The time of arrival of people in Australia is an unresolved question. It is relevant to debates about when modern humans first dispersed out of Africa and when their descendants incorporated genetic material from Neanderthals, Denisovans and possibly other hominins. Humans have also been implicated in the extinction of Australia's megafauna. Here we report the results of new excavations conducted at Madjedbebe, a rock shelter in northern Australia. Artefacts in primary depositional context are concentrated in three dense bands, with the stratigraphic integrity of the deposit demonstrated by artefact refits and by optical dating and other analyses of the sediments. Human occupation began around 65,000 years ago, with a distinctive stone tool assemblage including grinding stones, ground ochres, reflective additives and ground-edge hatchet heads. This evidence sets a new minimum age for the arrival of humans in Australia, the dispersal of modern humans out of Africa, and the subsequent interactions of modern humans with Neanderthals and Denisovans.
Published ages of >50 ka for occupation at Madjedbebe (Malakunanja II) in Australia's north have kept the site prominent in discussions about the colonisation of Sahul. The site also contains one of the largest stone artefact assemblages in Sahul for this early period. However, the stone artefacts and other important archaeological components of the site have never been described in detail, leading to persistent doubts about its stratigraphic integrity. We report on our analysis of the stone artefacts and faunal and other materials recovered during the 1989 excavations, as well as the stratigraphy and depositional history recorded by the original excavators. We demonstrate that the technology and raw materials of the early assemblage are distinctive from those in the overlying layers. Silcrete and quartzite artefacts are common in the early assemblage, which also includes edge-ground axe fragments and ground haematite. The lower flaked stone assemblage is distinctive, comprising a mix of long convergent flakes, some radial flakes with faceted platforms, and many small thin silcrete flakes that we interpret as thinning flakes. Residue and use-wear analysis indicate occasional grinding of haematite and woodworking, as well as frequent abrading of platform edges on thinning flakes. We conclude that previous claims of extensive displacement of artefacts and post-depositional disturbance may have been overstated. The stone artefacts and stratigraphic details support previous claims for human occupation 50-60 ka and show that human occupation during this time differed from later periods. We discuss the implications of these new data for understanding the first human colonisation of Sahul.
Recent archaeological research has firmly established eastern
While archaeobotany is increasingly part of archaeological projects in Oceania, the specific sub‐discipline focusing on wood charcoal macro‐remains (anthracology) continues to be a much underdeveloped field of research in Australia and the Pacific. To initiate a regional framework for anthracology, we present here a review of studies based on wood charcoal analyses that have been implemented in Oceania, and we then present anthracological principles and methods developed in other parts of the world. We use three recent case studies, from New Caledonia, and tropical and semi‐arid Australia, to illustrate the application of anthracological methods in the region. Finally, we consider the potential for the discipline to be successfully developed in Oceania, discussing identified challenges and prospects for anthracology to address key archaeological questions in the region. We argue the discipline has the potential to throw light on both palaeoenvironmental conditions and palaeoethnobotanical practices at a site, and can also offer insights in relation to mobility patterns and resource management in the past.
The 'Neolithic problem' refers to forager/farmer interaction in northern Australia, where despite a shared environmental inheritance with their New Guinea neighbours, Indigenous Australians seemingly rejected both the domesticates and the practices of the Melanesian horticultural economy (White, 1971). This ethnographic example is often used to suggest that hunter-gatherers elsewhere may have chosen not to adopt agriculture. However, the premise of the 'Neolithic problem' has been criticised for its overreliance on the ethnographic record and on an anachronistic notion of cultural evolution, which exaggerates the dichotomy between New Guinean agriculturalists and Australian hunter-gatherers. In this paper we review the historical and theoretical treatment of the 'Neolithic problem' and the archaeological evidence for subsistence practices in northern Sahul spanning the past 50e60,000 years. Using niche construction theory (Rowley-Conwy and Layton, 2011) to reexamine the archaeological and ethnohistoric record, it is possible to observe the development and expansion of a variety of subsistence systems. Contrary to the premise of the 'Neolithic problem', the past 50e60,000 years of occupation in Sahul has seen the development of a varied array of food-producing subsistence practices in both New Guinea and Australia. However, the archaeological evidence for the expansion of horticultural practices and cultivars outside of highland New Guinea suggests a spatially and temporally narrow window for the adoption of agriculture by Indigenous populations in Cape York. Instead, the interaction between different subsistence systems in northern Sahul may have centred on the New Guinea lowlands and the Bismarck Archipelago, where, in the late Holocene, local communities interacted with other Melanesian and Austronesian populations. Whilst further archaeological investigation is required, it is clear that the image of culturally-static Indigenous Australian populations often implied in the consideration of forager/farmer interactions belongs to another era of archaeological thought.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.