take everything for face value. Given the glorious reigns attributed to David and Solomon, in the Bible, one would notice that the kingdom of Israel is surprisingly absent from the records of neighboring states.

According to Israeli archaeologist Israel Finkelstein, "Taking the biblical description of King Solomon literally means ignoring two centuries of biblical research." What Finkelstein is referring to, is the evidence from the archaeological record so far and the scholarly analysis of the Bible. The biblical scholastic consensus is that Torah (first five books of the Hebrew Bible) and the histories (Joshua, Judges, 1 & 2 Kings and 1 & 2 Chronicles) are a compilation of various different sources, and written well after the events that they portray. In addition to the scholarly reasoning, it is also a question of to what level the Bible is taken literally, which varies between archaeologists. Levy maintains, "We're not answering the question" of Solomon’s existence. "But we've brought empirical data that shows we have to reevaluate those questions.” So, the argument between the biblical maximalists and the biblical minimalists continues, but with the expansion of archaeology and a site in Jerusalem being excavated by Dr. Eilat Mazar, perhaps the controversy will be solved within this millennium.

Related Sites:

Biblical Archeology Review

ScienceDaily: King Solomon's Copper Mines?

Los Angles Times: Copper ruins in Jordan bolster biblical record of King Solomon

What is Evolution?

Seed Magazine recently published an article on recent human evolution that was prompted by a scholarly article by John Hawks, Gregory Cochran, Eric Wang, Henry Harpending, and Robert Moyzis. Recent Acceleration of Human Adaptive Evolution was published in December of 2007 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science vol. 104 no. 52. Seed raises some interesting points in the course of their article but before I discuss those I’d like to talk a little bit about the basics of evolution. The American Heritage Dictionary defines evolution in biology as, “a gradual change in the characteristics of a population of animals or plants over successive generations.” What does that mean though? It means that evolution is more than believing we share a common ancestor with chimpanzees. The theory of evolution is far more complex and subtle than that. I will focus on evolution as observable changes in populations over time. The fact of evolution is evidence that we can see; it is the change in trait ratios over observable periods of time. It is the observable evidence for evolution that leads scientists to speculate about long-term changes. It might be helpful to think of evolution as biological change since the term evolution has come to be so associated with “progress,” “improvement,” and “advancement.” This change is not inherently good or bad in the long run. Instead it is good or bad for certain circumstances or environments that exist in a particular place or time. Whether or not a change is good or bad can change over time as the environment changes. Typically the processes of evolution (mutation, migration, genetic drift, and natural selection) will produce changes that benefit an organism’s ability to reproduce and pass on its genes to future generations.

Scientists have discovered that genes mutate randomly at a predictable rate over time Mutations can be caused by gene copying errors, UV or radiation exposure, chemicals, or viruses. When several of these mutations occur to affect the same gene, a new variation of the gene is created. If a mutation becomes common enough in a population then the likelihood of the mutation occurring in the majority of the population over time increases. An example of this is the development of blue eyes. Scientists believe that blue eyes originated in a single individual in the Black sea region between 6,000 – 10,000 years ago. The trait was passed onto the individual’s children and eventually became common enough that 20-40% of all Europeans today have blue eyes.

Genetic drift is one of the most difficult concepts within evolution to understand. Genetic drift is a random change in the frequency of alleles within a population. That is to say, at any given point in time an allele that has a high frequency within a population may not actually confer any fitness benefits to individuals who possess the allele; rather the allele’s high frequency may be due to chance. The University of California – Berkley has a great example of how genetic drift can change allele frequency in a population. Say you have a group of beetles that is made up of 3 green beetles and 5 brown beetles. Here there are nearly equal numbers of green and brown beetles. However, if a person walked through the middle of the group of beetles and happened to step on two of the green beetles then the frequency of the brown allele will go up in relation to the whole population. The next generation of beetles in this case would be much more likely to be mostly brown because there is only one green beetle left, not because being brown helps a beetle’s fitness. Fitness here is an organism’s ability to reproduce and pass on its genes to future generations.

Natural selection is far less random than genetic drift. For natural selection to occur there must be diversity within a population. Diversity is a byproduct of gene mutation because it produces many different variations of alleles. An allele is a variation of a gene that serves the same basic function as another variation for the same gene. For example, eye color in humans is determined by allele variations. In a simplified version, each human has two alleles for eye color encoded in their DNA – one from each parent. If a baby’s mom and dad have green and brown eyes respectively then the baby will get one “brown” allele and one “green” allele. Thus, the baby could have either brown or green eyes depending on which allele is dominant. When the baby grows up he/she could pass on either the brown or green allele no matter which color the baby’s eyes actually are. Natural selection comes into play if one allele has a fitness benefit that the other alleles for the same gene don’t have.

To explain this I’ll go back to the beetle example. Say we have a population of 3 green beetles and 3 brown beetles. If the beetles live on trees that have brown bark, the brown beetles aren’t as visible to predators that eat beetles. If birds eat all the green beetles, then the next generation will get mostly brown alleles because being brown kept some beetles alive by camouflaging them against predators. On the flip side, if the beetles live in the grass then the brown ones might be more likely targets for hungry birds. Thus we can see that whether or not a certain allele confers a benefit to an organism is highly dependant on the organism’s environment. Another example of natural selection can be found in the bright colors of a male peacock’s feathers. Female peacocks are attracted to brighter color displays on a male’s feathers. This means that a male with very colorful feathers will get more mates than a male with less colorful feathers – which means his genes are more likely to be passed on to the next generation. In this sense natural selection can also be determined by sex appeal – whether or not an individual looks healthy or attractive to the opposite sex.

Migration is the last major mechanism for evolutionary change. Allele frequency can be changed in a population if enough members of the population that have one gene variation leave the population. The same is true of incoming members to a population. For example, if we start with a group of 4 green and 4 brown beetles and 3 of the brown beetles leave to go live with another group then the brown allele frequency of the original group has dropped significantly. If the 3 brown beetles that left the first group join another group that has 2 brown beetles and 3 green beetles to start with then the frequency of brown beetles in the second group will go up significantly.

These mechanisms of evolutionary change are always at work and can have drastic impacts on a population over time. This change is not necessarily good or bad overall; it just tends to represent a successful solution to the present environmental circumstances that exist at any given time. Of course evolution and the mechanisms of evolution tend to be much more complicated than how I’ve represented them here I hope that this post helps clear up some of the basic confusions of evolution so that we can go more in depth next time. In my next post I plan to discuss some of the issues raised in the Seeds article, “How We Evolve.”

As usual, here are some extra links to sites that you might find interesting or helpful for further clarification on the topic of Evolution:

University of California – Berkley, Evolution 101:

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/index.shtml

How are human eye colors inherited?:

http://www.athro.com/evo/gen/inherit1.html

PNAS: Darwin’s greatest discovery – Design without designer:

http://www.pnas.org/content/104/suppl.1/8567.full

Link Dump

It's been a long time since our last posts, so I figured I'd take it upon myself to give you all an update on what's been going on in the lab. Whether you like it or not. And, since there have been a lot of really interesting archaeological finds in the last few weeks I'll wrap up things with a nice collection of stories to check out.

So, students came back from Fall Break last Thursday, midterms a faint memory, but research papers a growing fear on the horizon. Thankfully, they all come back to the lab no worse for wear. Right now there are 3 students working on displays, all using objects from our ethnographic collections. We've got one student working on re-classifying artifacts from a really cool, multi-component site in Clayton County; 3 students working on research/blog posts; 2 students digitizing audio cassettes; 1 student scanning our documents; and 4 students cataloging artifacts from a historic site in Van Buren county. That's what we've got going up here in a nutshell. Now on to the links...


Der Spiegel has a really detailed article about Martin Luther. Apparently archaeologists have discovered some pretty interesting artifacts associated with the theologian. There is also a lot of enlightening information about Luther's life and thinking. You'll never guess where the author think Luther came upon some of his inspiration. Der Spiegel. (photo to the right from Getty Images)


Does cooking make us human? A Harvard professor thinks this may be the key to human evolution. Boston Globe


Scott Ortman is applying a four field approach to the study of the people of the Southwest,specifically the ancient peoples of the Mesa Verde region and modern Puebloan peoples, with really amazing results. Although the news release is a little short on findings or specifics, its great to see what's possible and how each field can inform and enrich the larger picture. ASU News.

Rhode Island's Narangasett Bay is apparently rich with maritime archaeological sites. The Providence Journal.

Future of Native American Traditions in Doubt. NPR.

Are Un-contacted tribes fleeing Peru Logging? National Geographic News.

The Debate Surrounding Virginity Testing

In September, a news article emerged discussing how the Zulu in South Africa continue to practice virginity testing even though it is currently banned by the government. Last year, the South African government banned virginity testing for women under the age of 16, a practice which still causes much debate and which continues to be practiced by many in the country. Every year an annual ceremony is held where adolescent girls are inspected by a group of elderly women before receiving a certificate proclaiming her virginity. This is considered a high honor followed by a celebratory dance for the Zulu king. The Zulus believe that by continuing to perform virginity tests, it is helping to curb teenage pregnancy and the spread of AIDS. They say that it also encourages abstinence, which can prevent a variety of deadly diseases. However, many opponents of virginity testing assert that these tests subject girls to degrading public spectacles and those girls who do not pass can face emotional scarring. They also say that it does not prevent the spread of AIDS because it is still acceptable for the Zulu men to engage in sexual intercourse before marriage.

Another country that has had a similar debate in the past few years is Zimbabwe. Here women are also subjected to a physical examination by a group of elders before they get married. The situation is also similar with proponents of testing saying that it curbs the spread of AIDS and opponents believing that it is degrading and a double standard. An interesting aspect of virginity testing in this country can be seen on the eastern border of Zimbabwe where men must take a test proving they are not HIV positive before they can get married. Although it is not the same thing as a virginity test it is an attempt of trying to reduce the spread of AIDS.

In addition to physical examinations, it is common for many cultures around the world to hold a ceremony after the wedding night to determine if the woman was a virgin by observing whether the wedding sheet had been bloodied or not. This practice was formerly performed in countries such as China, Kenya and the French territory of Mayotte in addition to many others. In China, failure of this test could have been used as grounds for dismissal, divorce or reclamation of bride price. Mayotte and the city of Mombasa in Kenya had similar practices in that there was an intensive ceremony the night of the wedding and the morning after, with many songs and dances celebrating the girl’s virginity. The bride’s mother or grandmother would often display the wedding sheet the following morning accompanied by specific songs and dances. This practice was especially common before the 1970s and has since reduced in popularity.

Another country that has recently had discussions about virginity testing is Indonesia. Last August, a video surfaced at an Indonesian school of two students having sex. The principal of the school proposed having virginity tests for the school’s female students with the belief that it would curb pre-marital sex. However, since many parents viewed the testing as a violation of human rights the proposition was dropped.

Turkey is another country that in the past 15 years has had to confront their practice of virginity testing. In 1992, there were two suicides by high school girls who were forced to get virginity exams. In Turkey, virginity is highly valued and is considered a matter of family honor. It was not uncommon for government officials to force women of all ages to be subjected to virginity exams, especially hospital patients, students and prisoners. When this story became widely known in the early 1990s, there was a great public outcry from around the world for the termination of this practice stating that it was a violation of human rights. After much debate and discussion, Turkey passed a law in February 2002, banning virginity testing.

The concept of virginity testing is not new; it has been practiced for thousands of years by cultures all over the world. However, there is little scientific evidence about the accuracy of these tests. Essentially when testing for virginity, people act on the belief that the woman’s hymen is still intact. The problem with this is that a woman’s hymen can be torn in many ways, and not just by sexual intercourse. Also, it is not universally common for a woman to bleed the first time she has intercourse. Some cultures even use fake blood to give the appearance that the woman was a virgin on her wedding night. Therefore, this is basically a cultural practice and has little, if any, scientific basis. Today this practice is viewed by many to be a violation of human rights, causing conflicts between those who wish to end the practice and those who want to continue the tradition.

References:

Engel, John W. “Marriage in the People's Republic of China: Analysis of a New Law”. Journal of Marriage and the Family, Vol. 46, No. 4 (Nov., 1984), pp. 955-961

Lambek, Michael. “Virgin Marriage and the Autonomy of Women in Mayotte”. Signs, Vol. 9, No. 2 (Winter, 1983), pp. 264-281

Topan, Farouk M. “Vugo: A Virginity Celebration Ceremony among the Swahili of Mombasa”. African Languages and Cultures, Vol. 8, No. 1 (1995), pp. 87-107

Alexandria's Proposed Underwater Museum

An Underwater Archaeology Museum?

One aspect of archaeology that we don’t often hear about in the land-locked state of Iowa is underwater archaeology. A few weeks ago in the weekly online publication from Cairo, Al-Ahram, there was an article speculating about the possible development of an underwater archaeology museum in Alexandria. This isn’t the first time we’ve heard about this project: UNESCO, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, held an expert meeting back in 2006 to discuss the project’s feasibility. Prior to that, the idea was discussed at an UNESCO international workshop held in 1998 on Submarine Archaeology and Coastal Management. The overall consensus of these endeavors seem to be that the construction of an underwater archaeology museum in Alexandria has great potential to boost the economy of the area, provide access to great cultural treasures, and promote further research in the area. This is an exciting move for museums in general because it would expand the realm of museum’s public education to beneath the sea. To my knowledge no one has ever attempted to build an archaeological museum under water before so there is no past precedent. That means it could be quite a while before we see the proposed museum because the feasibility study being funded by UNESCO will have to take every aspect of the design, construction, and implementation into consideration before moving forward.

(Jacques Rougerie Architect – Illustration)

What is so special about Alexandria?

The bay of Alexandria, the proposed site of the underwater museum, is unusually rich in artifacts because so much of the city has collapsed into the ocean because of earthquakes since the 4^thcentury AD. Alexander the Great first founded the city of Alexandria in 331 BCE as the capital of Egypt. The archaeological history of the site goes back even farther because prior to this there had been a smaller settlement on the site. Many of the important archaeological finds relating to Alexandria have been at the bottom of the harbor. Most notably is the palace of Cleopatra, which was consumed by the sea as the result of ancient earthquakes, has been discovered on the harbor floor. Also on the floor of Alexandria’s harbor are pieces of what may be Pharos, the legendary lighthouse that was one of the 7 wonders of the ancient world. These archaeological remains include statues, pieces of buildings and streets, jewelry, and hieroglyphic inscriptions. Much of the ancient city actually crumbled into the sea and has only recently been rediscovered by archaeologists.

(Stéphane Compoint\ Smithsonian.com)

Wouldn't it just be easier to bring artifacts to the surface?

In 2001 UNESCO had a convention on the preservation of underwater cultural heritage. At this convention it was decided that for discoveries of underwater cultural heritage, “all traces of human existence having a cultural, historical or archaeological character which have been partially or totally under water, periodically or continuously, for at least 100 years,” states’ parties should explore preservation in situ as the first plan of action. Due to this decision many artifacts discovered by underwater archaeology often remain in situ unless doing so would be detrimental to their state of preservation. If these objects must remain underwater then the general public will likely never be able to see them. “Design of the Times”, one of the many news articles covering UNESCO’s decision to support the feasibility study for the museum says that the idea behind the museum is: “if the artifacts won't go to the museum, let the museum go to the artifacts.”

What else is going on beneath the waves?

The architect for the proposed Alexandria underwater museum, Jacques Rougerie, has several other underwater designs posted on his website. His designs are for everything from underwater living spaces for scientists who want to study underwater ecosystems to underwater cultural centers like the proposed museum. Although I couldn’t find any other news stories about his other underwater architectural projects, this does seem to be a growing trend in the tourism industry. There are efforts being made to create an underwater resort in Fiji, to open in early 2010, called Poseidon Underwater Resort.

(Peter Bollinger)

Another underwater resort is being designed in Dubai called Crescent Hyropolis Resort.

(Crescent-Hydropolis)

(/http://archrecord.construction.com/news/OnTheBoards/0708underwater.asp)

The tourism industry is always looking for new ways to attract visitors. In some ways museums are much the same, although usually not with quite as much funding. For a city like Alexandria that already attracts a large number of tourists annually with more than 11 million tourists visiting Egypt each year, the only way to keep boosting numbers and attracting new visitors is to keep up with the technological advances of the tourism industry. In this case architectural breakthroughs in underwater architecture are allowing for structures to be built underwater for the general public. However, this is still a relatively new direction and is still much more expensive than building on land so any tourism endeavors in the underwater sector will remain pricy for visitors for quite some time – this will likely include admission to the underwater archaeology museum in Alexandria as well when and if it opens.

For more information about the history of Alexandria, the proposed building of the underwater museum, or UNESCO’s involvement here are some links:

UNESCO 2006 News release

http://portal.unesco.org/culture/en/ev.php-URL_ID=36741&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html

UNESCO meeting 2006

http://portal.unesco.org/culture/en/ev.php-URL_ID=36833&URL_DO=DO_PRINTPAGE&URL_SECTION=201.html

Raising Alexandria Article

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/alexandria.html?c=y&page=1

National Geographic News – Underwater Museum Planned for Egypt’s Alexandria

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/09/080916-underwater-museum.html

UNESCO Moscow Office - UNESCO Assists Underwater Museum Project in Alexandria

http://www.unesco.ru/eng/articles/2004/Edward08092008110529.php