Dastlabki Evropa zamonaviy odamlari - Early European modern humans
Dastlabki Evropa zamonaviy odamlari (EEMH) yoki Kromagnonlar birinchisi edi erta zamonaviy odamlar (Homo sapiens) Evropada, qit'ani, ehtimol, 48000 yil oldin, doimiy ravishda egallab turgan holda, doimiy ravishda egallab turgan holda, 210000 yil avvalgi davrdan boshlab doimiy ravishda mavjud. Ular mahalliy aholi bilan o'zaro aloqada bo'lishdi va o'zaro aloqada bo'lishdi Neandertallar (H. neandertalensis) 40-35 ming yil oldin yo'q bo'lib ketgan; va 37000 yil ilgari boshlab, barcha EEMH yagona asoschilar populyatsiyasidan kelib chiqqan bo'lib, bu hozirgi evropaliklarga nasab berishiga yordam beradi. EEMH ishlab chiqarilgan Paleolit madaniyatlar, birinchi yirik bo'lgan Aurignacian, bu muvaffaqiyatli bo'ldi Gravettian tomonidan 30,000 yil oldin. Gravettian ikkiga bo'lindi Epi-Gravettian sharqda va Solutrean davomida g'arbiy qismida, iqlimning katta tanazzuli tufayli Oxirgi muzlik maksimal darajasi (LGM), 21000 yil oldin eng yuqori darajaga ko'tarilgan. Evropa isishi bilan Solutrean evolyutsiyasiga aylandi Magdaleniya 20000 yil oldin, va bu xalqlar Evropani qayta qurishdi. Magdaleniya va Epi-Gravettianlar yo'l berishdi Mezolit katta ov hayvonlari yo'q bo'lib ketayotgan madaniyatlar va Oxirgi muzlik davri yaqinlashdi.
EEMH anatomik jihatdan hozirgi evropaliklarga o'xshash edi, ammo ko'proq edi mustahkam yuzlari kengroq va qisqaroq, ko'zga ko'ringan tizmalar va katta tishlarga ega. Bugungi kun kabi Aynu xalqi (Yaponiyaning mahalliy aholisi), EEMH ning yuqori jag'lari qisqaroq, gorizontal yo'naltirilgan yonoq suyaklari va to'rtburchaklar ko'z teshiklari bo'lgan. Birinchi EEMH, ehtimol qorong'i teriga ega bo'lar edi va tabiiy selektsiya chunki yengilroq teri 30000 yil oldin boshlanmagan va Evropada oq teri bu yilgacha keng tarqalmagan Bronza davri. LGMdan oldin, EEMH populyatsiyasining umuman past zichligi, postindustrial odamlarga o'xshash baland bo'yli bo'yi, 900 km (560 milya) ga qadar cho'zilgan keng savdo yo'llari va katta hayvonlarni ov qilgan. EEMH aholisi neandertallarga qaraganda ancha yuqori edi, ehtimol bu tug'ilish darajasi yuqori bo'lganligi sababli; Ikkala tur uchun ham umr ko'rish davomiyligi odatda 40 yoshgacha bo'lgan. LGMdan keyin aholi zichligi oshdi, chunki jamoalar kamroq sayohat qilishdi (uzoqroq masofalarga bo'lsa ham) va ko'plab o'yinchilarning etishmayotganligi sababli tandemdagi ko'plab odamlarni boqish zarurati ularni keltirib chiqardi kichikroq yoki suvda o'ynaydigan o'yinlarga ko'proq ishonib, tez-tez ishtirok eting o'yinni boshqarish tizimlari va bir vaqtning o'zida butun podalarni so'yish. EEMH arsenalida nayzalar, nayza otuvchilar, harpunlar va, ehtimol tayoq tashlash va Paleolitik itlar. EEMH, odatda, harakatlanayotganda vaqtinchalik kulbalarni qurgan va Gravettian xalqlari, ayniqsa, katta kulbalarni qurishgan. Rossiya tekisligi mamont suyaklaridan.
EEMH turli xil badiiy asarlarni yaratish bilan mashhur, shu jumladan g'or rasmlari, Venera haykalchalari, teshilgan tayoqchalar, hayvonlar haykalchalari va geometrik naqshlar. Ular tanalarini bezab turgan bo'lishlari mumkin oxra qalam va ehtimol tatuirovka, skarifikatsiya va pirsinglar. Ushbu asarlarning aniq ramziyligi sirli bo'lib qolmoqda, ammo EEMH odatda (umuman olmasa ham) amalda bo'lgan deb o'ylashadi shamanizm g'or san'ati, xususan, odam / hayvon duragaylarini tasvirlaydiganlar - asosiy rol o'ynagan. Shuningdek, ular dekorativ munchoqlar va turli xil o'simlik bo'yoqlari bilan bo'yalgan o'simlik tolasi kiyimlarini kiyib yurishgan. holat belgilari. Musiqa uchun ular ishlab chiqarishdi suyak naylari hushtaklar va ehtimol buqalar, raspa, barabanlar, idiofonlar va boshqa asboblar. Ular o'zlarining o'liklarini dafn qildilar, lekin ehtimol faqat yuqori martabaga erishgan yoki tug'ilgan odamlar dafn etilgan.
Paleolit madaniyati qoldiqlari asrlar davomida ma'lum bo'lgan, ammo dastlab ular a kreatsionist ular vakili bo'lgan model antiluvian tomonidan yo'q qilingan xalqlar Katta toshqin. Kontseptsiyasi va ommalashtirishidan keyin evolyutsiya 19-asrning o'rtalaridan oxirigacha EEMH ko'p narsalarga aylandi ilmiy irqchilik, chunki ular Evropani irqiy jihatdan past neandertallardan tortib olgan va bugungi kunda ko'plab taxminlarga aylanib ketgan fathchilar sifatida qaraldi ".subraces "Evropaning tobora yengilroq va yengilroq irqlari rivojlanib, o'zlarining qorong'i zamondoshlarini buzish va almashtirish uchun Markaziy Evropadan tarqalib, ayniqsa"Shimoliy poyga "(ya'ni itarish Oriylarning ustunligi ). Bunday irq tushunchalari 20-asrning o'rtalariga kelib bekor qilindi. Davomida birinchi to'lqin feminizm harakat, EEMH teng huquqli jamiyatda yashaganligi va insoniyat jamiyati tabiatan emasligi haqida dalillar mavjud edi patriarxal, aksincha, ayollar kuchi erkaklar tomonidan tong otishi bilan o'g'irlangan tsivilizatsiya va kapitalizm (Marksistik feminizm ). Ba'zilar uchun turtki ham bo'ldi matriarxal din Venera haykalchalari atrofida joylashgan bo'lib, ular akademiyada bahslashsalar-da, ularni kuchaytirdilar Goddess harakati.
Xronologiya
Bir nechta bo'lgan ko'rinadi erta zamonaviy inson (Homo sapiens) Evropa qit'asidagi immigratsiya va yo'qolib qolish hodisalari, keyinchalik ular mahalliy aholi bilan o'zaro aloqada bo'lishdi Neandertallar (H. neandertalensis) allaqachon Evropada yuz ming yillar davomida yashagan. In O'rta paleolit, zamonaviy odamlar 210 ming yil oldin aniqlangan Apidima g'ori, Yunoniston va ularning o'rnini 170 ming yil oldin neandertallar egallagan.[1] Taxminan 60,000 yil oldin, dengiz izotoplari bosqichi 3 o'zgaruvchan iqlim naqshlari va to'satdan orqaga chekinishi va o'rmonzorlarning rekonstruktsiya qilish hodisalari bilan ajralib turadi, ochiq dasht maydonida.[2]
Ning dastlabki ko'rsatkichi Yuqori paleolit Evropaga zamonaviy inson immigratsiyasi - Bolqon Bohunis 48000 yil oldin boshlangan sanoat, ehtimol Levantindan kelib chiqqan Amir sanoat,[3] va Evropadagi eng qadimgi suyaklar taxminan 45-43 ming yil avval Bolgariyada,[4] Italiya,[5] va Britaniya.[6] G'arbga ko'chib o'tishda, agar ular ergashgan bo'lsalar, aniq emas Dunay yoki O'rta er dengizi sohillari bo'ylab bordi.[7] Taxminan 45 dan 44 ming yil oldin, Proto-avignas madaniyat Evropaga tarqaldi, ehtimol Yaqin Sharqdan kelib chiqqan Axmarian madaniyat. 40 ming yil oldin boshlanishi bilan Geynrix voqeasi 4, the Aurignacian to'g'ri Janubiy-Markaziy Evropada rivojlanib, qit'adagi boshqa madaniyatlarni tezda almashtirdi.[8] Zamonaviy odamlarning ushbu to'lqini neandertallar va ularning o'rnini egalladi Musterian madaniyat.[9] Dunay vodiysida, Aurignacian, 35000 yil avvalgi an'analarga qaraganda, juda oz sonli saytlarni o'z ichiga oladi. Bu erdan "odatdagi Aurignacian" keng tarqalgan bo'lib, 29000 yil oldin tarqaladi.[10]
Aurignacian o'rnini asta-sekin Gravettian madaniyat, ammo Aurignacian qachon yo'q bo'lib ketganligi noma'lum, chunki u yomon aniqlangan. "Aurignakoid" yoki "Epi-Aurignacian" asboblari 18-15 ming yil ilgari aniqlangan.[10] Gravettian Aurignician-dan qattiq ajralib turishi sababli qaerdan kelib chiqqanligi ham aniq emas (va shuning uchun undan kelib chiqmasligi mumkin).[11] Shunga qaramay, genetik dalillar Aurignacian qon tomirlarining hammasi ham yo'q bo'lib ketmaganligini ko'rsatadi.[12] Gravettian genezisi haqidagi farazlarga evolyutsiya kiradi: Markaziy Evropada Seletian 41-37 ming yil oldin mavjud bo'lgan (bohunik tilidan rivojlangan); yoki Axmariya yoki 40 ming yil oldin mavjud bo'lgan Yaqin Sharq yoki Kavkazdagi shunga o'xshash madaniyatlardan.[11] Avvalgi gipoteza Germaniya uchun taxminan 37,500 yil ilgari bahs yuritilganligi sababli, eng qadimgi hodisa aniqlangan joyda yana muhokama qilinadi.[13] va ikkinchisi Buran-Kaya III Taxminan 38 dan 36 ming yil oldin Qrimdagi toshlar.[14] Ikkala holatda ham Gravettianning ko'rinishi haroratning sezilarli pasayishiga to'g'ri keladi.[2] Bundan 37000 yil muqaddam, keyinchalik EEMH ning asoschilar populyatsiyasi mavjud edi va Evropa 14000 yilgacha butun dunyodan genetik izolyatsiyada qoladi.[12]
Taxminan 29000 yil oldin dengiz izotoplarining 2-bosqichi boshlanadi va sovutish kuchayadi. Bu qariyb 21000 yil oldin cho'qqiga chiqdi Oxirgi muzlik maksimal darajasi (LGM) qachon Skandinaviya, Boltiqbo'yi mintaqasi, va Britaniya orollari muzliklar bilan qoplangan va qishki dengiz muzlari Frantsiya dengiz tubiga etib borgan. The Alp tog'lari muzliklar bilan qoplangan edi va Evropaning aksariyat qismi qutbli cho'l edi mamont dasht va o'rmon dashti O'rta er dengizi sohilida hukmronlik qilmoqda.[2] Binobarin, Evropaning katta hududlari yashashga yaroqsiz edi va yangi muhitga moslashish uchun noyob texnologiyalarga ega bo'lgan ikkita alohida madaniyat paydo bo'ldi: Solutrean yangi texnologiyalarni ixtiro qilgan Janubiy-G'arbiy Evropada va Epi-Gravettian Italiyadan to Rossiya tekisligi oldingi Gravettian texnologiyalarini moslashtirgan. Solutreya xalqlari yashagan doimiy muzlik Epi-Gravettian xalqlari kamroq qattiq, mavsumiy muzlatilgan joylarga yopishgan ko'rinadi. Bu vaqtga kelib nisbatan kam sonli saytlar ma'lum.[15] Taxminan 20000 yil oldin muzliklar chekinishni boshladi va Magdaleniya keyingi ikki yil ichida G'arbiy va Markaziy Evropani (Solutreandan keyin keladigan) paydo qiladi va qayta tiklaydi.[2] Davomida boshlanadi Keksa Dryas Taxminan 14000 yil oldin, Magdaleniyaning so'nggi an'analari paydo bo'ldi, ya'ni Azilian, Gamburg va Kresvellian.[16] Davomida Bolling – Allerod isishi, Yaqin Sharq genlari tub evropaliklarda namoyon bo'la boshladi, bu Evropaning genetik izolyatsiyasining tugaganligini ko'rsatmoqda.[12] Ehtimol, Evropadagi katta o'yinlarning doimiy ravishda qisqarishi tufayli magdaleniya va epigravettianlar butunlay almashtirildi. Mezolit Holotsen boshida.[16][17]
Davomida Evropa butunlay qayta qurilgan edi Golotsenli iqlim maqbul 9 dan 5 ming yilgacha. Mezolit G'arbiy Evropa ovchilari-yig'uvchilar (WHG) hozirgi Evropa genomiga katta hissa qo'shdi Qadimgi Shimoliy Evrosiyoliklar (ANE) dan kelib chiqqan Sibir Mal'ta-Buret madaniyati[18] (va 37000 yil oldin EEMH dan ajralib chiqdi[12]). ANE dan farqli o'laroq, WHG genomi ikkala tomonida keng tarqalmagan Kavkaz va faqat Kavkazning g'arbidagi har qanday muhim o'lchovda ko'rinadi. Hozirgi Evropaliklarning aksariyatida WHG / (WHG + ANE) nisbati 60-80% ni tashkil qiladi va 8000 yillik mezolit Loschbour odam shunga o'xshash naqshga ega bo'lgan ko'rinadi. Yaqin Sharq Neolitik Evropa ovchilaridan 40 ming yil oldin ajralib chiqqan dehqonlar 8000 yil oldin Evropaga tarqalib, Neolitik bilan Dastlabki Evropa dehqonlari (EEF). EEF ajdodlarimizning qariyb 30 foizini hozirgi Boltiqbo'yi aholisiga, 90 foizigacha esa O'rta er dengizi populyatsiyasiga qo'shadi. Ikkinchisi WHE ajdodlarini EEF introressiyasi orqali meros qilib olgan bo'lishi mumkin.[18][19] The Sharqiy ovchi-yig'uvchilar (EHG) populyatsiyasi dasht atrofida aniqlangan Urals sharqqa ham tarqaldi va Skandinaviya ovchilari-yig'uvchilar WHG va EHG aralashmasi kabi ko'rinadi. Taxminan 4500 yil oldin immigratsiya Yamnaya va Simli buyumlar sharqiy dashtlardan kelgan madaniyatlar Bronza davri, Proto-hind-evropa tili va evropaliklarning ozmi-ko'pmi hozirgi genetik tarkibi.[20]
Tasnifi
EEMH ilmiy adabiyotda tarixiy jihatdan "anatomik jihatdan zamonaviy odamlar" atamasi yanada ommalashgan 1990-yillarga qadar "kromagnonlar" deb nomlangan.[21] "Cro-Magnon" nomi frantsuz paleontologi tomonidan kashf etilgan 5 ta skeletdan kelib chiqqan Lui Lartet 1868 yilda Cro-Magnon toshdan boshpana, Les Eyzies, Dordogne, Frantsiya, temir yo'l stantsiyasi uchun erni tozalash paytida bu hudud tasodifan topilganidan keyin.[22] Paleolit davridagi toshqotganliklar va eksponatlar aslida o'nlab yillar davomida ma'lum bo'lgan, ammo ular kreatsionist model (tushunchasi sifatida evolyutsiya hali ishlab chiqilmagan). Masalan, Aurignacian Pavilandning qizil xonimi (yosh yigit) Janubiy Uelsdan geolog Reverend tomonidan tasvirlangan Uilyam Baklend fuqarosi sifatida 1822 yilda Rim Britaniya va keyingi mualliflar skeletga da'vo qilishdi antiluvian (oldin Katta toshqin ) Buyuk Britaniyadagi odamlar yoki kuchli toshqin suvlari janubdagi aholi yashaydigan joylardan uzoqroqqa siljigan. Baklend bu namunani ayol deb taxmin qildi, chunki u zargarlik buyumlari bilan bezatilgan (chig'anoqlar, fil suyagi tayoqchalari va uzuklar va bo'ri suyagi shishasi) va u shuningdek (ehtimol hazil bilan) zargarlik buyumlari sehrgarlik. Taxminan shu vaqt ichida bir xillik Harakat asosan boshchiligidagi kuchga ega bo'ldi Charlz Layl, qazilma materiallar ilgari bo'lgan deb bahslashmoqda Injil xronologiyasi.[23]
Keyingi Charlz Darvin 1859 yil Turlarning kelib chiqishi to'g'risida, irqiy antropologlar va raciologlar hozirgi zamon odamlarining ishonib bo'lmaydigan va pastki irqiga asoslangan taxminiy pastki va irqlarni ajratishni boshladilar. qalbaki ilmiy dan olingan ko'rsatkichlar antropometriya, fiziognomiya va frenologiya 20-asrda davom etmoqda.[24]:93–96 Bu davomi edi Karl Linney ' 1735 Systema Naturae, u erda odamlarni shunday tasniflashda zamonaviy tasniflash tizimini ixtiro qilgan Homo sapiens bir nechta taxminlar bilan pastki turlari asosida har xil irqlar uchun tasniflar irqchi xulq-atvor ta'riflari (mos ravishda tarixiy irq tushunchalari ): "H. s. evropeys"(Evropadan kelib chiqishi, qonunlar bilan boshqariladi),"H. s. afer"(Afrika kelib chiqishi, impuls),"H. s. asiaticus"(Osiyo kelib chiqishi, fikrlari) va"H. s. amerikan"(Tub amerikaliklarning kelib chiqishi, urf-odatlari).[25] Irqiy tasniflash tizimi tezda ularning qadimiyligi tan olingandan so'ng, EEMH va Neandertallarni ham o'z ichiga olgan fotoalbom namunalariga tarqaldi.[24]:110 1869 yilda Lartet pastki turlarni tasniflashni taklif qildi "H. s. fotoalbomlar"uchun Cro-Magnon qoladi.[21] "Cro-Magnon poygasi" ning boshqa taxminiy subrasiyalariga quyidagilar kiradi: "H. etiopikusgacha"Dordogne shahridan" Efiopiya yaqinligi "bo'lgan bosh suyagi uchun;"H. predmosti"yoki"H. predmostensis"dan bosh suyaklari uchun Brno, Chexiya Respublikasi, neandertallar va EEMH o'rtasida o'tish davri;[26]:110–111 H. mentonensis bosh suyagi uchun Menton, Frantsiya;[26]:88 "H. grimaldensis" uchun Grimaldi odam va Monakoning Grimaldi yaqinidagi boshqa skeletlari;[26]:55 va "H. aurignacensis"yoki"H. a. hauseri" uchun Komb-Kapelle bosh suyagi.[26]:15
Bu "qazilma toshlar", yonma-yon Ernst Gekkel keyingi evolyutsiyani talab qiluvchi orqaga qarab irqlar borligi haqidagi g'oya (ijtimoiy darvinizm ), Evropaning fikriga ko'ra, madaniyatli oq odam ibtidoiy, kam qirrali maymun ajdodlaridan kelib chiqqan va bir qator vahshiy irqlar orqali chiqqan. Taniqli qosh tizmalari maymunga o'xshash xususiyat deb tasniflangan va natijada neandertallar (shuningdek Avstraliyaliklarning tub aholisi ) past irq deb hisoblangan.[24]:116 Ushbu Evropa qoldiqlari, ayniqsa, yashaydigan Evropa irqlarining ajdodlari bo'lgan.[24]:96 EEMHni tasniflash bo'yicha dastlabki urinishlar orasida irqiy antropologlar tomonidan qilingan Jozef Deniker va Uilyam Z. Ripli 1900 yilda ularni baland bo'yli va aqlli proto-Oriylar, Skandinaviya va Germaniyadan kelib chiqqan boshqa irqlardan ustun. Keyingi irq nazariyalari Markaziy Evropada rivojlanib borgan sayin qorong'u ajdodlari o'rnini to'ldirish uchun to'lqinlarda tarqalib boruvchi tobora yengil, qorong'i va ustun irqlar (kichik tip) atrofida aylanib, "Shimoliy poyga ". Ular bilan yaxshi moslangan Nordisizm va Pan-Germanizm (anavi, Oriylarning ustunligi ) oldin mashhurlikka erishdi Birinchi jahon urushi, va ayniqsa tomonidan ishlatilgan Natsistlar Evropani bosib olish va nemis xalqining ustunligini oqlash Ikkinchi jahon urushi.[24]:203–205 Balandlik ushbu pastki irqlarni ajratish uchun ishlatiladigan xususiyatlardan biri edi, shuning uchun balandroq EEMH, masalan, frantsuz Cro-Magnon namunalari, Paviland va Grimaldi joylari "shimoliy irq" ning ajdodlari deb, kichikroq joylari esa Kombe-Kapelle va Kansel odam (shuningdek, Frantsiyadan) ikkalasining ham kashshofi hisoblangan "O'rta er dengizi poygasi "yoki"Eskimoidlar ".[27] The Venera haykalchalari, ko'kraklari va sonlari bo'rttirilgan homilador ayollarning haykallari "mavjudligiga dalil sifatida ishlatilgan"Negroid poygasi "Paleolitik Evropada, chunki ular haqiqiy ayollarga asoslangan deb talqin qilingan steatopigiya (bu ayollarda keng tarqalgan sonlarning qalinlashishiga olib keladigan holat San odamlar go'yo Afrikaning janubiy qismida joylashgan) va ba'zilarining soch turmalari go'yoki o'xshashlarga o'xshaydi Qadimgi Misr.[28] 1940 yillarga kelib pozitivizm siyosiy va madaniy tarafkashlikni ilmdan olib tashlash uchun kurashgan va taxminan bir asr oldin boshlangan harakat - Evropa antropologiyasida xalq tomonidan qo'llab-quvvatlandi. Ushbu harakat va raciologiyaning natsizm bilan birlashishlari tufayli raciologiya amaliyotdan chiqib ketdi.[24]:137
Demografiya
Yuqori paleolitning boshlanishi Evropada aholi sonining ko'payishi bilan tavsiflangan deb taxmin qilinmoqda, G'arbiy Evropada odamlarning soni neandertal / zamonaviy insoniyat davrida 10 martaga ko'payishi mumkin.[29] Arxeologik yozuvlar shuni ko'rsatadiki, paleolit davridagi odamlarning aksariyati (neandertallar ham, zamonaviy odamlar ham) 40 yoshga to'lmasdan vafot etishgan, kam sonli keksa odamlar esa qayd etilgan. Ehtimol, aholining ko'payishiga tug'ilish koeffitsientlarining sezilarli darajada oshishi sabab bo'lgan.[30]
2005 yilgi tadqiqotda arxeologik yozuvlar asosida yashagan butun geografik maydonni hisoblash orqali yuqori paleolit Evropasi aholisi taxmin qilingan; aholi zichligini o'rtacha Chipevyan, Ha, Tepalik odamlar va Naskapi Sovuq iqlim sharoitida yashaydigan va bunga EEMHga murojaat qilgan mahalliy amerikaliklar; va aholi zichligi vaqt oralig'idagi umumiy joylar sonining o'zgarishi bilan hisoblab chiqilgan vaqt bilan doimiy ravishda oshib boradi deb taxmin qildilar. Ular quyidagilarni hisoblab chiqdilar: 40-30 ming yil avval aholisi 1,738-28,359 (o'rtacha 4,424); bundan 30-22 ming yil oldin 1.879–30.589 (o'rtacha 4776); 22–16,5 ming yil avvalgi 2,313–37,693 (o'rtacha 5,885); va 16,5–11,5 ming yil oldin 11,343–72,635 (o'rtacha 28,736).[31]
LGM-dan so'ng, EEMH juda kam mobil bo'lganligi va aholi zichligi yuqori bo'lganligi, bu qisqa ko'rinadigan savdo yo'llari va ozuqaviy stress ko'rsatkichlari bilan ko'rsatilgan.[32]
Biologiya
Jismoniy xususiyatlar
190-25 ming yil avvalgi 28 zamonaviy odam namunalari uchun o'rtacha miya hajmi taxminan 1478 kub (90,2 kub dyuym), 13 EEMH uchun esa 1,514 kub (92,4 kub) ni tashkil etgan. Taqqoslash uchun, bugungi kunda odamlar o'rtacha 1350 kubometrni tashkil etadi (bu 82 kubometr), bu sezilarli darajada kichikdir. Buning sababi shundaki, EEMH miyasi, hozirgi odamlar uchun turlicha bo'lsa-da, o'rtacha o'rtacha ko'rsatkichni ko'rsatadi frontal lob uzunlik va balandroq oksipital lob balandlik. The parietal loblar ammo, EEMH-da qisqaroq. Bu hozirgi va dastlabki zamonaviy odamlar o'rtasidagi har qanday funktsional farqlarga tenglashadimi, aniq emas.[33]
EEMH jismonan hozirgi odamga o'xshaydi, globusli brainkaza, yuzi butunlay tekis, munchoq qosh tizmasi va iyagi aniqlangan. Biroq, EEMH suyaklari biroz qalinroq va ko'proq mustahkam.[34] Hozirgi evropaliklar bilan taqqoslaganda, EEMH yuzlari kengroq va qisqaroq, taniqli qosh tizmalari, tishlari kattaroq, yuqori jag'lari qisqaroq, gorizontal yo'naltirilgan yonoq suyaklari va yana to'rtburchaklar ko'z teshiklari. Oxirgi uchtasi bugungi kunda ma'lum Aynu xalqi (Yaponiyaning mahalliy aholisi).[35]
G'arbiy Evropaning yuqori paleolit davrida 20 erkak va 10 ayol o'rtacha 176,2 sm (5 fut 9 dyuym) va 162,9 sm (5 fut 4 dyuym) ga teng deb taxmin qilingan. Bu postindustrial zamonaviy Shimoliy Evropaliklarga o'xshaydi. Aksincha, yuqori paleolit davridagi G'arbiy Evropadagi 21 va 15-sonli erkak va ayollarning namunalarida, o'rtacha sanoatgacha bo'lgan zamonaviy odamlarga o'xshash 165,6 sm (5 fut 5 dyuym) va 153,5 sm (5 fut) ni tashkil etdi. Ilgari EEMH nima uchun balandroq bo'lganligi noma'lum, ayniqsa sovuq iqlimli mavjudotlar kalta oyoqli va shuning uchun tana issiqligini yaxshiroq ushlab turish uchun kalta. Bu har xil tarzda quyidagicha izohlanadi: farazlarga ko'ra baland ajdodlar holatini saqlab qolish; keyinchalik yo'q bo'lib ketgan megafauna ovi tufayli yuqori sifatli parhez va ovqatlanish; ov paytida yugurish paytida qadam uzunligini va harakat samaradorligini oshirish uchun funktsional moslashuv; keyinchalik EEMH orasida hududiylikni oshirish, jamoalar o'rtasida gen oqimini kamaytirish va o'sish qarindoshlik stavka; yoki kichik namunalar tufayli yoki baland bo'yli odamlar guruhda yuqori mavqega ega bo'lishlari va shuning uchun ko'milish va saqlanib qolish ehtimoli yuqori bo'lganligi sababli statistik tarafkashlik.[27]
Odatda EEMH, hozirgi evropaliklar singari, singdirishga moslashish uchun engil teriga ega edi D vitamini shimoldan kamroq nurli quyoshdan. Ammo hozirgi yevropaliklarning engil teri uchun javobgar bo'lgan 3 ta asosiy genidan -KITLG, SLC24A5 va SLC45A2 - oxirgi ikkitasi, shuningdek TYRP1 sochlar va ko'zlarning engil ranglari bilan bog'liq bo'lgan gen, tajribali ijobiy tanlov 19 - 11 ming yil ilgari mezolit davrida. Bu uchtasi butun qit'ada keng tarqalib ketdi Bronza davri.[37][38] Bilan bog'liq bo'lgan genning o'zgarishi ko'k ko'zlar hozirgi odamlarda, OCA2, taxminan 10-15 ming yil oldin Shimoliy Evropaning bir joyida umumiy ajdoddan kelib chiqqan ko'rinadi.[39] Vaqtning bunday kechikishiga, terining, sochning va ko'zning rangini bunday moslashuvchan siljishi uchun zarur bo'lgan aholi sonining pastligi va / yoki past kontinental harakat sabab bo'lishi mumkin. Biroq, KITLG taxminan 30,000 yil oldin boshlangan EEMH (shuningdek, Sharqiy Osiyoliklar) da ijobiy tanlovni boshdan kechirdi.[38][40]
Genetika
Anatomik jihatdan zamonaviy odamlar Afrikadan tashqarida, ehtimol 250000 yil oldin, ayrim vaqt oralig'ida bo'lganlarida,[41] hozirgi afrikalik bo'lmaganlar Afrikadan tashqarida kengayish taxminan 65-55 ming yil oldin sodir bo'lgan. Ushbu harakat Sharqiy Afrikada tez sur'atlarda kengayib borishi bilan bog'liq edi mtDNA haplogroup L3.[42][43] Mitoxondrial DNK tahlil EEMHni yuqori paleolitik Sharqiy Osiyo guruhlariga qardosh guruh sifatida joylashtiradi ("Proto-mongoloid "), kelishmovchilik taxminan 50 000 yil oldin sodir bo'lgan.[44]
2014 yilda eng qadimgi EEMH bo'yicha dastlabki genomik tadqiqotlar, ya'ni 37000 yoshli Kostenki-14 individual, aniqlangan uchta asosiy nasl-nasab, ular hozirgi evropaliklarda ham mavjud: ulardan biri keyingi barcha EEMH bilan bog'liq; a "Bazal Evroosiyo "hozirgi evropaliklar va sharqiy osiyoliklarning ajdodlari bir-birlaridan ajralishidan oldin ajralib chiqqan nasab; va yana biri Sibirdan kelgan 24000 yoshli shaxsga tegishli. Mal'ta-Buret madaniyati (yaqin Baykal ko'li ). Buning farqli o'laroq, 2016 yilgi ancha ilgari Evropa namunalarini, shu jumladan Ust-Ishim va Oase-1 45000 yil ilgari paydo bo'lgan, genomning "Bazaviy Evroosiyo" tarkibiy qismiga oid hech qanday dalil topmagan va butun yuqori paleolit davridan EEMH ning keng doirasini ko'rib chiqishda Mal'ta-Buretning intressivligini isbotlamagan. Buning o'rniga ular hozirgi evropaliklarning bunday genetik tarkibi asosan Neolit va Bronza davrida sodir bo'lgan Yaqin Sharq va Sibir intrigressidan kelib chiqqan degan xulosaga kelishdi (14000 yil oldin boshlangan bo'lsa-da), ammo Kostenki-14 va shu jumladan va unga ergashgan barcha EEMH namunalari o'z hissasini qo'shdi. hozirgi Evropa genomi va Sharqiy Osiyoliklarga qaraganda hozirgi Evropaliklar bilan chambarchas bog'liq edi. Oldingi EEMH (jami 10 ta sinovdan o'tgan), aksincha, hozirgi biron bir aholi uchun ajdodlarga o'xshamagan va ular o'zlari ichida yaxlit bir guruh tashkil qilmaganlar, ularning har biri mutlaqo alohida genetik nasllarni, mayorlar orasidagi aralashmani ifodalaydi. nasabga ega yoki juda xilma-xil ajdodlarga ega. Shu sababli, ular taxminan 37000 yil oldin boshlanib, EEMH yagona asoschilar populyatsiyasidan kelib chiqqan va reproduktiv ravishda dunyodan ajralib qolgan degan xulosaga kelishdi. Ular Aurignacian shaxsning Grottes de Goyet, Belgiya, Magdalena aholisi bilan ko'proq genetik yaqinlikka ega Cueva de El Miròn ozmi-ko'pmi zamondosh Sharqiy Evropa Gravettyanlariga qaraganda.[12]
Gaplogruplar EEMHda aniqlangan patilineal (otadan bolaga) Y-DNK haplogrouplari IJ, C1 va K2a;[eslatma 1][46] va matrilineal (onadan bolaga) mt-DNK haplogroup N, R va U.[2-eslatma] Y-haplogroup IJ Janubiy-G'arbiy Osiyodan kelib chiqqan. Haplogroup I Evropada yoki G'arbiy Osiyoda taxminan 35 dan 30 ka gacha paydo bo'ldi. MT-haplogroup U5 Evropada LGMdan oldin, 35 dan 25 ka gacha paydo bo'lgan.[45] 14000 yoshli Villabruna 1 skeleti Ripari Villabruna, Italiya, eng keksa Y-haplogroup tashuvchisi hisoblanadi R1b (R1b1a-L754 * (xL389, V88)) Evropada topilgan, ehtimol Yaqin Sharqning kirib kelishidan kelib chiqqan.[12] Aziliyaliklar "Bichon odam "dan skelet Shveytsariyalik Yura WHG avlodlari bilan bog'liqligi aniqlandi. U Y-DNK haplogroupining tashuvchisi edi I2a va mtDNA haplogroup U5b1h.[40]
Genetik dalillar dastlabki zamonaviy odamlarni taklif qiladi neandertallar bilan aralashgan. Hozirgi genomdagi genlarning taxmin qilinishicha, taxminan 65-47 ming yil oldin kirib kelgan G'arbiy Osiyoda tez orada zamonaviy odamlar Afrikani tark etishganidan keyin.[48][49] 2015 yilda 40 ming yillik zamonaviy inson Oase 2 6-9% bo'lganligi aniqlandi (balli taxmin 7,3%) Neandertalning DNKsi, bundan to'rt-olti avlodgacha bo'lgan neandertal ajdodini ko'rsatmoqda, ammo bu gibrid Ruminiya aholisi keyingi evropaliklarning genomlariga katta hissa qo'shmagan ko'rinadi. Shu sababli, neandertallar va EEMH o'rtasida o'zaro bog'liqlik keng tarqalgan bo'lib, hozirgi genomga hissa qo'shmagan.[36] Vaqt o'tishi bilan neandertal genlarining ulushi asta-sekin kamayib bordi, bu ularning moslashuvchan emasligini va genofonddan tanlanganligini ko'rsatishi mumkin.[12]
Madaniyat
Arxeologik yozuvlarda neandertallarning EEMH bilan almashtirilganiga to'g'ri keladigan sezilarli texnologik murakkablik mavjud va shuning uchun ushbu ikki vaqt oralig'ini ajratish uchun "O'rta paleolit" va "Yuqori paleolit" atamalari yaratilgan. G'arbiy Evropa arxeologiyasiga asosan bu o'tish "yuqori paleolit inqilobi" (butun dunyo miqyosidagi hodisa sifatida kengaytirilgan) va "xatti-harakatlarning zamonaviyligi "bu voqea va dastlabki zamonaviy madaniyatlar bilan bog'liq bo'lib qoldi. Yuqori paleolitda O'rta paleolitga qaraganda texnologik va madaniy evolyutsiyaning yuqori darajasi ko'rinadi, degan xulosaga kelishilgan, ammo agar xatti-harakat zamonaviyligi haqiqatan ham keskin rivojlanish bo'lgan bo'lsa yoki yuqori paleolit davridan ancha ilgari boshlangan, ayniqsa Evropaga tegishli bo'lmagan arxeologik yozuvlarni ko'rib chiqishda sekin rivojlanish. Xulq-atvor zamonaviy amaliyotga quyidagilar kiradi: mikrolitlar, suyak va shoxdan keng foydalanish, silliqlash va urish vositalaridan keng foydalanish, tanani bezatish va haykalchalar ishlab chiqarishning yuqori sifatli dalillari, shaharlararo savdo tarmoqlari va takomillashtirilgan ov texnologiyasi.[50][51] Magdaleniya san'atga kelsak, eng murakkab paleolit asarlarini yaratgan va ular odatdagi, kundalik buyumlarni juda chiroyli bezatgan.[52]
Ov qilish va yig'ish
Odatda, EEMH mavsumga qarab daromadni maksimal darajada oshirish uchun o'lja odatlarini sinchkovlik bilan o'rgangan deb taxmin qilingan. Masalan, yirik sutemizuvchilar (shu jumladan qizil kiyik, otlar va echki ) mavsumiy yig'ilish va kiyik Ehtimol, mavsumiy ravishda mo'yna yasagan hasharotlar xayollarga duchor bo'lgan, ba'zida uni qayta ishlash uchun yaroqsiz.[53] EEMH, ayniqsa, G'arbiy Evropada, LGM-dan keyin, butun podalarni samarali ravishda so'yish uchun katta o'lja hayvonlarini tabiiy cheklangan joylarga (masalan, jarlik devoriga, delikantga yoki suv havzasiga) tuzatganligi haqida ko'plab dalillar mavjud. hayvonlar (o'yin haydovchi tizimi ). Ular migratsiya tartibiga to'g'ri keladigan ommaviy qirg'inlarni, xususan, qizil kiyiklar, otlar, kiyiklar, bizon, Aurochs, va ba'zan echki tukli mamontlar.[54] Shuningdek, mavsumiy ravishda mo'l-ko'l baliqlarni iste'mol qilishning ko'plab misollari mavjud bo'lib, ular yuqori-paleolitning o'rtalarida keng tarqalgan.[55] Shunga qaramay, Magdalena xalqlari avvalgilariga qaraganda mayda hayvonlar, suv manbalari va o'simliklarga ko'proq bog'liq bo'lgan ko'rinadi, bu, ehtimol, LGM-dan keyin Evropaning katta o'yinlari nisbiy kamligi (To'rtlamchi davrda yo'q bo'lib ketish hodisasi ).[2] LGMdan keyingi davrlarda ozuqa moddalarining etishmasligi bilan bog'liq kasalliklarning yuqori darajasi, shu jumladan balandlikning pasayishi kuzatiladi, bu esa ushbu guruhlar (ehtimol yashashga yaroqli hudud kamayganligi sababli) omon qolish uchun juda keng va unchalik istalmagan oziq-ovqat mahsulotlarini iste'mol qilishi kerakligini ko'rsatmoqda.[32] O'yin haydovchi tizimlarining ommalashishi oziq-ovqat mahsulotlarini qaytarishni ko'paytirishi bo'lishi mumkin.[54] Ayniqsa Frantsiyaning janubi-g'arbiy qismida EEMH asosan kiyiklarga bog'liq edi va shu sababli bu jamoalar podalarni ta'qib qilib, Perigord va Pireneylar faqat yozda sodir bo'ladi.[56] Epi-Gravettian jamoalari, aksincha, odatda 1 turdagi yirik ovni ovlashga, asosan ot yoki bizonga e'tibor qaratdilar.[17] Ehtimol, inson faoliyati, qulay dashtning orqaga chekinishiga qo'shimcha ravishda, Evropaning aksariyat qismida LGM dan keyin megafauna tomonidan rekolonizatsiyasini inhibe qilgan bo'lishi mumkin (masalan, mamontlar, junli karkidon, Irlandiyalik elk va g'or sherlari ), qisman ularning yo'q qilinishiga hissa qo'shadi, bu turlarga qarab, Golotsen boshlanishi yoki yaxshi kirib borishi bilan sodir bo'ladi.[57]
Qurol uchun EEMH asosan suyak va shoxdan foydalangan holda nayzalarni ishlab chiqardi, ehtimol bu materiallar juda ko'p edi. Tosh bilan taqqoslaganda, bu materiallar siqilib, ularni ancha parchalanmaydi.[53] Ular o'shanda edi haftalik sifatida ishlatilishi kerak bo'lgan mil ustiga nayzalar. Ehtimol, Aurignacian hunarmandlari suyak tikanlarini nayza uchlari ustiga bog'lab qo'ygan bo'lishi mumkin, ammo bunday texnologiyaning aniq dalillari 23,500 yil oldin eng erta qayd etilgan va mezolitgacha keng tarqalmagan.[58] Aurignacian hunarmandlari ishlab chiqargan pastil -shaklli (olmosga o'xshash) nayzalar. 30000 yil oldin nayzalarning uchlari yumaloq poydevor bilan ishlab chiqarilgan va 28000 yil oldin shpindel shaklidagi kallaklar ishlab chiqarilgan. Gravettian paytida nayzalarning uchlari a qiyshaygan tayanch ishlab chiqarilayotgan edi. LGM boshida nayza uloqtiruvchi snaryadning kuchini va aniqligini oshirishi mumkin bo'lgan Evropada ixtiro qilingan.[53] Mumkin bumerang mamont tuskidan yasalgan Polshada aniqlangan (garchi u uloqtiruvchiga qaytib kela olmasa ham) va 23000 yil ilgari paydo bo'lgan bu eng qadimgi bumerang bo'lar edi.[59] Barutli va yelkali uchlari bo'lgan tosh nayza uchlari Solutreanda keng tarqalgan. Katta va kichik nayza uchlari juda ko'p miqdorda ishlab chiqarilgan, kichiklari esa snaryadga yopishtirilgan bo'lishi mumkin dart. Kamondan otish ehtimol Solutrean-da ixtiro qilingan, ammo kam noaniq kamon texnologiyasi birinchi bo'lib mezolitda xabar qilingan. Magdalaniyada suyak texnologiyasi qayta tiklandi, shuningdek uzoq masofali texnologiya harpunlar juda keng tarqalgan. Ba'zi bir arpun parchalari bo'lganligi taxmin qilinmoqda leisterlar yoki tridentlar va haqiqiy harponlar odatda mavsumiy mavsumda uchraydi go'shti Qizil baliq migratsiya yo'llari.[54]
Bir muncha vaqt o'tgach, EEMH itni xonakilashtirdi, ehtimol a simbiyotik ovchilik munosabatlari. DNK dalillari shuni ko'rsatadiki, hozirgi itlar LGM boshlanishida atrofida bo'rilardan ajralgan. Biroq, potentsial Paleolitik itlar bundan oldin topilgan, ya'ni 36000 yoshli Goyet iti Belgiyadan va 33000 yoshli Oltoy iti Sibirdan - bu Evropa bo'rilarini uy sharoitida uyushtirishga bir necha bor urinishlar bo'lganligini ko'rsatishi mumkin.[60] Ushbu "itlar" Sharqiy Evropada balandligi 60 sm (2 fut) dan Markaziy va G'arbiy Evropada 30-45 sm dan (1 fut - 1 fut 6 dyuym) gacha bo'lgan keng diapazonga ega edilar.[61] va butun Evropada 32-41 kg (71-90 funt). Ushbu "itlar" zamonaviy bo'rilarga qaraganda tumshug'i va bosh suyagi qisqaroq, tanglayi va miyasi kengligi bilan aniqlanadi. Shunga qaramay, uylantirish uchun Aurignacian kelib chiqishi ziddiyatli. Chexiya Respublikasining 27-24 ming yillik Pedmosti saytida bosh suyaklari teshilgan (ehtimol miyani chiqarib olish uchun) bo'lgan 3 ta "it" aniqlandi va 1 kishining og'zida mamont suyagi bor edi. Kashfiyotchilar buni dafn marosimi sifatida izohladilar.[62] 14,500 yosh Bonn-Oberkassel iti Germaniyadan 40 yoshli erkak va 25 yoshli ayol bilan birga ko'milganligi, shuningdek, qizil rang izlari topilgan gematit, va genetik jihatdan hozirgi itlarning ajdodi sifatida joylashtirilgan. Tashxis qo'yilgan itlarga yuqadigan virus va ehtimol 19-23 xafta orasida vafot etgan. Hech narsaga hissa qo'shmasdan omon qolish uchun odamlarning keng qamrovli g'amxo'rligi talab qilinishi kerak edi, chunki bu vaqtda odamlar va itlar faqat moddiy shaxsiy manfaatlar bilan emas, balki hissiy yoki ramziy aloqalar bilan bog'langan.[63] Ushbu proto-itlar ovda, shuningdek, narsalarni tashish yoki lagerni yoki tana go'shtini qo'riqlash kabi uy xizmatlarida muhim rol o'ynagan deb taxmin qilishadi, ammo bu itlarning aniq foydaliligi aniq emas.[64]
Jamiyat
Ijtimoiy tizim
Aksincha patriarxat tarixiy jamiyatlarda taniqli, ikkalasining ham tarixdan ustunligi g'oyasi matriarxat yoki matrifokal oilalar (onalikka asoslangan) birinchi bo'lib 1861 yilda huquqshunos olim tomonidan asos solingan Yoxann Yakob Bachofen. Buning dastlabki modellari qadimgi davrlarda monogamiya keng qo'llanilmagan deb hisoblashgan - shuning uchun otalikni kuzatib borish onalikka qaraganda ancha qiyin bo'lgan va matriarxat jamiyatlari patriarxlar tomonidan tsivilizatsiya boshlanganda zabt etilgan. Matriarxatdan patriarxatga o'tish, natijada oldinga sakrash sifatida qaraldi.[65] Biroq, odamlarning birinchi paleolitik tasvirlari kashf etilganida, odatda aniq ko'krak, dumba va vulvaga ega bo'lgan Venera haykalchalari (hozirgi G'arbiy madaniyatda odatda jinsiy aloqada bo'lgan joylar) dastlab pornografik deb talqin qilingan. Birinchi topilgan Venera "deb nomlandiVénus impudique "(" beozor Venera ") kashfiyotchi tomonidan Pol Xuro, 8-Markiz de Vibray, chunki u kiyimga muhtoj emas edi va taniqli vulvaga ega edi.[28] Ism "Venera ", keyin Rim goddess of beauty, in itself implies an erotic purpose. Such a pattern in the representation of the human form led to suggestions that human forms were generally pornography for men, meaning men were primarily responsible for artwork and craftsmanship in the Palaeolithic whereas women were tasked with child rearing and various domestic works. This would equate to a patriarchal social system.[66]
The Palaeolithic matriarchy model was adapted by prominent communist Fridrix Engels who instead argued that women were robbed of power by men due to economic changes which could only be undone with the adoption of communism (Marksistik feminizm ). The former sentiment was adopted by the birinchi to'lqin feminizm movement, who attacked the patriarchy by making Darwinist arguments of a supposed natural egalitarian or matrifocal state of human society instead of patriarchal, as well as interpreting the Venuses as evidence of ona ma'buda worship as part of some matriarchal religion. Consequently, by the mid-20th century, the Venuses were primarily interpreted as evidence of some Palaeolithic fertility cult. Such claims died down in the 1970s as archaeologists moved away from the highly theoretical models produced by the previous generation. Orqali ikkinchi to'lqin feminizm movement, the prehistoric matriarchal religion hypothesis was primarily propelled by Lithuanian-American archaeologist Marija Gimbutas. Her interpretations of the Palaeolithic were notably involved in the Goddess harakati.[65] Equally ardent arguments against the matriarchy hypothesis have also been prominent, such as American religious scholar Cynthia Eller's 2000 The Myth of Matriarchal Prehistory.[66]
Looking at the archaeological record, depictions of women are markedly more common than of men. In contrast to the commonplace Venuses in the Gravettian, Gravettian depictions of men are rare and contested, the only reliable one being a fragmented ivory figurine from the grave of a Pavlovian site in Brno, Czech Republic (it is also the only statuette found in a Palaeolithic grave). 2-D Magdalenian engravings from 15 to 11 thousand years ago do depict males, indicated by an erect penis and facial hair, though profiles of women with an exaggerated buttock are much more common.[67] There are less than 100 depictions of males in the EEMH archaeological record (of them, about a third are depicted with erections.)[68] On the other hand, most individuals which received a burial (which may have been related to social status) were men.[69] Anatomically, the robustness of limbs (which is an indicator of strength) between EEMH men and women were consistently not appreciably different from each other. Such low levels of jinsiy dimorfizm through the Upper Pleistocene could potentially mean that jinsiy mehnat taqsimoti, which characterises historic societies (both agricultural and hunter-gatherer), only became commonplace in the Holocene.[32]
Savdo
The Upper Palaeolithic is characterised by evidence of expansive trade routes and the great distances at which communities could maintain interactions. The early Upper Palaeolithic is especially known for highly mobile lifestyles, with Gravettian groups (at least those analysed in Italy and Moravia, Ukraine) often sourcing some raw materials upwards of 200 km (120 mi). However, it is debated if this represents sample bias, and if Western and Northern Europe were less mobile. Some cultural practices such as creating Venus figurines or specific burial rituals during the Gravettian stretched 2,000 km (1,200 mi) across the continent.[32] Genetic evidence suggests that, despite strong evidence of cultural transmission, Gravettian Europeans did not introgress into Siberians, meaning there was a movement of ideas but not people between Europe and Siberia.[12] At the 30,000 year old Romanian Poiana Cireşului site, perforated shells of the Homalopoma sanguineum sea snail were recovered, which is significant as it inhabits the Mediterranean at nearest 900 km (560 mi) away.[70] Such interlinkage may have been an important survival tool in lieu of the steadily deteriorating climate. Given low estimated population density, this may have required a rather complex, cross-continental social organisation system.[32]
By and following the LGM, population densities are thought to have been much higher with the marked decrease of habitable lands, resulting in more regional economies. Decreased land availability could have increased travel distance, as habitable refugia may have been far and few between, and increasing population density within these few refugia would have made long-distance travel less economic. This trend continued into the Mesolithic with the adoption of sedentizm.[32] Nonetheless, there is some evidence of long-distance Magdalenian trade routes. For example, at Lascaux, a painting of a bull had remnants of the marganets mineral hausmannit, which can only be manufactured in heat in excess of 900 °C (1,650 °F), which was probably impossible for EEMH; this means they likely encountered natural hausmannite which is known to be found 250 km (160 mi) away in the Pyrenees. Unless there was a hausmannite source much closer to Lascaux which has since been depleted, this could mean that there was a local economy based on manganese ores. Shuningdek, Ekain, Basque Country, the inhabitants were using the locally rare manganese mineral groutite in their paintings, which they possibly mined out of the cave itself.[71] Based on the distribution of Mediterranean and Atlantic seashell jewellery even well inland, there may have been a network during the Late Glacial Interstadial (14 to 12 thousand years ago) along the rivers Reyn va Rhone in France, Germany, and Switzerland.[70]
Uy-joy
EEMH cave sites quite often feature distinct spatial organisation, with certain areas specifically designated for specific activities, such as hearth areas, kitchens, butchering grounds, sleeping grounds, and trash pile. It is difficult to tell if all material from a site was deposited at about the same time, or if the site was used multiple times.[50] EEMH are thought to have been quite mobile, indicated by the great lengths of trade routes, and such a lifestyle was likely supported by the constructions of temporary shelters in open environments, such as huts. Evidence of huts is typically associated with a hearth.[73]
Magdalenian peoples, especially, are thought to have been highly migratory, following herds while repopulating Europe, and several cave and open-air sites indicate the area was abandoned and revisited regularly. The 19,000 year old Peyre Blanque site, France, and at least the 260 km2 (100 sq mi) area around it may have been revisited for thousands of years.[73] In the Magdalenian, stone lined rectangular areas typically 6–15 m2 (65–161 sq ft) were interpreted as having been the foundations or flooring of huts. At Magdalenian Pincevent, France, small, circular dwellings were speculated to have existed based on the spacing of stone tools and bones; these sometimes featured an indoor hearth, work area, or sleeping space (but not all at the same time). A 23,000 year old hut from the Israeli Ohalo II was identified as having used grasses as flooring or possibly bedding, but it is unclear if EEMH also lined their huts with grass or instead used animal pelts.[74] A 13,800 year old slab from Molí del Salt, Spain, has 7 dome-shaped figures engraved onto it, which are postulated to represent temporary dome-shaped huts.[72]
Over 70 dwellings constructed by EEMH out of mammoth bones have been identified, primarily from the Russian Plain,[75] possibly semi-permanent hunting camps.[76] They seem to have built tipis va yarangas.[77] These were typically constructed following the LGM after 22,000 years ago by Epi-Gravettian peoples;[78] the earliest hut identified comes from Moldova, Ukraine, which was dated to 44,000 years ago (making it possible it was built by Neanderthals).[79] Typically, these huts measured 5 m (16 ft) in diameter, or 4 m × 6 m (13 ft × 20 ft) if oval shaped. Huts could get as small as 3 m × 2 m (9.8 ft × 6.6 ft).[77] One of the largest huts has a diameter of 12.5 m (41 ft)—a 25,000 year old hut identified in Kostenki, Russia—and was constructed out of 64 mammoth skulls, but given the little evidence of occupation, this is postulated to have been used for food storage rather than as a living space.[78] Some huts have burned bones, which has typically been interpreted as bones used as fuel for fireplaces due to the scarcity of firewood, and/or disposal of waste. A few huts, however, have evidence of wood burning, or mixed wood/bone burning.[78]
Mammoth hut foundations were generally made by pushing a great quantity of mammoth skulls into the ground (most commonly, though not always, with the tusks facing up to possibly be used as further supports), and the walls by putting into the ground vertically elka pichoqlari, tos suyaklari, uzun suyaklar, jaws, and the spine. Long bones were often used as poles, commonly placed on the end of another long bone or in the cavity of where tusk used to be.[77] Foundation may have extended as far as 40 cm (16 in) underground. Generally, multiple huts were built in a locality, placed 1–20 m (3 ft 3 in–65 ft 7 in) apart depending on location. Tusks may have been used to make entrances, skins pulled over for roofing,[75] and the interior sealed up by less dug out of pits. Some architectural decisions seem to have been purely for aesthetics, best seen in the 4 Epi-Gravettian huts from Mezhyrich, Mezine, Ukraine, where jaws were stacked to create a chevron or zigzag pattern in 2 huts, and long bones were stacked to create horizontal or vertical lines in respectively 1 and 2 huts. The chevron seems to have been a commonly used symbol on the Russian Plain, painted or engraved on bones, tools, figurines, and mammoth skulls.[77]
San'at
G'or san'ati
EEMH are well known for having painted or engraved geometric designs, hand stencils, plants, animals, and seemingly human/animal hybrid creatures on cave walls deep inside caves. Typically the same species are represented in caves which have such art, but the total number of species is quite numerous, and namely includes creatures such as mammoths, bison, lions, bears, and ibex. Nonetheless, some caves were dominated by certain forms, Grotte de Niaux where over half of the animals are bison. Images could be drawn on top of one another.[80] They are found in dark cave recesses, and the artists either lit a fire on the cave floor and used portable stone lamps to see. Drawing materials include black ko'mir and red and yellow ochre crayons, and these same materials were ground into powder and mixed with water to create paint. Palaeolithic painters made use of a variety of minerals for this purpose. Large, flat rocks may have been used as palitralar, and brushes may have included reeds, bristles, and twigs, and possibly a blowgun was used to spray paint over less accessible areas.[81] Hand stencils could either be made by holding the hand to the wall and spitting paint over it (leaving a negative image ) or by applying paint to the hand and then sticking it to the wall. Some prints are missing fingers, but it is unclear if the artist was actually missing the finger or simply excluded it from the stencil. It has generally been assume that the larger prints were left by men and the smaller ones by boys, but the exclusion of women entirely may be improbable.[82] Though many hypotheses have been proposed for the symbolism of cave art, it is still debated why these works were created in the first place.[80]
When examples of EEMH art were first discovered in the 19th century—engraved objects—they were assumed to have been "art for art's sake" as Palaeolithic peoples were widely concieved as having been uncultured savages. This model was primarily championed by French archaeologist Lui Loran Gabriel de Mortillet. Then, detailed paintings found deep within caves were discovered, the first being Cueva de Altamira, Spain, in 1879. The "art for art's sake" model came apart by the turn of the century as more examples of cave art were found in hard-to-reach places in Western Europe such as Combarelles and Font-de-Gaume, for which the idea of it being simply a leisure activity became increasingly untenable. At this time, one notable hypothesis was forwarded by French religious historian Salomon Raynach who supposed that, because only animals were depicted on cave walls, the images represented totem veneration, in which a group or a group member identifies with a certain animal associated with certain powers, and honours or respects this animal in some way such as by not hunting it. If this were the case, then EEMH communities within a region would have subdivided themselves into, for example, a "horse clan", a "bison clan", a "lion clan", and so forth. This was soon contested as some caves contain depictions of animals wounded by projectiles, and generally multiple species are represented.[80]
In 1903, Reinach proposed that the cave art represented simpatik sehr (between the painting and the painting's subject), and by drawing an animal doing some kind of action, the artist believed they were exerting that same action onto the animal. That is, by being the master of the image, they could master the animal itself. The hunting magic model—and the idea that art was magical and utilitarian in EEMH society—gained much popularity in the following decades. In this model, herbivorous prey items were depicted as having been wounded prior to a hunt in order to cast a spell over them; some animals were incompletely depicted to enfeeble them; geometric designs were traps; and human/animal hybrids were sorcerers dressed as animals to gain their power, or were gods ruling over the animals. Many animals were depicted as completely healthy and intact, and sometimes pregnant, which this model interprets as fertility magic to promote reproduction; however, if the animal was a carnivore, then this model says that the depiction served to destroy the animal. By the mid-20th century, this model was being contested because of how few depictions of wounded animals exist; the collection of consumed animal bones in decorated caves often did not match types of animals depicted in terms of abundance; and the magic model does not explain hand stencils.[80]
Following the 1960s, begun by German-American art historian Maks Rafael, the study of cave art took on a much more statistik approach, analysing and quantifying items such as the types and distribution of animals depicted, cave topography, and cave wall morphology. Based on such structuralist tests, horses and bovines seem to have been preferentially clustered together typically in a central position, and such binary organisation led to the suggestion that this was sexual symbolism, and some animals and iconography were designated by EEMH as either male or female. This conclusion has been heavily contested as well, due to the subjective definition of association between two different animals, and the great detail the animals were depicted in, permitting sexual identification (and further, the hypothesis that bison were supposed to be feminine contradicts the finding that many are male).[80]
Also in the late 20th century, with the popularisation of the hypothesis that EEMH practised shamanizm, the human/animal hybrids and geometrical symbols were interpreted within this framework as the visions a shaman would see while in a trans (entoptic phenomena ). Opponents mainly attack the comparisons made between Palaeolithic cultures and present-day shamanistic societies for being in some way inaccurate.[80] In 1988, archaeologists Devid Lyuis-Uilyams and Thomas Dowson suggested trances were induced by hallucinogenic plants containing either meskalin, LSD, yoki psilotsibin; but the only European plant which produces any of these is ergot (which produces a substance used to make LSD), and there is no evidence EEMH purposefully ate it.[83]
Portable art
Venus figurines are commonly found associated with EEMH and are the earliest well-acknowledged representation of human figures. These are most commonly found in the Gravettian (notably in the French Upper Perigordian, the Czech Pavlovian, and West Russian Kostenkian ) most commonly from 29 to 23 thousand years ago. Almost all Venuses depict naked women, and are generally hand-held sized, and feature a downturned head, no face, thin arms which end at or cross over the breasts, voluminous breasts and buttocks, a prominent abdomen interpreted as homiladorlik, tiny and bent legs, and pegged or unnaturally short feet. Venuses vary in proportions, and it is debated if this is due to material choice or if they were intentional design choices.[67] It is suggested that Eastern European Venuses have an emphasis on the breasts and stomach, whereas Western European ones emphasise the hips and thighs.[84]
The earliest interpretations of the Venuses believed these were literal representations of women with semirish or steatopygia (a condition where a woman's body stores more fat in the thighs and buttocks, making them especially prominent).[67] Another early hypothesis was that ideal womanhood for EEMH involved obesity, or that the Venuses were used by men as erotica due to the exaggeration of body parts typically sexualised in Western Culture (as well as the lack of detail to individualising traits such as the face and limbs). However, extending present-day Western norms to Palaeolithic peoples was contested, and a counter interpretation is that either Venuses were mother goddesses, or that EEMH believed depictions of things had sehrli properties over the subject, and that such a depiction of a pregnant woman would facilitate fertility and fecundity. This is also contested as it assumes women are only thought of in terms of child rearing.[67][28]
EEMH also carved perforated batons out of horn, bone, or stone, most commonly through the Solutrean and Magdalenian. Such batons disappear from the archaeological record at the Magdalenian's close. Some batons seem phallic in nature, and about 60 batons have been hypothesised to be representations of penises (all with erections), of which 30 show decoration, and 23 are perforated. Several phallic batons are depicted as sunnat qilingan and seemingly bearing some ornamentation such as piercings, skarifikatsiya, or tattooing. The purpose of perforated batons has been debated, which suggestions for spiritual or religious purposes, ornamentation or status symbol, currency, drumsticks, tent holders, weaving tools, spear straighteners, spear throwers, or dildos. Unperforated phallic batons, measuring 30 (11.8 in) to a few centimetres long, were quite early on interpreted as sexual toys.[68]
Depictions of animals were commonly produced by EEMH. As of 2015, as many as 50 Aurignacian ivory figurines and fragments have been recovered from the German Shvabiyalik Yura. Of the discernible figures, most represents mammoths and lions, and a few horses, bison, possibly a rhino, waterfowl, fish, and small mammals. These sculptures are hand-sized and would have portable works, and some figurines were made into wearable pendants. Some figurines also featured enigmatic engravings, dots, marks, lines, hooks, and criss-cross patterns.[85]
EEMH also made purely symbolic engravings. There are several plaques of bone or antler (referred to as polishers, spatulas, palettes, or knives) which feature series of equidistantly placed notches, most notably the well-preserved 32,000 year old Blanchard plaque from L'Abri Blanchard, France, which features 24 markings in a seemingly serpentine pattern. These have been speculated to have been an early counting system for tallying items such as animals killed, or some other notation system. Marshack postulated they may be calendars.[86] Also in 1972, Marshack identified Magdalenian plaques from 15 to 13 thousand years bearing small, abstract symbols seemingly into organised blocks or sets, which he interpreted as representing an early writing system.[87]
Czech archaeologist Bohuslav Klíma speculated a complex engraving on a mammoth tusk he discovered in the Gravettian Pavlov site, Czech Republic, as being a map, showing a meandering river centre-left, a mountain centre-right, and a living grounds at the centre indicated by a double circle. A few similar engravings have been identified across Europe (in particular the Russian Plain), which he also postulated were maps, plans, or stories.[88]
Tana san'ati
EEMH are commonly associated with large pieces of pigments ("crayons"), namely made of red oxra. For EEMH, it is typically assumed that ochre was used for some symbolic purposes, most notably for cosmetics such as body paint. This is because ochre in some sites had to be imported from incredibly long distances, and it is also associated with burials. It is unclear why they specifically chose red ochre instead of other colours. Xususida colour psychology, popular hypotheses include the putative "female cosmetic coalitions " hypothesis and the "red dress effect ". It is also possible that ochre was chosen for its utility, such as an ingredient for adhesives, hide tanning agent, insect repellent, sunscreen, medicinal properties, dietary supplement, or as a soft hammer.[89] EEMH appear to have been using grinding and crushing tools to process ochre before applying it to the skin.[52]
In 1962, French archaeologists Saint-Just and Marthe Péquart identified bi-pointed needles in the Magdalenian Le Mas-d'Azil, which they speculated might have been used in tattooing.[52] Hypothesised depictions of penises from most commonly the Magdalenian (though a few dating back to the Aurignacian) appear to be decorated with tattoos, scarification, and piercings. Designs include lines, plaques, dots or holes, and human or animal figures.[68]
Kiyim
EEMH produced beads, which are typically assumed to have been attached to clothing or portable items as body decoration. Beads had already been in use since the Middle Palaeolithic, but production dramatically increased in the Upper Palaeolithic. It is unclear why communities chose specific raw materials over other ones, and they seem to have upheld local bead making traditions for a very long time.[90] For example, Mediterranean communities used specific types of marine shells to make beads and pendants for more than 20,000 years; and Central and Western European communities often used pierced animal (and less commonly human) teeth.[91] In the Aurignacian, beads and pendants were being made of shells, teeth, ivory, stone, bone, and antler; and there are a few examples of use of fossil materials including a belemnite, nummulit, ammonit va amber. They may have also been producing ivory and stone rings, diademalar va labretlar. Beads could be manufactured in numerous different styles, such as conical, elliptical, drop-shaped, disc-shaped, ovoid, rectangular, trapezoidal, and so on.[90] Beads may have been used to facilitate social communication, to display the wearer's socio-economic status, as they could have been capable of communicating labour costs (and thereby, a person's wealth, energy, connections, etc.) simply by looking at them.[91] The distribution of ornaments on buried Gravettian individuals, and the likeliness that most of the buried were dressed with whatever they were wearing upon death, indicates that jewellery was primarily worn on the head as opposed to the neck or the torso.[69]
The Gravettian Dolní Věstonice I and III and Pavlov I sites in Moraviya, Czech Republic, yielded many clay fragments with to'qimachilik taassurotlar. These indicate a highly sophisticated and standardised textile industry, including the production of: single-ply, double-ply, triple-ply, and braided string and cordage; knotted nets; to'qilgan baskets; and woven cloth including simple and diagonal egilgan cloth, tekis to'qilgan cloth, and o'ralgan mato. Some cloths appear to have a design pattern. Shuningdek, bor o'ralgan items which may have been baskets or mats. Due to the wide range of textile o'lchov asboblari va to'quv, it is possible they could also produce wall hangings, blankets, bags, shawls, shirts, skirts, and sashes. These people used plant rather than animal fibres,[84][92] ehtimol qichitqi o'ti, sutli o't, yew, yoki qushqo'nmas which have historically been used in weaving. Such plant fibre fragments have also been recorded at the Russian Kostenki and Zaraysk as well as the German Gonnersdorf sayt.[92]
Aholisi Dzudzuana Cave, Georgia, appear to have been staining zig'ir fibres with plant-based dyes, including yellow, red, pink, blue, turquoise, violet, black, brown, gray, green, and khaki.[93] The emergence of textiles in the European archaeological record also coincides with the proliferation of the tikuvchilik ignasi in European sites. Ivory needles are found in most late Upper Palaeolithic sites, which could correlate to frequent sewing, and the predominance of small needles (too small to tailor clothes out of hide and leather) could indicate work on softer woven fabrics or accessory stitching and embroidery of leather products.[84][92]
There is some potential evidence of simple dastgoh texnologiya. However, these have also been interpreted as either hunting implements or art pieces. Rounded objects made of mammoth falanjlar from Předmostí and Avdeevo, Russia, may have been loom weights or human figures. Perforated, washer-like ivory or bone discs from across Europe were potentially shpindel vintlar. A foot-shaped piece of ivory from Kniegrotte, Germany, was possibly a comb or a decorative pendant.[84][92] On the basis of wearing analyses, EEMH are also speculated to have used net spacers or weaving sticks. In 1960, French archaeologist Fernand Lacorre suggested that perforated batons were used to spin cordage.[92]
Some Venuses depict hairdos and clothing worn by Gravettian women. The Willendorfning Venera seems to be wearing a cap, possibly woven fabric or made from shells, featuring at least seven rows and an additional two half-rows covering the nape of the neck. It may have been made starting at a knotted centre and spiraling downward from right to left, and then backstitching all the rows to each other. The Kostenki-1 Venus seems to be wearing a similar cap, though each row seems to overlap the other. The Brassempouy Venera seems to be wearing some nondescript open, twined hair cover. The engraved Lyusselning Venera from France seems to be wearing some headwear with rectangular gridding, and could potentially represent a snoud. Most East European Venuses with headwear also display notching and checkwork on the upper body which are suggestive of bandeaux (a strip of cloth bordering around the tops of the breasts) with some even featuring straps connecting it to around the neck; these seem to be absent in Western European Venuses. Some also wear belts: in Eastern Europe, these are seen on the waist; whereas in Central and Western Europe they are worn on the low hip. The Lespugue Venera seems to be wearing a plant fibre string skirt comprising 11 cords running behind the legs.[84][92]
Musiqa
EEMH are known to have created fleyta out of hollow bird bones as well as mammoth ivory, first appearing in the archaeological record with the Aurignacian about 40,000 years ago in the German Swabian Jura. The Swabian Jura flutes appear to have been able to produce a wide range of tones. One virtually complete flute made of the radius a griffon tulpor from Hohle Fels measures 21.8 cm (8.6 in) in length and 0.8 cm (0.31 in) in diameter. The bone had been smoothed down and was pierced with holes. These finger holes exhibit cut marks, which could indicate the exact placement of these holes was specifically measured to create konsert maydonchasi (that is, to make the instrument in sozlash ) yoki a o'lchov. The part near the elbow joint had two V-shaped carvings, presumably a mouthpiece. Ivory flutes would have required a great time investment to make, as it requires more skill and precision to craft compared to a bird bone flute. A section of ivory must be sawed off to the correct size, cut in half so it can be hollowed out, and then the two pieces have to be refitted and stuck together by an adhesive in an air-tight seal.[94] EEMH also created bone whistles out of deer phalanges.[95]
Such sophisticated music technology could potentially speak to a much longer musical tradition than the archaeological record indicates, as modern hunter-gatherers have been documented to create instruments out of: more biodegradable materials (less likely to fossilise) such as reeds, gourds, skins, and bark; more or less unmodified items such as horns, qobiq chig'anoqlari, logs, and stones; and their weapons, including spear thrower shafts or boomerangs as qarsakchalar, or a hunting bow.[94]
It is speculated that a few EEMH artefacts represent buqalar or percussion instruments such as raspa, but these are harder to prove.[94] One probable bullroarer is identified at Lalinde, France, dating to 14 to 12 thousand years ago, measuring 16 cm (6.3 in) long and decorated with geometric incisions. In the mammoth-bone houses at Mezine, Ukraine, an 80 cm × 20 cm (31.5 in × 7.9 in) thigh-bone, a 53 cm × 50 cm (21 in × 20 in) jawbone, a 57 cm × 63 cm (22 in × 25 in) shoulder blade, and a 63 cm × 43 cm (25 in × 17 in) pelvis of a mammoth bear evidence of paint and repeated percussion. These were first proposed by archaeologist Sergei Bibikov to have served as drums, with either a reindeer antler or mammoth tusk fragment also found at the site being used as a drum stick, though this is contested. Other European sites have yielded potential percussion mallets made of mammoth bone or reindeer antler. It is speculated that some EEMH marked certain sections of caves with red paint which could be struck to produce a note that would resonate throughout the cave chamber, somewhat like a ksilofon.[95]
Til
The early modern human vocal apparatus is generally thought to have been the same as that in present-day humans, and the present-day variation of the FOXP2 gene associated with speech and language ability seems to have evolved within the last 100,000 years. These indicate Upper Palaeolithic humans had the same language capabilities and range of potential fonemalar (sounds) as present-day humans.[96]
Though EEMH languages likely contributed to present-day languages, it is unclear what early languages would have sounded like because words denature and are replaced by entirely original words quite rapidly, making it difficult to identity language qarindoshlar (a word in multiple different languages which descended from a common ancestor) which originated before 9 to 5 thousand years ago. Nonetheless, it has been controversially hypothesised that Eurasian languages are all related and form the "Nostratik tillar " with an early common ancestor existing just after the end of the LGM. In 2013, evolutionary biologist Mark Pagel and colleagues postulated that among "Nostratic languages", frequently used words more often have speculated cognates, and that this was evidence that 23 identified words were "ultraconserved" and supposedly changed very little in use and pronunciation, descending from a common ancestor about 15,000 years ago at the end of the LGM.[97] Archaeologist Paul Heggarty said that Pagel's data was subjective interpretation of supposed cognates, and the extreme volatility of sound and pronunciation of words (for example, Lotin [akwam] "water" → Frantsuzcha [o] in just 2,000 years) makes it unclear if cognates can even be identified that far back if they do indeed exist.[98]
Din
Shamanizm
Several Upper Palaeolithic caves feature depictions of seemingly part-human, part-animal chimaeras (typically part bison, reindeer, or deer), variously termed "anthropozoomorphs", "therianthropes ", or "sorcerers". These have typically been interpreted as being the centre of some shamanistic ritual, and to represent some cultural revolution and the origins of sub'ektivlik.[99] The oldest such cave drawing has been identified at the 30,000 year old Chauvet g'ori, where a figure with a bison upper body and human lower body was drawn onto a stalactite, facing a depiction of a vulva with two tapering legs.[100]:208–209 The 17,000 year old Grotte de Lascaux, France, has a seemingly dead bird-human hybrid between a rhino and a charging bison, with a bird on top of a pole placed near the figure's right hand.[101] A bird on a stick is used as a symbol of mystical power by some modern shamanistic cultures who believe that birds are psychopomps, and can move between the land of the living and the land of the dead. In these cultures, they believe the shaman can either transform into a bird or use a bird as a ruhiy qo'llanma.[102][101] The 14,000 year old Grotte des Trois-Frères, France, features 3 sorcerers. "Deb nomlanganThe Dancing Sorcerer " or "God of Les Trois Frères" seems to bear human legs and feet, paws, a deer head with antlers, a fox or horse tail, a beard, and a flaccid penis, interpreted as dancing on all-fours. Another smaller sorcerer with a bison head, human legs and feet, and upright posture stands above several animal depictions, and is interpreted as holding and playing a musical bow to herd all the animals. The third sorcerer has a seemingly bison upper body and human lower body with testicles and an erection.[102][101]
Some drawn human figures feature lines radiating out. These are generally interpreted as wounded people, with the lines representing pain or spears, possibly related to some initiation process for shamans. One such "wounded man" at Grotte de Cougnac, France, is drawn on the chest of a red Irish elk. A wounded sorcerer with a bison head is found at the 17,000 year old Grotte de Gabillou.[103][101] Some caves featured "vanquished men", lying presumably dead at the foot of generally a bull or bear.[103]
For tangible art, the early Aurignacian Hohlenstein-Stadel, Swabian Jura, has yielded the famous lion-human haykaltaroshlik. It is 30 cm (12 in) tall, which is much larger than the other Swabian Jura figurines. A possible second lion-human was also found in the nearby Hohle Fels. An ivory slab from Geissenklösterle has a carved yengillik of a human figure with its arms raised in the air wearing a hide, the "worshipper ".[85] A 28,000 year old "puppet" was identified at Brno, Czech Republic, consisting of an isolated head piece, torso piece, and left arm piece. It is presumed that the head and torso were connected by a rod, and the torso and arm by some string allowing the arm to move. Qabrdan topilganligi sababli, bu o'liklarning marosimlarida foydalanish uchun shamanga tegishli deb taxmin qilinadi.[104] 14000 yillik katta tosh Cueva del Juyo, Ispaniya, o'ngdagi odamning chap tomonidagi katta mushukning (unga qaragan holda) birlashtirilgan yuzi sifatida o'yilgan ko'rinadi. Erkak kishi mo'ylovi va soqoliga o'xshaydi. Mushukning yarmi (leopard yoki sher) egilgan ko'zlari, tumshug'i, tish va mo'ylovni ko'rsatadigan tumshug'i bor.[102]
Ispaniyalik arxeologlar Lesli G.Frieman va Xoakin Gonsales Echegaray Cueva del Juyo marosimlarni o'tkazish uchun muqaddas joy sifatida xizmat qilish uchun maxsus o'zgartirilganligini ta'kidladilar. Ularning so'zlariga ko'ra, aholi uchburchak xandaq qazib, qurbonliklar bilan to'ldirgan Patella (limpets ), the oddiy periwinkle (a dengiz salyangozi ), pigmentlar, oyoqlari va jag'lari (ehtimol ular ustida go'sht bo'lishi mumkin) qizil va maral kiyiklari va qizil kiyik shoxi tik holatidadir. So'ngra xandaq va qurbonliklar axloqsizlik bilan to'ldirildi va ustiga qizil, sariq va yashil pigmentlarning porloq silindrsimon bo'laklari kabi ko'rinadigan gulzor tartib o'rnatildi. Keyin u loy, tosh plitalar va suyak nayzalari bilan ko'milgan. Loy qobig'i 900 kg (2000 funt) ohaktosh plitasi bilan katta yassi toshlar bilan qoplangan. Magdaleniya Ispaniyasining boshqa joylarida ham odamning ba'zi bir vakili bilan bog'liq bo'lgan o'xshash tuzilmalar topilgan, masalan: Kueva Erralla, Entrefoces tosh boshpanasi, Cueva de Praileaitz, Cueva de la Garma va Cueva de Erberua.[105]
O'likxonadagi amaliyotlar
EEMH o'zlarining o'liklarini, odatda turli xil ramziy qabr mollari va shuningdek, qizil oxra bilan ko'mgan va ko'p odamlar bir xil qabrga dafn etilgan.[106] Biroq, arxeologik yozuvlarda ming yillik uchun saqlanib qolgan 5 dan kam qabrlar bo'lgan, ular kamdan-kam dafn etilganligini ko'rsatishi mumkin. Binobarin, ular izolyatsiya qilingan dafn marosimlarini anglatadimi yoki o'liklarning anchagina umumlashtirilgan an'analarini shakllantiradimi, aniq emas.[69] Evropa bo'ylab ba'zi qabrlarda bir nechta odam bor edi, bu holda ko'pincha ikkala jins ham qatnashgan.[106]
Dafnlarning aksariyati Gravettian (ayniqsa, 31-29 ming yil oldin) va Magdaleniya oxiriga (14–11 ming yil avval) tegishli. Aurignacian paytida hech kim aniqlanmagan. Gravvet dafn marosimlari LGMdan keyingi ko'milishlardan farq qiladi. Birinchisi Evropada Portugaliyadan Sibirgacha bo'lgan, ikkinchisi esa aniq Italiya, Germaniya va Frantsiya janubi-g'arbida bo'lgan. Dafn etilgan Gravettianlarning yarmiga yaqini go'daklar edi, go'daklarni dafn qilish LGMdan keyin kamroq tarqalgan edi, ammo bu ijtimoiy farqlar yoki bolalar o'limining darajasi bilan bog'liqmi, degan munozaralar mavjud. Qabrlar, odatda, hayvon qoldiqlari va asboblari bilan bog'liq, ammo bu qasddan qilinganmi yoki tasodifan to'ldiruvchining bir qismi bo'lganmi, aniq emas. Ular LGMdan keyin juda kam uchraydi va LGMdan keyingi qabrlar Gravettian qabrlariga qaraganda bezaklar bilan ko'proq bog'liq.[69]
Paleolit dafnining eng dabdabali Gravettian qabridir Sungir, Rossiya, unda o'g'il va qiz bolalar toj-to-toj uzun, sayoz qabrga joylashtirilgan va minglab teshilgan fil suyagi munchoqlari, yuzlab teshiklari bilan bezatilgan. arktik tulki itlar, fil suyagidan yasalgan pinalar, disk kulonlari, fil suyagi haykalchalari va mamont tusk nayzalari. Boncuklar bitta saytdagi odam bilan topilgan narsalarning uchdan bir qismiga teng edi, bu bu kichik boncuklar bolalar uchun maxsus ishlab chiqarilganligini ko'rsatishi mumkin edi.[106] Shaxsiy bezakdan tashqari, faqat ikkita yuqori paleolit qabrlarida qabr buyumlari topilgan Arene Candide, Italiya va Brno (Chexiya) va bu ikki bolaning qabri har qanday funktsional asboblarni (nayzalarni) va boshqa shaxsning suyagini (qisman femur) ko'tarishda noyobdir. Sungirdan ko'milgan boshqa 5 kishiga deyarli shuncha qabr mollari olmagan, birovga rasmiy muomala qilinmaganga o'xshaydi.[107] Biroq, Gravettian qabrlarining aksariyat qismida bir nechta naqshlar mavjud va ko'milganlar, ehtimol, o'limidan oldin ularni kiyib yurishgan.[69]
Bunday boy moddiy madaniyat va turli xil shaxslar o'rtasidagi muomalaning sezilarli farqi tufayli, bu xalqlar ijtimoiy darajadagi farq bilan murakkab guruhga ega bo'lgan deb taxmin qilingan. Ushbu modelda chuqur dafn marosimlari berilgan yosh shaxslar yuqori mavqega ega bo'lishlari mumkin.[106] Biroq, EEMH skeletlarining taxminan 75% erkaklar edi, bu san'atdagi ayollarning tasvirlari ustunligidan keskin farq qiladi.[69] Bu qabr buyumlari uchun juda ko'p vaqt, mehnat va mablag 'kerak bo'lganligi sababli, qabr marosimidan ancha oldin qilingan deb taxmin qilingan. Ko'plab dafn marosimlarini rejalashtirish va arxeologik ma'lumotlarda ularning ko'pligi, ikkala jinsning maqsadga muvofiqligi va ba'zi bir tug'ma kasalliklarga chalingan kishilar uchun aniq afzalligi tufayli[106] (aniqlangan dafn marosimlarining taxminan uchdan bir qismi[107]), ushbu madaniyatlar amalda bo'lganligi taxmin qilinmoqda inson qurbonligi g'ayritabiiy xususiyatlarga ega bo'lganlarga qo'rqish, mensimaslik yoki ularga sig'inishda, ko'pgina hozirgi va tarixiy jamiyatlarda bo'lgani kabi.[106][107] Murakkab dafn marosimlari, shamanizm va ritualizmning dalillaridan tashqari, xudojo'ylarning e'tiqodlari haqidagi farazlarni keltirib chiqardi. keyingi hayot EEMH tomonidan.[108]
Ning dastlabki dalillari bosh suyagi kosalari va shu tariqa marosimdagi kannibalizm Magdaleniyadan kelib chiqqan Gough's Cave, Angliya. Bunday marosimlarning aniq dalillari paleolitdan keyin paydo bo'lmaydi. Gough's Cave kubogi xuddi shunday usulga amal qilganga o'xshaydi bosh terisi Neolitik Evropadan bo'lganlar singari, bosh suyagining o'rta chizig'i bo'ylab kesmalar qilingan (shu bilan birga, amerikaliklarning skalping usuli toj atrofida aylana shaklida kesilgan). Evropada marosimsiz kannibalizmning oldingi misollari xuddi shu go'shtni tozalash usuliga amal qilmaganga o'xshaydi.[109] Kamida 1 bosh suyagi kosasi boshqa joydan tashilgan. Bundan tashqari, Gough's Cave ham insonga ega bo'ldi radius zig-zag o'yma bilan. G'orda yoki Magdalena davriga xos bo'lgan boshqa asarlar bilan taqqoslaganda, radiusi juda oz o'zgartirilgan, o'yma, ehtimol tezda o'yilgan (boshqa Magdalena gravyurasida qayd qilinmagan qirg'ich izlari bilan ko'rsatilgan) va suyak singan va ko'p o'tmay tashlangan. . Bu suyakning yagona funktsiyasini guruh tomonidan bezak yoki vosita sifatida olib yurishga tayyorlanishdan ko'ra, ba'zi odam yeb ketish va / yoki dafn marosimlarida vosita bo'lganligini ko'rsatishi mumkin.[110]
Ommaviy madaniyatda
"g'or odam " arxetip adabiyotda ham, ko'rgazmali ommaviy axborot vositalarida ham juda mashhur va juda mushak, tukli yoki dahshatli sifatida tasvirlanishi va yovvoyi va hayvonlar xarakterini aks ettirishi mumkin. G'or odamlari birinchi marta ingl D. V. Griffit 1912 yil Inson Ibtidova badiiy adabiyotda birinchi ko'rinishlardan biri bo'lgan Stenli Vaterloo 1897 yil Abning hikoyasi va Jek London 1907 yil Odam Atodan oldin.[111] G'or odamlari, shuningdek, birinchi marta Griffitning 1914 yilda amalga oshirilgan dinozavrlarga qarshi bo'lganligi (noaniq) sifatida tasvirlangan. Qo'pol kuch (davomi Inson Ibtido) xususiyatli Ceratosaurus.[112] Shuningdek, EEMH neandertallar bilan o'zaro aloqada tasvirlangan, masalan H. G. Uells ' 1927 Ajoyib xalq, Uilyam Golding 1955 yil Vorislar, Byörn Kurten 1978 yil Yo'lbars raqsi, Jan M. Auel 1980 yil Cave of Cave Bear va unga Yer bolalari ketma-ket va Elizabeth Marshall Tomas ' 1987 Kiyik Oy va uning 1990 yildagi davomi Hayvonlarning xotini. EEMH odatda neandertallardan ustun bo'lib, Evropani egallashga imkon berdi.[113]
Shuningdek qarang
Izohlar
- ^ Kostenki-14 (Rossiya): C1b, Goyet Q116-1 (Belgiya) C1a,[12] Sungir (Rossiya): C1a2, Ust'-Ishim va Oase-1: K2a[45]
- ^ Haplogroup N Gravetti davridagi ikkita tosh qoldiqdan topilgan, Paglicci 52 Paglicci 12 va Markaziy Osiyoda keng tarqalgan[47]
Adabiyotlar
- ^ Harvati, K .; va boshq. (2019). "Apidima g'orining qoldiqlari dastlabki dalillarni keltiradi Homo sapiens Evrosiyoda "deb nomlangan. Tabiat. 571 (7766): 500–504. doi:10.1038 / s41586-019-1376-z. PMID 31292546. S2CID 195873640.
- ^ a b v d e El Zaatari, S .; Xublin, J.-J. (2014). "Yuqori paleolitik zamonaviy odamlarning dietasi: mikroto'lqinli to'qimalarni tahlil qilish dalillari". Amerika jismoniy antropologiya jurnali. 153 (4): 570–581. doi:10.1002 / ajpa.22457. PMID 24449141.
- ^ Hoffecker, J. F. (2009). "Zamonaviy odamlarning Evropada tarqalishi". Milliy fanlar akademiyasi materiallari. 106 (38): 16040–16045. Bibcode:2009PNAS..10616040H. doi:10.1073 / pnas.0903446106. PMC 2752585. PMID 19571003.
- ^ Xublin, J.-J .; Sirakov, N .; va boshq. (2020). "Bolgariya Bacho Kiro g'oridan dastlabki paleolitik homo sapiens". Tabiat. 581 (7808): 299–302. doi:10.1038 / s41586-020-2259-z. PMID 32433609. S2CID 218592678.
- ^ Benazzi, S .; Duka, K .; Fornay, S .; Bauer, KC; Kullmer, O .; Svoboda, J.Í .; Pap, I .; Mallegni, F .; Bayl, P .; Kokerelle, M.; Kondemi, S .; Ronchitelli, A .; Harvati, K .; Weber, G.W. (2011). "Evropada zamonaviy odamlarning erta tarqalishi va neandertal xulq-atvoriga ta'siri". Tabiat. 479 (7374): 525–528. Bibcode:2011 yil natur.479..525B. doi:10.1038 / nature10617. PMID 22048311. S2CID 205226924.
- ^ Higham, T .; Kompton, T .; Stringer, C .; Jakobi, R .; Shapiro, B .; Trinkaus, E .; Chandler, B .; Gröning, F .; Kollinz, S .; Xillson, S .; O'Higgins, P .; Fitsjerald, S.; Fagan, M. (2011). "Evropaning shimoliy-g'arbiy qismida anatomik jihatdan zamonaviy odamlar uchun dastlabki dalillar". Tabiat. 479 (7374): 521–524. Bibcode:2011 yil natur.479..521H. doi:10.1038 / tabiat10484. PMID 22048314. S2CID 4374023.
- ^ Duka, Katerina; Grimaldi, Stefano; Boschiya, Jovanni; Angiolo; Higham, Tomas F. G. (2012). "Riparo Mochi (Italiya) yuqori paleolitining yangi xronostratigrafik asosi". Inson evolyutsiyasi jurnali. 62 (2): 286–299. doi:10.1016 / j.jhevol.2011.11.009. PMID 22189428.
- ^ Hoffecker, J. F. (2009 yil 1-iyul). "Zamonaviy odamlarning Evropada tarqalishi". PNAS. 106 (38): 16040–16045. Bibcode:2009PNAS..10616040H. doi:10.1073 / pnas.0903446106. PMC 2752585. PMID 19571003.
- ^ Higham, T .; Duka, K .; Vud, R .; va boshq. (2014). "Neandertalning yo'q bo'lib ketishi vaqti va makonga oid namunalari". Tabiat. 512 (7514): 306–309. Bibcode:2014 yil Noyabr 512..306H. doi:10.1038 / tabiat13621. hdl:1885/75138. PMID 25143113. S2CID 205239973.
- ^ a b Genri-Gambier, D. (2002). "Kromagnon odamlarining qoldiqlari (Les Eyzies-de-Tayac, Dordogne): ularning xronologik mavqei va madaniy atributlari to'g'risida yangi ma'lumotlar". Bulletins et mémoires de la Sociétéd'Anthropologie de Parij. 14 (1–2).
- ^ a b Svoboda, J. (2007). "O'rta Dunaydagi gravettian". Paleo (19): 204. doi:10.4000 / paleo.607.
- ^ a b v d e f g h men Fu, Q .; Posth, C. (2016). "Muzlik davri Evropasining genetik tarixi". Tabiat. 534 (7606): 200–205. Bibcode:2016Natur.534..200F. doi:10.1038 / tabiat17993. PMC 4943878. PMID 27135931.
- ^ Bicho, N .; Kaskaleyra, J .; Gonchalves, C. (2017). "Evropadagi dastlabki yuqori paleolit davri mustamlakasi: Gravettian diffuziyasining vaqti va rejimi". PLOS ONE. 12 (5): e0178506. doi:10.1371 / journal.pone.0178506. PMC 5443572. PMID 28542642.
- ^ Pean, S .; Puaud, S .; va boshq. (2013). "Buran-Kaya III ning O'rta va yuqori paleolitik ketma-ketligi (Qrim, Ukraina): yangi stratigrafik, paleoekologik va xronologik natijalar". Radiokarbon. 55 (2–3). doi:10.2458 / azu_js_rc.55.16379.
- ^ Banklar, V. E.; d'Erriko, F.; Peterson, A. T .; Vanxaeren, M. (2008). "Evropada LGM paytida insonning ekologik nişalari va diapazonlari eko-madaniy niş modellashtirishdan olingan" (PDF). Arxeologiya fanlari jurnali. 35 (2): 481–491. doi:10.1016 / j.jas.2007.05.011.
- ^ a b Xolzkamper, J .; Kretschmer, men.; Mayer, A .; va boshq. (2013). "G'arbiy Markaziy Evropada yuqori paleolitik o'tish. Tipologiya, texnologiya, atrof-muhit va demografiya" (PDF). Archäologische Informationen. 36: 161–162.
- ^ a b Kitagava, K .; Julien, M.-A .; Krotova, O .; va boshq. (2017). "Ovchilarni yig'uvchilarning muzlik va muzlikdan keyingi moslashuvi: Sharqiy Evropaning janubiy dashtidagi so'nggi paleolit va mezolit davrining kechki hayot strategiyasini o'rganish". To'rtlamchi davr. 465 (2018): 192–209. doi:10.1016 / j.quaint.2017.01.005.
- ^ a b Lazaridis, I .; Patterson, N .; va boshq. (2014). "Qadimgi odam genomlari hozirgi evropaliklar uchun uchta ajdod populyatsiyasini taklif qiladi". Tabiat. 513 (7518): 409–413. doi:10.1038 / tabiat13673. PMC 4170574. PMID 25230663.
- ^ Lipson (2017). "Parallel paleogenomik transeksiyalar dastlabki Evropa dehqonlarining murakkab genetik tarixini ochib beradi". Tabiat. 551 (7680): 368–72. Bibcode:2017Natur.551..368L. doi:10.1038 / tabiat24476. PMC 5973800. PMID 29144465.
- ^ Xak, V.; Lazaridis, I .; va boshq. (2015). "Dashtdan ommaviy ko'chish hind-evropa tillari uchun Evropada manba bo'ldi". Tabiat. 522 (7555): 207–211. doi:10.1038 / tabiat14317. PMC 5048219. PMID 25731166.
- ^ a b "O'zimizni bilamiz". Tabiat ekologiyasi va evolyutsiyasi. 2 (10): 1517–1518. 2018. doi:10.1038 / s41559-018-0675-3. PMID 30201965. S2CID 52180259.
- ^ Lartet, L. (1868). "Une sépulture des troglodytes du Périgord (crânes des Eyzies)" [Perigordagi g'or aholisi qabri (Les Eyzies bosh suyaklari)]. Bulletinler et Mémoires de la Société d'Anthropologie de Parij (frantsuz tilida). 3: 335–349. doi:10.3406 / bmsap.1868.9547.
- ^ Shimoliy, F. J. (1942). "Paviland g'ori," Qizil xonim ", To'fon va Uilyam Baklend". Ilmlar tarixi. 5 (2): 91–128. doi:10.1080/00033794200201391.
- ^ a b v d e f McMahon, R. (2016). Evropa irqlari: Ijtimoiy fanlarda milliy shaxslar qurilishi, 1839-1939 yillar. Palgrave Makmillan. doi:10.1057/978-1-137-31846-6. ISBN 978-1-137-31846-6.
- ^ Notton, D. G.; Stringer, C. B. (2010). "Kimning turi Homo sapiens?". Zoologik nomenklatura bo'yicha xalqaro komissiya. Iqtibos jurnali talab qiladi
| jurnal =(Yordam bering) - ^ a b v d Romeo, L. (1979). Ecce Homo!: Inson leksikoni. John Benjamins nashriyoti. ISBN 978-90-272-2006-6.
- ^ a b Formikola, V .; Giannecchini, M. (1998). "Yuqori paleolit va mezolit davridagi Evropada qadr-qimmatning evolyutsion tendentsiyalari". Inson evolyutsiyasi jurnali. 36 (3): 319–333. doi:10.1006 / jhev.1998.0270. PMID 10074386.
- ^ a b v d Conkey, M. W. (2005). "Mafkuralarni safarbar qilish: paleolit" san'ati, "Gender muammolari va alternativalar haqida o'ylash". Xagerda L. (tahrir). Ayollar inson evolyutsiyasida. Yo'nalish. ISBN 978-1-134-84010-6.
- ^ Mellars, P .; Frantsiya, J. C. (2011). "G'arbiy Evropada aholining Neandertaldan zamonaviyga o'tish davrida o'n baravar ko'payishi". Ilm-fan. 333 (6042): 623–627. Bibcode:2011 yil ... 333..623M. doi:10.1126 / science.1206930. PMID 21798948. S2CID 28256970.
- ^ Trinkaus, E. (2011). "Kechki pleystotsen kattalar o'limi va zamonaviy inson tuzilishi". Milliy fanlar akademiyasi materiallari. 108 (4): 1267–1271. Bibcode:2011PNAS..108.1267T. doi:10.1073 / pnas.1018700108. PMC 3029716. PMID 21220336.
- ^ Bocquet-Appel, J.-P.; Demars, P.-Y .; Noiret, L .; Dobrovskiy, D. (2005). "Arxeologik ma'lumotlarga ko'ra Evropada yuqori paleolitik meta-populyatsiya sonining taxminlari". Arxeologiya fanlari jurnali. 32 (11): 1656–1668. doi:10.1016 / j.jas.2005.05.006.
- ^ a b v d e f Xolt, B. M. (2003). "Yuqori paleolit va mezolit davridagi harakatchanlik: pastki oyoq-qo'ldan dalillar". Jismoniy antropologiya jurnali. 122 (5): 200–215. doi:10.1002 / ajpa.10256.
- ^ Balzeu, A .; Grimaud-Herve, D. Detroyt, F.; Xollouey, R. L. (2013). "Cro-Magnon 1 endokastining birinchi tavsifi va anatomik ravishda zamonaviy miya o'zgarishi va evolyutsiyasini o'rganish Homo sapiens". Bulletins et Mémoires de la Société d antropologie de Parij. 25 (1–2): 11–12. doi:10.1007 / s13219-012-0069-z. S2CID 14675512.
- ^ Liberman, D. E. (1998). "Sfenoidlarning qisqarishi va zamonaviy inson kranial shakli evolyutsiyasi". Tabiat. 393 (6681): 158–162. doi:10.1038/30227. PMID 9603517. S2CID 4409749.
- ^ Xaviland, V. A .; Prins, H.E L.; Valrat, D.; McBride, B. (2010). Antropologiya: inson chaqirig'i. O'qishni to'xtatish. 204–205, 212-betlar. ISBN 978-0-495-81084-1.
- ^ a b Fu, Q .; Xajdinjak, M .; Moldova, O. T .; Konstantin, S .; Mallick, S .; Skoglund, Pontus; Patterson, N .; Rohland, N .; Lazaridis, I .; Nikel, B.; Viola, B .; Prüfer, Kay; Meyer, M .; Kelso, J .; Reyx, D; Pääbo, S. (2015). "Yaqinda neandertal ajdodi bo'lgan Ruminiyadan kelgan zamonaviy zamonaviy odam". Tabiat. 524 (7564): 216–219. Bibcode:2015 yil Noyabr 524 ... 216F. doi:10.1038 / tabiat14558. PMC 4537386. PMID 26098372.
- ^ Allentoft, M. E.; Sikora, M. (2015). "Bronza davri Evroosiyo populyatsiyasi genomikasi". Tabiat. 522 (7, 555): 167–172. Bibcode:2015 Noyabr 522..167A. doi:10.1038 / tabiat 14507. PMID 26062507. S2CID 4399103.
- ^ a b Beleza, S .; va boshq. (2012). "Evropaliklarda pigmentatsiyani yoritish vaqti". Molekulyar biologiya va evolyutsiya. 30: 24–35. doi:10.1093 / molbev / mss207. PMC 3525146. PMID 22923467.
- ^ Eiberg, X .; Troelson, J .; va boshq. (2008). "Odamlarda ko'zning ko'k rangiga OCA2 ekspressionini inhibe qiluvchi HERC2 geni tarkibidagi regulyativ element tarkibidagi mutasaddi mutatsion mutatsion sabab bo'lishi mumkin". Inson genetikasi. 123 (2): 177–188. doi:10.1007 / s00439-007-0460-x. PMID 18172690. S2CID 9886658.
- ^ a b Jons, ER (2015). "Yuqori paleolit genomlari zamonaviy yevrosiyolarning chuqur ildizlarini ochib beradi". Tabiat aloqalari. 6: 8912. Bibcode:2015 NatCo ... 6.8912J. doi:10.1038 / ncomms9912. PMC 4660371. PMID 26567969.
- ^ Posth, Cosimo; va boshq. (2017 yil 4-iyul). "Chuqur divergent arxaik mitoxondriyal genom afrikalik genlarning neandertallarga oqishi uchun quyi vaqt chegarasini beradi". Tabiat aloqalari. 8: 16046. Bibcode:2017 NatCo ... 816046P. doi:10.1038 / ncomms16046. PMC 5500885. PMID 28675384.
- ^ Soares, P .; va boshq. (2011). "MtDNA Haplogroup L3 ning Afrika ichida va tashqarisida kengayishi". Molekulyar biologiya va evolyutsiya. 29 (3): 915–927. doi:10.1093 / molbev / msr245. PMID 22096215.
- ^ Xayam, Tomas F. G.; Vesselingh, Frank P.; Xedjes, Robert E. M.; Bergman, Kristofer A.; Duka, Katerina (2013-09-11). "Ksar Okil xronologiyasi (Livan) va Evropani anatomik jihatdan zamonaviy insonlar tomonidan mustamlaka qilishiga ta'siri". PLOS ONE. 8 (9): e72931. Bibcode:2013PLoSO ... 872931D. doi:10.1371 / journal.pone.0072931. ISSN 1932-6203. PMC 3770606. PMID 24039825.
- ^ Maka-Meyer N, Gonsales AM, Larruga JM, Flores S, Kabrera VM (2001). "Asosiy genomik mitokondriyal nasllar insonning dastlabki kengayishini aniqlaydi". BMC Genet. 2: 13. doi:10.1186/1471-2156-2-13. PMC 55343. PMID 11553319.
- ^ a b Sikora, Martin; Seguin-Orlando, Andain; Sousa, Vitor S.; Albrechtsen, Anders; Korneliussen, Torfinn; Ko, Emi; Rasmussen, Simon; Dupanloup, Izabel; Nigst, Filipp R.; Bosch, Marjolein D.; Reno, Gabriel; Allentoft, Morten E.; Margaryan, Ashot; Vasilev, Sergey V.; Veselovskaya, Elizaveta V.; Borutskaya, Svetlana B.; Devies, Tibo; Komediya, Dan; Xayam, Tom; Manika, Andrea; Fuli, Robert; Meltzer, Devid J.; Nilsen, Rasmus; Excoffier, Loran; Mirazon Lam, Marta; Orlando, Lyudovich; Willerslev, Eske (2017). "Qadimgi genomlar yuqori paleolit davridagi dastlabki yem-xashaklarning ijtimoiy va reproduktiv xatti-harakatlarini namoyish etadi". Ilm-fan. 358 (6363): 659–662. Bibcode:2017Sci ... 358..659S. doi:10.1126 / science.aao1807. PMID 28982795.
- ^ Seguin-Orlando, A .; Korneliussen, T. S.; Sikora, M .; Malaspinas, A.-S .; Manika, A .; Moltke, I .; Albrechtsen, A .; Ko, A .; Margaryan, A .; Moiseyev, V .; Gebel, T .; Westaway, M .; Lambert, D.; Xartanovich, V .; Wall, J. D .; Nigst, P. R .; Fuli, R. A .; Lahr, M. M .; Nilsen, R .; Orlando, L .; Willerslev, E. (2014 yil 6-noyabr). "Evropaliklarda kamida 36200 yillik tarixga ega genomik tuzilish". Ilm-fan. 346 (6213): 1113–1118. Bibcode:2014 yil ... 346.1113S. doi:10.1126 / science.aaa0114. PMID 25378462. S2CID 206632421.
- ^ Karamelli, D .; Lalueza-Fox, C .; Vernesi, C .; Lari, M .; Kasoli, A .; Mallegni, F .; Chiarelli, B .; Dupanloup, men.; Bertranpetit, J .; Barbujani, G.; Bertorelle, G. (2003 yil may). "Neandertals va 24000 yoshli anatomik jihatdan zamonaviy evropaliklar o'rtasidagi genetik uzilish haqida dalillar". Milliy fanlar akademiyasi materiallari. 100 (11): 6593–6597. Bibcode:2003 PNAS..100.6593C. doi:10.1073 / pnas.1130343100. PMC 164492. PMID 12743370.
- ^ Kulvilm, M.; Gronau, I .; Xubis, M. J .; de Filippo, S.; Prado-Martines, J .; Kirxer, M .; va boshq. (2016). "Qadimgi genlar dastlabki zamonaviy odamlardan Sharqiy neandertallarga oqadi". Tabiat. 530 (7591): 429–433. Bibcode:2016Natur.530..429K. doi:10.1038 / tabiat16544. PMC 4933530. PMID 26886800.
- ^ Sankararaman, S .; Patterson, N .; Li, X.; Pääbo, S.; Reyx, D.; Akey, J. M. (2012). "Neandertallar va zamonaviy odamlar o'rtasidagi chatishtirish sanasi". PLOS Genetika. 8 (10): e1002947. arXiv:1208.2238. Bibcode:2012arXiv1208.2238S. doi:10.1371 / journal.pgen.1002947. PMC 3464203. PMID 23055938.
- ^ a b Bar-Yosef, O. (2002). "Yuqori paleolit inqilobi". Antropologiyaning yillik sharhi. 31: 363–369. doi:10.1146 / annurev.anthro.31.040402.085416. JSTOR 4132885.
- ^ Bar-Yosef, O & Zilhão, J (eds) 2002: Aurignacian ta'rifiga to'g'ri keladi. 25-30 iyun kunlari Portugaliyaning Lissabon shahrida bo'lib o'tgan simpozium materiallari. Trabalhos de Arqueologia yo'q 45. 381 bet. PDF
- ^ a b v Deter-Wolf, A. (2013). "Qadimgi tatuirovkaning moddiy madaniyati va o'rta tosh asri kelib chiqishi". Antik davrda tatuirovka va tana modifikatsiyalari. Chronos Verlag. 17-18 betlar.
- ^ a b v Knecht, H. (1994). "Kechikgan muzlik davri ov qilish texnologiyasi". Ilmiy Amerika. 271 (1): 82–87. doi:10.1038 / Scientificamerican0794-82. JSTOR 24942770.
- ^ a b v Straus, L. G. (1993). "G'arbiy Evropadagi yuqori paleolitik ov taktikasi va qurollari". Amerika antropologik assotsiatsiyasining arxeologik hujjatlari. 4 (1): 83–93. doi:10.1525 / ap3a.1993.4.1.83.
- ^ Zohar, I .; Dayan, T .; Goren, M .; Nadel, D .; Hershkovitz, I. (2018). "Opportunizm yoki suvda ixtisoslashish? Ohalo II-da chuchuk suv baliqlarini ekspluatatsiya qilish dalillari- Yuqori paleolit davri botqoqlangan joy". PLOS ONE. 13 (6): e0198747. doi:10.1371 / journal.pone.0198747. PMC 6005578. PMID 29912923.
- ^ Bahn, P. G. (1977). "Kech muzlik davrida Janubiy-G'arbiy Frantsiyada mavsumiy migratsiya". Arxeologiya fanlari jurnali. 4 (3): 245–257. doi:10.1016/0305-4403(77)90092-9.
- ^ Styuart, A. J .; Lister, A. M. (2007). "Evropa va Shimoliy Osiyoda to'rtinchi davrning so'nggi megafaunal qirilishining naqshlari" (PDF). Courier Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg. 259 (259): 289–299.
- ^ Tomasso, A .; Rots, V .; Purdue, L .; Beyris, S. (2018). "Gravettian qurol: Les Prés de Laure (Frantsiya) dan 23,500 yillik birikma tikanli nuqta dalil".. Arxeologiya fanlari jurnali. 100: 158–175. doi:10.1016 / j.jas.2018.05.003.
- ^ Valde-Novak, P.; Nadaxovskiy, A .; Volsan, M. (1987). "Polshaning janubida mamont tusidan qilingan yuqori paleolitik bumerang". Tabiat. 329 (6138): 436–438. doi:10.1038 / 329436a0. S2CID 4361636.
- ^ Talmann O .; Shapiro, B .; Cui, P .; Shuenemann, V. J.; Soyer, S. K .; va boshq. (2013). "Qadimgi kanidlarning to'liq mitoxondriyal genomlari uy itlarining evropalik kelib chiqishini taklif qiladi". Ilm-fan. 342 (6160): 871–874. Bibcode:2013 yil ... 342..871T. doi:10.1126 / science.1243650. PMID 24233726. S2CID 1526260. qo'shimcha jadvalga qarang. S1-jadval
- ^ Horard-Xerbin, M.-P.; Tresett, A .; Vigne, J.-D. (2014). "Paleolitdan temir davriga qadar g'arbiy Evropada itni uyga solish va ulardan foydalanish" (PDF). Hayvon chegaralari. 4 (3): 23–24. doi:10.2527 / af.2014-0018. S2CID 72062079.
- ^ Germonpré, M.; Lasničková-Galetova, M.; Sablinc, M. V. (2012). "Gravettian Pedmostí saytidagi paleolitik it bosh suyaklari, Chexiya". Arxeologiya fanlari jurnali. 39 (1): 184–202. doi:10.1016 / j.jas.2011.09.022.
- ^ Yansens, Lyuk; Giemsch, Lian; Shmitz, Ralf; Ko'cha, Martin; Van Dongen, Stefan; Crombé, Philippe (2018). "Eski itga yangi qarash: Bonn-Oberkassel qayta ko'rib chiqildi". Arxeologiya fanlari jurnali. 92: 126–138. doi:10.1016 / j.jas.2018.01.004. hdl:1854 / LU-8550758.
- ^ Lupo, K. D. (2017). "Qachon va qaerda itlar ovchilik mahsuldorligini yaxshilaydilar? Empirik yozuvlar va yuqori paleolit davrida o'lja sotib olishning ba'zi oqibatlari". Antropologik arxeologiya jurnali. 47: 139–151. doi:10.1016 / j.jaa.2017.05.003.
- ^ a b Eller, C. (2005). "19 va 20-asrlarda matriarxal afsonasini feministik ravishda o'zlashtirish". Tarix kompas. 179: 1–10. doi:10.1111 / j.1478-0542.2005.00179.x.
- ^ a b Marler, J. (2006). "Umumjahon patriarxiya haqidagi afsona: Sintiya Ellerga tanqidiy javob Matriarxal tarixgacha bo'lgan afsona". Feministik ilohiyot. 14 (2): 173–179. doi:10.1177/0966735006059510. S2CID 145417508.
- ^ a b v d McDermott, L. (1996). "Yuqori paleolit davridagi ayol haykalchalaridagi o'zini o'zi namoyish etish". Hozirgi antropologiya. 37 (2): 231–235. doi:10.1086/204491. JSTOR 2744349.
- ^ a b v Angulo, J. C .; Garsiya-Dez, M.; Martines, M. (2010). "Paleolit davridagi falak bezagi: jinsiy a'zolarni skarifikatsiya qilish, pirsing va tatuirovka". Urologiya jurnali. 186 (6): 2498–2503. doi:10.1016 / j.juro.2011.07.077. PMID 22019163.
- ^ a b v d e f Riel-Salvatore, J .; Gravel-Migel, C. (2013). "Evrosiyodagi yuqori paleolit morgining amaliyoti: dafn yozuvlariga tanqidiy qarash". Tarlowda S .; Stutz, L. N. (tahrir). O'lim va o'lim arxeologiyasi bo'yicha Oksford qo'llanmasi. Oksford universiteti matbuoti. ISBN 978-0-19-956906-9.
- ^ a b v Nitu, E.-C .; Kerciumaru, M.; Nikolae, A .; Kirstina, O .; Lupu, F. I .; Leu, M. (2019). "O'rta yuqori paleolit davridagi harakatchanlik va ijtimoiy o'ziga xoslik: Poiana Cireșului (Piatra Neamț, Ruminiya) dan yangi shaxsiy bezaklar". PLoS One.
- ^ Chalmin, E .; Farjes, F .; Vigna, C .; Susini, J. (2007). "Lasko (Frantsiya) va Ekayn (Ispaniya) dan paleolit qora pigmentlarida g'ayrioddiy minerallarning kashf etilishi". X-nurlarining yutilishining nozik tuzilishi bo'yicha 13-xalqaro konferentsiya (XAFS13). doi:10.1063/1.2644480. Iqtibos jurnali talab qiladi
| jurnal =(Yordam bering) - ^ a b Garsiya-Diez, M.; Vaquero, M. (2015). "Lagerga qarash: ovchi-yig'uvchi lagerining paleolitik tasviri". PLOS ONE. 10 (12): e0143002. doi:10.1371 / journal.pone.0143002. PMID 26629824. S2CID 16299376.
- ^ a b Maher, L. A .; Conkey, M. (2019). "Ovchilar uchun uylar? Yuqori paleolit Evropasi va epipaleolit janubi-g'arbiy Osiyodagi ovchi-yig'uvchi joylarda uy kontseptsiyasini o'rganish". Hozirgi antropologiya. 60 (1): 107–110. doi:10.1086/701523.
- ^ Nadel, D .; Vayss, E .; Simchoni, O .; va boshq. (2004). "Isroildagi tosh davri kulbasi dunyodagi eng qadimgi ko'rpa-to'shak buyumlarini ko'rsatmoqda. Milliy fanlar akademiyasi materiallari. 101 (17): 6821–6826. doi:10.1073 / pnas.0308557101. PMC 404215. PMID 15090648.
- ^ a b Lister, A .; Bahn, P. (2007). Mamontlar - Muzlik davrining gigantlari (3 nashr). Frensis Linkoln. 128-132 betlar. ISBN 978-0-520-26160-0. OCLC 30155747.
- ^ Pidoplichko, I. H. (1998). Ukrainadagi mamont suyaklarining yuqori paleolitik uylari: Kiev-Kirillovskiy, Gontsi, Dobranichevka, Mezin va Mejirich. Oksford: J. va E. Xеджs. ISBN 978-0-86054-949-9.
- ^ a b v d Iakovleva, L. (2015). "Markaziy va Sharqiy Evropadagi yuqori paleolit davri manzilgohlarining mamont suyaklari doiraviy turar-joylari arxitekturasi va ularning ijtimoiy-ramziy ma'nolari". To'rtlamchi davr. 359–360: 324–334. doi:10.1016 / j.quaint.2014.08.050.
- ^ a b v Pryor, A. J. E .; Beresford-Jons, D. G.; Dudin, A. E.; va boshq. (2020). "Kostenki 11 da yangi dumaloq mamont-suyak tuzilishining xronologiyasi va vazifasi". Antik davr. 94 (374): 323–341. doi:10.15184 / aqy.2020.7.
- ^ Demay, L .; Pean, S .; Patou-Mathis, M. (2012). "Neandertallar tomonidan oziq-ovqat va qurilish resurslari sifatida foydalanilgan mamontlar: Zoloarxeologik tadqiqotlar Molodova I (Ukraina) 4-qavatida qo'llanilgan" (PDF). To'rtlamchi davr. 276–277: 212–226. Bibcode:2012QuInt.276..212D. doi:10.1016 / j.quaint.2011.11.019.
- ^ a b v d e f Clottes, J. (2016). Paleolitik san'at nima ?: G'or rasmlari va inson ijodining shafaqi. Chikago universiteti matbuoti. 7-19 betlar. ISBN 978-0-226-18806-5.
- ^ Kleiner, F. S. (2016). Asrlar davomida Gardner san'ati: G'arb istiqboli. Men. O'qishni to'xtatish. p. 20. ISBN 978-1-305-63394-0.
- ^ Snow, D. (2006). "Yuqori paleolit davridagi qo'l shablonlarida jinsiy dimorfizm". Antik davr. 80 (308): 390–404. doi:10.1017 / S0003598X00093704.
- ^ Guerra-Doce, E. (2014). "Tarixgacha bo'lgan davrdagi psixoaktiv moddalar: arxeologik dalillarni o'rganish". Vaqt va aql. 8 (1): 97. doi:10.1080 / 1751696X.2014.993244.
- ^ a b v d e Soffer, O .; Adovasio, J. M .; Hyland, D.C (2000). "" Venera "haykalchalari: To'qimachilik, basketbol, jins va yuqori paleolitdagi holat". Hozirgi antropologiya. 41 (4): 512–521. doi:10.1086/317381.
- ^ a b Floss, H. (2015). "Eng qadimgi ko'chma san'at: Svabiya yurasidan (janubiy-g'arbiy Germaniya) Aurignacian fil suyagi haykalchalari". Paletnologiya (7). doi:10.4000 / paletnologie.888.
- ^ Marshack, A. (1972). "Yuqori paleolit gravyurasining kognitiv jihatlari". Hozirgi antropologiya. 13 (3–4): 445–477. doi:10.1086/201311. JSTOR 2740829.
- ^ Marshack, A. (1972). "Yuqori paleolitik yozuv va belgi". Ilm-fan. 178 (4063): 817–828. doi:10.1126 / science.178.4063.817. PMID 17754789.
- ^ Svoboda, J. (2017). "Markaziy Evropa yo'lagidagi landshaftlar, xaritalar va yuqori paleolit turmush tarzi to'g'risida: Pavlov va Piremosti obrazlari". Veleiya. 34 (1): 67–74. doi:10.1387 / veleia.18074.
- ^ Bo'ri, S .; Dapschauskas, R .; va boshq. (2018). "Afrika va Evropada oxradan foydalanishni rivojlantirish sharoitida Shvabiya Yurasining yuqori paleolit davrida oxra va rasmlardan foydalanish". Ochiq arxeologiya. 4 (1): 185–205. doi:10.1515 / opar-2018-0012. S2CID 195827025.
- ^ a b Vanxeren, M .; d'Errico, F. (2006). "Evropaning Aurignacian etno-lingvistik geografiyasi shaxsiy bezaklar bilan ochilgan". Arxeologiya fanlari jurnali. 33 (8): 1105–1128. doi:10.1016 / j.jas.2005.11.017.
- ^ a b Kun, S. L .; Stiner, M. C. (2007). "Paleolitik bezaklar: idrok, demografiya va o'ziga xoslik uchun ta'siri". Diogenlar. 214 (2): 40–48. doi:10.1177/0392192107076870. S2CID 146555925.
- ^ a b v d e f Soffer, O .; Adovasio, J. M. (2010). "Yuqori paleolit davridagi tez buziladigan texnologiyalarning roli". Magdaleniya uyi: uy sharoitini echish. SUNY Press. 237–242 betlar. ISBN 978-1-4384-3368-4.
- ^ Kvavadze E; Bar-Yosef O; Belfer-Koen A; va boshq. (Sentyabr 2009). "30000 yillik yovvoyi zig'ir tolalari". Ilm-fan. 325 (5946): 1359. Bibcode:2009 yilgi ... 325.1359K. doi:10.1126 / science.1175404. PMID 19745144. S2CID 206520793. Onlayn materialni qo'llab-quvvatlash
- ^ a b v Killin, A. (2018). "Musiqaning kelib chiqishi: dalillar, nazariya va istiqbollar". Musiqa va fan. 1: 5–7. doi:10.1177/2059204317751971. S2CID 165905083.
- ^ a b De Anjeli, S .; Ikkalasi ham, A. A .; Xeygl, S .; Xolms, P .; Pasalados, R. J .; Lund, S. S., nashr. (2018). "Dastlabki tovushlar". Qadimgi Evropadagi musiqa va tovushlar. Evropa musiqa arxeologiyasi loyihasi. ISBN 978-88-904555-3-7.
- ^ Liberman, P. (2007). "Inson nutqining evolyutsiyasi: uning anatomik va asabiy asoslari". Hozirgi antropologiya. 48 (1): 39–66. doi:10.1086/509092.
- ^ Pagel, M.; Atkinson, Q. D .; Klod, A. S .; Meade, A. (2013). "Ultrakonservatsiya qilingan so'zlar Evroosiyo bo'ylab chuqur til ajdodlariga ishora qiladi". Milliy fanlar akademiyasi materiallari. 110 (21): 8471–8476. doi:10.1073 / pnas.1218726110. PMC 3666749. PMID 23650390.
- ^ Heggarti, P. (2013). "Ultrakonservatsiya qilingan so'zlar va Eurasiatic? Tarix tilining" olovdagi yuzlari "". Milliy fanlar akademiyasi materiallari. 110 (35): E3254. doi:10.1073 / pnas.1309114110. PMID 23918403. S2CID 205264098.
- ^ Yusoff, K. (2015). "Geologik mavzular: g'ayriinsoniy kelib chiqishi, geomorfik estetikasi va g'ayriinsoniy bo'lish san'ati". Madaniy geografiyalar. 22 (3): 386. doi:10.1177/1474474014545301. JSTOR 26168658. S2CID 147208415.
- ^ Guthrie, R. D. (2005). Paleolit san'atining tabiati. Chikago universiteti matbuoti. ISBN 978-0-226-31126-5.
- ^ a b v d Stone, A. (2003). "Shamanizmning tarixiy tarixi". Shamanizmni o'rganing. Albionning yuragi. ISBN 978-1-872883-68-7.
- ^ a b v Valter, E. V. (1988). Joylashtirish yo'llari: Inson atrof-muhit nazariyasi. UNC matbuot kitoblari. 89-94 betlar. ISBN 978-0-8078-4200-3.
- ^ a b Lyuis-Uilyams, D. (2004). "G'or va to'qnashuv". G'ordagi aql: ong va san'atning kelib chiqishi. Temza va Xadson. ISBN 978-0-500-77044-3.
- ^ Teylor, T. (2011). "Brno effekti: madaniyatdan aqlga". World Prehistory jurnali. 24 (2/3): 218–222. doi:10.1007 / s10963-011-9052-8. JSTOR 41289970. S2CID 143890919.
- ^ Arias, P. (2009). "Qorong'ulikdagi marosimlar? Magdalena g'orlari joylarida marosim o'tkaziladigan joylarning mavjud dalillarini baholash". Jahon arxeologiyasi. 41 (2): 262–294. doi:10.1080/00438240902843964. S2CID 161323031.
- ^ a b v d e f Formicola, V. (2015). "Sunghir bolalaridan Romito mittigacha: yuqori paleolit dafn landshaftining aspektlari". Hozirgi antropologiya. 48 (3). doi:10.1086/517592.
- ^ a b v Trinkaus, E.; Bujilova, A. P. (2018). "Sunghirda o'liklarni xilma-xilligi va differentsial ravishda yo'q qilish". Antik davr. 92 (361): 7–21. doi:10.15184 / aqy.2017.223.
- ^ Petru, S. (2019). "Shaxsiyat va qo'rquv - yuqori paleolitdagi dafnlar". Praehistorica hujjatlari. 45: 6–13. doi:10.4312 / dp.45-1.
- ^ Marginedas, F .; Rodriquez-Xidalgo, A .; va boshq. (2020). "Boshsuyagi kosalarini tayyorlash: Evropaning beshta arxeologik joylaridan odam o'ldirgan bosh suyaklaridagi izlarni so'yish". Arxeologiya fanlari jurnali. 114: 105076. doi:10.1016 / j.jas.2020.105076.
- ^ Bello, S. M.; Uolduk, R .; Parfitt, S. A .; Stringer, C. B. (2017). "Ritualistik kannibalizm bilan bog'liq bo'lgan yuqori paleolitda o'yib ishlangan odam suyagi". PLOS ONE. 12 (8): e0182127. doi:10.1371 / journal.pone.0182127. PMC 5549908. PMID 28792978.
- ^ Berman, J. C. (1999). "Paleolitda yomon sochlar kunlari: g'or odamining zamonaviy (qayta) inshootlari". Amerika antropologi. 101 (2): 288–304. doi:10.1525 / aa.1999.101.2.288. JSTOR 683202.
- ^ Glut, D. F.; Bret-Surman, M.l K. (1997). "Dinozavrlar va ommaviy axborot vositalari". To'liq dinozavr. Indiana universiteti matbuoti. p. 676. ISBN 978-0-253-33349-0.
- ^ Drell, J. R. R. (2000). "Neandertallar: talqin tarixi". Arxeologiya Oksford jurnali. 19 (1): 1–24. doi:10.1111/1468-0092.00096. S2CID 54616107.
| Taksonomiya (Gomininlar ) |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ajdodlar |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Modellar |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Vaqt jadvallari | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Boshqalar |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Turkum
Evolyutsion biologiya portali