H-KQGE
Dagobah Resident
Some more on the "out of Africa & in to Europe" (& Asia) line of thought.
http://www.pasthorizonspr.com/index.php/archives/09/2013/dating-of-beads-sets-new-timeline-for-early-humans
I'm wondering where this fits with that article about the Saharan river systems 100,000 years ago. I'm also wondering about radiocarbon dating. Is that still a trustworthy method?
http://www.pasthorizonspr.com/index.php/archives/09/2013/dating-of-beads-sets-new-timeline-for-early-humans
Beads from the site of Ksar Akil. Credit: Katerina Douka and Natural History Museum London
DATING OF BEADS SETS NEW TIMELINE FOR EARLY HUMANS
Article created on Thursday, September 12, 2013
An international team of researchers led by Oxford University has new dating evidence indicating when the earliest fully modern humans arrived in the Near East, the region known as the Middle East today.
They have obtained the radiocarbon dates of marine shell beads found at Ksar Akil, a key archaeological site in Lebanon, which allowed them to calculate that the oldest human fossil from the same sequence of archaeological layers is 42,400–41,700 years old. This is significant because the age of the earliest fossils, directly and indirectly dated, of modern humans found in Europe is roughly similar.
This latest discovery throws up intriguing new possibilities about the routes taken by the earliest modern humans out of Africa, says the study published online by the journal PLOS ONE.
Body or clothes decoration
The research team radiocarbon dated 20 marine shells from the top 15 metres of archaeological layers at Ksar Akil, north of Beirut. The shells were perforated, which indicates they were used as beads for body or clothes decoration by modern humans. Neanderthals, who were living in the same region before them, were not making such beads. The study confirms that the shell beads are only linked to the parts of the sequence assigned to modern humans and shows that through direct radiocarbon dating they are between 41,000–35,000 years old.
The Middle East has always been regarded as a key region in prehistory for scholars speculating on the routes taken by early humans out of Africa because it lies at the crossroads of three continents – Africa, Asia and Europe. It was widely believed that at some point after 45,000 years ago early modern humans arrived in Europe, taking routes out of Africa through the Near East and, from there, along the Mediterranean rim or along the River Danube. However, this dating evidence suggests populations of early modern humans arrived in Europe and the Near East at roughly the same time, sparking a new debate about where the first populations of early humans travelled from in their expansion towards Europe and which alternative routes they may have taken.
In Ksar Akil, the Lebanese rock-shelter, several human remains were found in the original excavations made 75 years ago. Unfortunately, since then the most complete skeleton of a young girl, thought to be about 7–9 years of age and buried at the back of the rock shelter, has been lost. Lost also are the fragments of a second individual, found next to the buried girl. However, the team was able to calculate the age of the lost fossil at 40,800–39,200 years ago, taking into account its location in the sequence of archaeological layers in relation to the marine shell beads.
I'm wondering where this fits with that article about the Saharan river systems 100,000 years ago. I'm also wondering about radiocarbon dating. Is that still a trustworthy method?