100 Ancient Indian Names and Their Meaning

This compilation of 100 Ancient Indian names and their meanings offers a glimpse into the profound cultural heritage and spiritual depth of ancient India.

Each name, carefully selected for its significance and symbolism, reflects the values, beliefs, and traditions of this vibrant civilization. From the divine appellations of gods and goddesses to the earthly expressions of virtues and qualities, these names encapsulate the essence of Indian spirituality, mythology, and ethos. Whether invoking the cosmic forces of creation and destruction or celebrating the beauty and harmony of the natural world, each name carries a story, a legacy, and a sense of connection to the timeless wisdom of India's past.

Through this exploration, we come to appreciate the richness and diversity of Indian culture, where names serve as vessels of meaning, carrying forward the aspirations, hopes, and aspirations of generations past and present. In embracing these names, we honor the profound legacy of ancient India and its enduring influence on the world.

Here's a list of 100 Ancient Indian names along with their meanings:

1. Aditi: Meaning "free" or "unbounded," Aditi is also the name of the Hindu goddess of infinity and motherhood.

2. Akash: Meaning "sky" or "ether," Akash symbolizes vastness and boundlessness.

3. Amar: Meaning "immortal" or "everlasting," Amar represents eternal life and vitality.

4. Ananya: Meaning "unique" or "incomparable," Ananya signifies individuality and exclusivity.

5. Arjun: Meaning "bright" or "shining," Arjun is also the name of a legendary warrior prince from the Mahabharata.

6. Ashwin: Meaning "light" or "possessor of horses," Ashwin is also the name of the twin gods of medicine in Hindu mythology.

7. Bhavesh: Meaning "lord of the world," Bhavesh signifies sovereignty and dominion.

8. Chandra: Meaning "moon," Chandra represents beauty, calmness, and serenity.

9. Dhruv: Meaning "pole star," Dhruv symbolizes stability, constancy, and guidance.

10. Gauri: Meaning "fair" or "golden," Gauri is also an epithet of the Hindu goddess Parvati.

11. Govind: Meaning "cowherd" or "protector of cows," Govind is also a name of Lord Krishna.

12. Hari: Meaning "lord Vishnu" or "the green one," Hari represents divine sustenance and preservation.

13. Ishaan: Meaning "lord Shiva" or "the sun," Ishaan symbolizes power, energy, and auspiciousness.

14. Jagannath: Meaning "lord of the world," Jagannath is a name of Lord Vishnu, particularly revered in the Jagannath Temple in Puri, Odisha.

15. Kamala: Meaning "lotus," Kamala represents purity, enlightenment, and spiritual growth.

16. Krishna: Meaning "dark" or "black," Krishna is one of the most revered avatars of Lord Vishnu in Hinduism.

17. Lakshmi: Meaning "prosperity" or "wealth," Lakshmi is the Hindu goddess of fortune and abundance.

18. Manoj: Meaning "born of the mind," Manoj symbolizes creativity, intellect, and mental prowess.

19. Neha: Meaning "love" or "affection," Neha represents emotional bonding and compassion.

20. Om: Meaning "the sacred sound," Om is a mystical syllable in Hinduism, representing the essence of the universe.

21. Parth: Meaning "charioteer" or "warrior," Parth is also a name of Arjuna, the hero of the Mahabharata.

22. Prisha: Meaning "beloved" or "dear one," Prisha signifies affection and endearment.

23. Raj: Meaning "king" or "ruler," Raj represents leadership, authority, and power.

24. Riya: Meaning "singer" or "melody," Riya symbolizes musical talent and artistic expression.

25. Sagar: Meaning "ocean" or "sea," Sagar represents vastness, depth, and mystery.

26. Shakti: Meaning "power" or "energy," Shakti is the divine feminine energy in Hinduism, often associated with the goddess Durga.

27. Shiv: Meaning "auspicious" or "benevolent," Shiv is also a name of Lord Shiva, the destroyer and transformer in Hinduism.

28. Tanvi: Meaning "beautiful" or "slender," Tanvi signifies grace, elegance, and attractiveness.

29. Uma: Meaning "flax" or "linen," Uma is an epithet of the Hindu goddess Parvati, representing fertility and auspiciousness.

30. Ved: Meaning "sacred knowledge" or "scripture," Ved symbolizes wisdom, enlightenment, and divine revelation.

31. Yash: Meaning "fame" or "glory," Yash represents recognition, achievement, and honor.

32. Zara: Meaning "princess" or "flower," Zara signifies royalty, beauty, and delicacy.

33. Abhay: Meaning "fearless" or "brave," Abhay represents courage, valor, and strength.

34. Anjali: Meaning "offering" or "salutation," Anjali signifies devotion, reverence, and respect.

35. Ayush: Meaning "long life" or "health," Ayush symbolizes vitality, wellness, and longevity.

36. Bhumi: Meaning "earth," Bhumi represents grounding, stability, and nourishment.

37. Chetan: Meaning "consciousness" or "soul," Chetan signifies awareness, vitality, and life force.

38. Dhara: Meaning "flow" or "stream," Dhara represents continuity, movement, and dynamism.

39. Ganga: Meaning "river Ganges," Ganga is a sacred river in Hinduism, symbolizing purity and liberation.

40. Hansa: Meaning "swan," Hansa symbolizes purity, grace, and spiritual discernment.

41. Ishita: Meaning "desired" or "cherished," Ishita signifies aspiration, fulfillment, and contentment.

42. Jai: Meaning "victory" or "triumph," Jai represents success, achievement, and overcoming obstacles.

43. Kavya: Meaning "poetry" or "literature," Kavya symbolizes creativity, expression, and aesthetic beauty.

44. Lila: Meaning "divine play" or "cosmic drama," Lila represents the spontaneous and joyful expression of the universe.

45. Mohan: Meaning "charming" or "bewitching," Mohan is also a name of Lord Krishna, signifying attractiveness and allure.

46. Nandini: Meaning "joyful" or "delightful," Nandini signifies happiness, pleasure, and contentment.

47. Ojas: Meaning "vigor" or "vitality," Ojas represents strength, resilience, and robustness.

48. Pari: Meaning "fairy" or "angel," Pari signifies beauty, grace, and ethereality.

49. Pranav: Meaning "sacred syllable Om," Pranav symbolizes the divine essence and universal consciousness.

50. Radha: Meaning "success" or "prosperity," Radha is also a name of the beloved consort of Lord Krishna, symbolizing devotion and love.

51. Rohan: Meaning "ascending" or "rising," Rohan represents progress, growth, and advancement.

52. Sakshi: Meaning "witness" or "observer," Sakshi signifies awareness, presence, and mindfulness.

53. Shreya: Meaning "auspicious" or "favorable," Shreya represents goodness, virtue, and positive outcomes.

54. Tarun: Meaning "youthful" or "young," Tarun symbolizes vitality, freshness, and vigor.

55. Urmi: Meaning "wave" or "undulation," Urmi represents fluidity, movement, and change.

56. Varun: Meaning "lord of the waters," Varun is also a name of the Vedic god of the oceans, symbolizing depth and mystery.

57. Vidya: Meaning "knowledge" or "wisdom," Vidya represents learning, enlightenment, and intellectual growth.

58. Yamini: Meaning "night" or "nocturnal," Yamini signifies darkness, introspection, and the subconscious mind.

59. Zoya: Meaning "life" or "alive," Zoya represents vitality, energy, and vivacity.

60. Aadi: Meaning "beginning" or "first," Aadi symbolizes origin, initiation, and genesis.

61. Aarav: Meaning "peaceful" or "calm," Aarav represents tranquility, serenity, and harmony.

62. Advik: Meaning "unique" or "peerless," Advik signifies individuality, distinctiveness, and exclusivity.

63. Amrita: Meaning "immortality" or "nectar," Amrita represents eternal life, divine sustenance, and spiritual rejuvenation.

64. Anika: Meaning "grace" or "favor," Anika signifies divine blessing, benevolence, and kindness.

65. Arya: Meaning "noble" or "honorable," Arya represents virtue, integrity, and ethical conduct.

66. Dev: Meaning "deity" or "divine," Dev symbolizes the divine presence and sacredness.

67. Divya: Meaning "divine" or "heavenly," Divya signifies spiritual purity, transcendence, and enlightenment.

68. Esha: Meaning "desire" or "wish," Esha represents aspiration, ambition, and longing.

69. Hansa: Meaning "swan," Hansa symbolizes purity, grace, and spiritual discernment.

70. Ila: Meaning "earth" or "speech," Ila represents grounding, stability, and communication.

71. Ishan: Meaning "lord Shiva" or "the sun," Ishan symbolizes power, energy, and auspiciousness.

72. Kavi: Meaning "poet" or "sage," Kavi signifies creativity, inspiration, and artistic expression.

73. Kiran: Meaning "ray of light" or "beam," Kiran represents illumination, clarity, and insight.

74. Leela: Meaning "divine play" or "cosmic drama," Leela signifies the spontaneous and joyful expression of the universe.

75. Mani: Meaning "jewel" or "gem," Mani symbolizes preciousness, value, and uniqueness.

76. Maya: Meaning "illusion" or "magic," Maya represents the transient nature of existence and the veiling power of the divine.

77. Nehal: Meaning "rainy" or "joyful," Nehal signifies happiness, abundance, and fertility.

78. Nisha: Meaning "night" or "darkness," Nisha represents introspection, mystery, and the subconscious mind.

79. Ojaswi: Meaning "brilliant" or "radiant," Ojaswi signifies luminosity, brilliance, and splendor.

80. Preeti: Meaning "love" or "affection," Preeti represents emotional bonding, compassion, and empathy.

81. Rajesh: Meaning "lord of the kingdom," Rajesh symbolizes rulership, authority, and governance.

82. Ria: Meaning "singer" or "melody," Ria represents musical talent, artistic expression, and creative passion.

83. Samira: Meaning "breeze" or "air," Samira signifies freedom, movement, and fluidity.

84. Shaurya: Meaning "valor" or "bravery," Shaurya represents courage, heroism, and strength of character.

85. Sneha: Meaning "affection" or "love," Sneha symbolizes emotional bonding, attachment, and tenderness.

86. Tejas: Meaning "radiance" or "brightness," Tejas represents inner light, vitality, and spiritual brilliance.

87. Trisha: Meaning "thirst" or "desire," Trisha signifies aspiration, longing, and fulfillment.

88. Utkarsh: Meaning "prosperity" or "success," Utkarsh represents growth, advancement, and abundance.

89. Vansh: Meaning "lineage" or "ancestry," Vansh symbolizes heritage, tradition, and familial connection.

90. Vidhi: Meaning "destiny" or "fate," Vidhi represents the cosmic order and divine plan governing the universe.

91. Yuvraj: Meaning "prince" or "heir apparent," Yuvraj signifies royalty, nobility, and leadership.

92. Zara: Meaning "princess" or "flower," Zara represents grace, beauty, and elegance.

93. Aaradhya: Meaning "worshiped" or "devoted," Aaradhya signifies reverence, devotion, and spiritual dedication.

94. Anand: Meaning "bliss" or "joy," Anand represents happiness, contentment, and inner peace.

95. Aryaman: Meaning "noble" or "honorable," Aryaman signifies virtue, integrity, and ethical conduct.

96. Daksh: Meaning "skillful" or "competent," Daksh represents proficiency, capability, and expertise.

97. Diva: Meaning "divine" or "heavenly," Diva signifies sacredness, transcendence, and spiritual connection.

98. Ishani: Meaning "goddess" or "divine," Ishani represents feminine power, grace, and compassion.

99. Jaya: Meaning "victory" or "triumph," Jaya signifies success, achievement, and overcoming obstacles.

100. Kaira: Meaning "unique" or "one of a kind," Kaira represents individuality, distinctiveness, and exclusivity.

These names encompass a diverse range of meanings and cultural significance, reflecting the rich tapestry of ancient Indian heritage and tradition.

Why did some people have elongated skulls?

Over millennia, diverse cultures worldwide have engaged in the practice of artificial cranial deformation, known as head binding, sculpting the very bones of their infants' skulls into varying shapes. This intricate process, often initiated during infancy, has been driven by a myriad of cultural, social, and even practical motivations, creating a tapestry of unique and sometimes alien-looking cranial configurations that continue to intrigue and fascinate.

Evolution of Standards of Beauty and Status: Across epochs and geographies, the perception of beauty and social status has been a driving force behind cranial modification practices. What constitutes an ideal appearance has varied dramatically, from elongated heads denoting nobility in Eurasian cultures to flattened foreheads symbolizing beauty in pre-colonial Southeast Asia. These practices were not merely cosmetic but deeply intertwined with societal structures and perceptions of identity.

A Toulouse man with a elongated skull (Picture: Didier Descouens)

Symbolism and Social Significance: In many societies, the shape of one's skull served as a potent symbol of identity, belonging, and even divinity. From the Alchon Huns of Eurasia to the Incas of the Americas, distinct cranial shapes were markers of ethnic identity, familial lineage, or even divine favor. Elaborate rituals and practices surrounded the process, imbuing it with profound cultural significance beyond mere aesthetics.

Paracas Skulls (Picture: Ica Museum)

Rituals and Techniques: The methods employed for cranial modification were as diverse as the cultures themselves. From tightly bound bandages to wooden cradleboards, each society devised its own techniques to mold the skulls of infants into desired shapes. These practices often required meticulous care and precision, reflecting the importance placed on the outcome within the respective cultural contexts.

Regional Variations: While the practice of head binding shared common themes across continents, each region developed its own unique traditions and preferences. From the conical skulls of Eurasia to the flattened foreheads of Southeast Asia, cranial modification manifested in a kaleidoscope of shapes and forms, each bearing the imprint of its cultural heritage.

Legacy and Decline: Despite its historical ubiquity, the practice of cranial modification has gradually waned in modern times. Westernization, shifting social norms, and advancements in medicine have led to its decline across many cultures. Today, the remnants of these ancient practices reside primarily in museums and archaeological sites, serving as poignant reminders of humanity's diverse cultural tapestry.

A Mangbetu woman with her child having their head bound (Picture: Tropen Museum)

In essence, the phenomenon of cranial modification reflects humanity's enduring quest for identity, beauty, and social distinction, encapsulating the rich tapestry of cultural diversity that has shaped our collective history.

Ancient humans sheltered in a Saudi lava tube for 7,000 years

Archaeologists have unveiled captivating insights into the ancient human occupation of Northern Arabia, with a recent study shedding light on a remarkable discovery: a lava tube in Saudi Arabia that provided shelter to humans for over 7,000 years. This revelation marks a significant step in our understanding of the region's dynamic history and cultural development.

The harsh, arid conditions of Northern Arabia had previously posed challenges for researchers seeking to uncover the mysteries of human occupation in this area. Organic remains were often poorly preserved, hindering efforts to pinpoint the timing of human habitation and their connections with neighboring regions like the Levant.

However, a shift in archaeological focus towards caves and underground environments has offered new avenues of exploration. These sheltered settings have preserved ancient materials, shielding them from the damaging effects of sun, wind, and temperature fluctuations.

In the latest study, researchers delved into the archaeological wonders of Umm Jirsan, a lava tube nestled within the volcanic landscape of Harrat Khaybar in Saudi Arabia. Situated approximately 125 kilometers north of Medina, this site proved to be a treasure trove of artifacts, rock art, and skeletal remains, documenting a rich tapestry of human activity spanning millennia.

Among the findings were traces of repeated human occupation stretching back over 7,000 years. Rock art depicting scenes of pastoral life, along with animal bones representing domesticated sheep and goats, hinted at the significance of the lava tube as a resource for ancient pastoralists.

Rock art at Umm Jirsan shows sheep, goat, two stick figures with tools on their belts, horned cattle, and ibex with ribbed horns and coat markings. (Stewart et al., 2024, PLOS ONE)

Moreover, evidence of plant consumption, including cereals and fruits, hinted at the emergence of oasis agriculture during the Bronze Age. Analysis of the remains suggested a diet rich in protein for the human inhabitants, while the livestock likely grazed on wild grasses and shrubs.

Far from being a mere dwelling, the Umm Jirsan lava tube likely served as a vital hub for travelers navigating the challenging terrain between oasis settlements. It facilitated cultural exchange and trade, acting as a crucial waypoint along pastoral routes.

The significance of this discovery extends beyond its immediate implications. It underscores the importance of interdisciplinary investigations in caves and lava tubes, offering a unique window into Arabia's ancient past. By piecing together these fragments of history, researchers continue to unravel the rich tapestry of human experience in this enigmatic region.

New Insights into the Roots of the Indo-Europeans: How the Caucasus-Lower Volga Cline Shaped Their Genetic and Linguistic Heritage

In the fast-paced world of scientific discovery, the last two decades have seen a remarkable acceleration in research related to the Indo-European question. This surge in interest and innovation has significantly enhanced our understanding of one of the most intriguing puzzles in human history: the origins and expansions of the Indo-European peoples. The key to these advancements lies in the harmonious integration of three pivotal sciences—archaeology, genetics, and linguistics. Together, these disciplines have begun to weave a more coherent narrative of the past, shedding light on the complex interplay of human migration, language development, and cultural transformations.

Unraveling the Mysteries of the Indo-Europeans Through Multidisciplinary Research

The journey through these intertwined realms gained substantial momentum in 2022 with a groundbreaking study that identified a mysterious "Caucasian link component" between the Steppe and Anatolia. This research, published by Science, highlighted the genetic and cultural bridges that connected these regions, suggesting a pivotal role for the Caucasus in the split of the proto-Indo-Anatolian language into the distinct Anatolian and Indo-European branches. The findings not only deepened our understanding of linguistic divergence but also emphasized the genetic underpinnings that accompanied these historical developments.

Building on this foundation, 2023 ushered in another significant linguistic study that further explored the "Caucasian factor," integrating it with both the steppe migrations and the agricultural revolution. This linguistic research pushed the timeline of the proto-language back to 6,000 BC, providing a vital clue to the timing of the Indo-Iranian split around 3,500 BC. By connecting genetic data with archaeological evidence and linguistic patterns, this study offered a more nuanced view of how ancient peoples interacted and evolved over millennia.

Now, in 2024, we will continue this exciting exploration with this new research that delves deeper into the Caucasus-Lower Volga (CLV) Cline. This study not only builds upon the previous findings but also expands our understanding of how these dynamic interactions between diverse populations helped shape the genetic and cultural landscapes of Eurasia. By examining a broader array of ancient DNA and correlating it with both material culture and linguistic distributions, we are beginning to see a clearer picture of how the Indo-Europeans spread across continents.

(A) Indo-European languages covered in the IE-CoR database: 109 modern languages (round dots) and 52 nonmodern languages (diamonds). An interactive version is available at https://iecor.clld.org/languages. Colors distinguish the 12 main clades of Indo-European (other potential clades went extinct without sufficient written record). (B to D) Maps showing alternative hypotheses for the first stages of Indo-European expansion. The hypothesis of an origin in the western steppe (B) contrasts with the hypothesis of an earlier spread with farming (C). The map in (D) shows a hybrid of parts of both hypotheses. Date estimates for the start of divergence within each main clade are given in years before present. Language labels on the hypothesis maps reflect recent end points, not necessarily earlier movements. RESEARCH ARTICLE

The newest research on the Caucasus-Lower Volga (CLV) Cline shows how important this genetic and cultural corridor was to the development of Eurasian populations. It had a big effect on the Yamnaya culture and the spread of Indo-European languages. Building on the foundations of previous studies, the 2024 research by Lazaridis et al. reveals significant advancements in understanding the genetic origins and linguistic branches of the Indo-European family.

Genetic Continuity and Admixture in the Caucasus-Lower Volga Region

This study meticulously analyzed ancient DNA from a diverse group of 428 individuals, enhancing our understanding of the genetic landscape during the Eneolithic period. The research identifies three significant genetic clines: the Caucasus-Lower Volga (CLV) Cline, the Volga Cline, and the Dnipro Cline, each contributing uniquely to the genetic makeup of the Yamnaya culture.

The CLV Cline, in particular, shows a complex admixture pattern with significant contributions from both Caucasus hunter-gatherers (CHG) and Eastern hunter-gatherers (EHG). This mix facilitated the unique genetic profile that would define the Yamnaya ancestry, which was crucial for their later migrations across Europe and Asia.

Map with analyzed sites.

Linguistic Implications of the Genetic Findings

The study's findings also shed light on the linguistic landscape of the region. The genetic makeup of the CLV population supports theories of a proto-Indo-Anatolian language spreading through these populations before branching into the well-known Anatolian and Indo-European languages around 4000–4400 BCE. The evidence suggests that the linguistic split was likely facilitated by the genetic and cultural exchanges occurring in the CLV region, spurred by extensive mobility and interaction across these communities.

Cultural and Archaeological Correlations

Archaeologically, the research aligns with the material culture transitions observed across the Eurasian steppes. The presence of kurgan burials, a hallmark of the Yamnaya culture, across the CLV area supports a shared cultural practice that may have spread through both migration and cultural diffusion. This practice, along with genetic evidence of widespread mixing, points to a time of intense cultural and genetic exchange that happened before and may have helped the later Yamnaya expansions.

Conclusions and Future Directions

The 2024 study not only underscores the genetic and cultural complexity of the Caucasus-Lower Volga region but also highlights its central role in the formation of early Indo-European cultures and languages. By providing a clearer picture of the genetic and cultural exchanges that shaped this area, the research contributes profoundly to our understanding of Eurasian prehistory.

As we continue to unravel the intricate tapestry of ancient human migration and cultural exchange, further research in this region will undoubtedly provide even deeper insights into the origins of modern populations and the languages they speak today. The ongoing exploration of ancient DNA, coupled with archaeological discoveries, promises to further illuminate the interconnected history of these ancient peoples.

The three Eneolithic clines in the context of Eneolithic and Bronze Age admixture.

This multidisciplinary approach is not just enhancing our comparative studies; it is revolutionizing them. It allows us to synthesize diverse data sets into a cohesive framework, offering insights that were previously obscured by the limitations of single-discipline studies. As we stand on the shoulders of these pioneering research efforts, we move closer to unraveling the complex genetic tapestry and linguistic heritage of the Indo-European peoples. The journey through time, facilitated by the integration of archaeology, genetics, and linguistics, continues to illuminate the paths tread by our ancient ancestors, guiding us through the mists of prehistory into the light of understanding.

The Enigmatic Origins of the Dravidian Languages: New Study Traces a 4,400-year-old Ancestral Component

The genetic and linguistic tapestry of the Indian subcontinent is remarkably complex, consisting of a rich mosaic of ancestries and languages that have evolved over thousands of years. Among these, the Dravidian languages, spoken by millions in the southern and central parts of India, present a fascinating case of linguistic and genetic continuity that spans several millennia.

Origins of Dravidian Speakers

Recent research has unveiled a novel ancestral component in tribes speaking Dravidian languages, particularly identified in the Koraga tribe. This component, distinct from the well-documented Ancestral North Indian (ANI) and Ancestral South Indian (ASI) ancestries, suggests a basal Middle Eastern origin. The Koraga, an indigenous tribe from the southwestern coast of India, demonstrate a unique genetic signature that aligns with the Dravidian languages they speak.

Connection to the Indus Valley Civilization

The discovery of this ancestral component has significant implications for our understanding of the Indus Valley Civilization, one of the world's earliest urban cultures that flourished along the basins of the Indus River. The genetic lineage underpinning Dravidian speakers appears to have diverged around the dawn of the Indus Valley Civilization, which suggests a deep-rooted connection between this ancient civilization and modern Dravidian languages.

Fig. 1 Population structure in the Indian cline. (a) PCA plot show a clustering pattern along the ANI- ASI cline. Red ellipses represent clusters which also include North Dravidian language communities sensu lato: Brahui, Koraga, Gauḍa, Tānti, Bāgdi, Oraon, Kota, Birhor and Mahar. Kota and Mahar are found in the ANI-ASI cline as well. Grey ellipses represent clusters that have drifted away from the ANI-ASI cline, which includes both Dravidian and other groups: Burusho, Kannaḍa and coastal populations of Karnāṭaka and Kerala, Paniya, Koṇḍa Reddy, Kamar and one Birhor sample. (b)

The study indicates that this Proto-Dravidian ancestry emerged around 4,400 years ago, possibly originating from the region between the Iranian plateau and the Indus Valley. This timeline and location suggest that the Dravidian languages may have originated in the Indus Valley itself before spreading southwards across the Indian subcontinent.

Genetic Evidence and Linguistic Correlations

The genetic makeup of the Koraga tribe and its correlation with their linguistic characteristics offer compelling evidence of a continuous cultural and genetic lineage. Advanced genomic analyses, including SNP genotyping and admixture modeling, have shown that the Koraga people not only retain a significant portion of this ancient Dravidian ancestry but also exhibit clear genetic distinctions from neighboring populations.

These findings are supported by linguistic studies, which trace the Dravidian languages back to a common ancestral language that might have been spoken by the early inhabitants of the Indus Valley. This ancestral language, Proto-Dravidian, appears to have diversified into various regional languages that are still spoken today across southern India.

Fig. 4 Maximum Likelihood (ML) tree showing the genetic relatedness between the Koraga and selected South Asian populations present in Dataset 3, using TreeMix v1.13.

Implications for Historical Linguistics and Archaeogenetics

The convergence of genetic and linguistic evidence points to the Indus Valley region as a significant cultural and linguistic hub in ancient South Asia. This research not only helps in understanding the genetic origins of the Dravidian languages but also provides insights into the migration patterns and social structures of one of the world's earliest civilizations.

The elucidation of a 4,400-year-old ancestral component specific to Dravidian-speaking tribes enhances our understanding of the prehistoric demography of South Asia and the intricate web of human migrations that shaped the subcontinent's history. Moreover, it emphasizes the need for integrated studies that combine genetics, archaeology, and linguistics to reconstruct the complex puzzle of human history.

Ancient Egypt's Stairway to Heaven?

In the vast tapestry of the night sky, the Milky Way stands as a celestial marvel, captivating the imaginations of cultures across the globe for millennia. From ancient times to the present day, interpretations of this luminous band have varied widely, ranging from a celestial river ferrying departed souls to the realm of the afterlife, to the ethereal birthplace of divine beings.

Yet, despite the wealth of historical records and decades of scholarly inquiry, the perspective of the ancient Egyptians on the Milky Way has remained elusive, shrouded in mystery and conjecture.

Enter Dr. Or Graur, a distinguished Associate Professor of Astrophysics at the University of Portsmouth and a Research Associate at the American Museum of Natural History. Armed with a relentless curiosity and a keen intellect, Dr. Graur embarked on a quest to unravel the enigma of the ancient Egyptian view of the Milky Way.

In a groundbreaking revelation, Dr. Graur has unveiled a compelling link between the celestial spectacle of the Milky Way and the ancient Egyptian goddess, Nut. Through meticulous analysis of mythological texts and astronomical observations, Dr. Graur has illuminated a previously unseen connection that sheds new light on the cosmological beliefs of ancient Egypt.

To delve deeper into this fascinating discovery and uncover the hidden wisdom of the ancient Egyptians, we invite you to watch the video below. Join Dr. Or Graur on a journey through time and space as he unveils the secrets of the cosmos and unlocks the mysteries of one of humanity's oldest and most enduring celestial wonders.

Prehistoric Australia Was Pure Nightmare Fuel

Australia's Deadly Menagerie: Exploring the Prehistoric Beasts of the Land Down Under

Nestled within the sun-scorched expanses of Australia lies a realm teeming with life, both magnificent and menacing. Renowned for its array of venomous serpents, fearsome crocodiles, and formidable predators, the Land Down Under has earned a reputation as a sanctuary for nature's deadliest denizens. From the shadowy depths of the ocean to the rugged expanse of the Outback, Australia's biodiversity is as diverse as it is deadly, harboring creatures that have evolved to survive in some of the harshest environments on Earth.

At the forefront of Australia's natural arsenal are its snakes, with an impressive roster of venomous species that comprise 20 of the 25 most lethal serpents in the world. From the elusive Inland Taipan to the notorious Coastal Taipan, these reptilian assassins wield venom capable of swiftly dispatching their prey and instilling fear in the hearts of even the most seasoned bushmen.

Venture further inland, and one may encounter the enigmatic Cleary bird, a creature steeped in Aboriginal mythology and renowned for its cunning and intelligence. Saltwater crocodiles lurk in the murky waters of Australia's northern rivers and estuaries, reigning as apex predators with a fearsome reputation for their ambush tactics and voracious appetites. And looming beneath the waves, the great white shark patrols the coastal waters, instilling a primal fear in those who dare to venture into its domain.

But Australia's prehistoric past reveals an even more chaotic and formidable landscape, where colossal beasts once roamed the ancient plains and forests. Around 50,000 years ago, giant monitor lizards and terrestrial crocodiles ruled the land, casting a shadow of terror over the primitive landscape. Among these titans was the Quin Kan, a true crocodilian marvel capable of traversing the land with ease. With its elongated legs, hoof-like toes, and serrated blade-like teeth, the Quin Kan emerged as one of Australia's apex predators during the Pleistocene epoch, commanding respect and fear from all who crossed its path.

But perhaps the most imposing of these ancient behemoths was the Megalania, a gargantuan species of monitor lizard that dwarfed its modern-day counterparts. Reaching lengths of up to 7.9 meters and weighing in at a staggering 348 pounds, this prehistoric titan prowled the ancient landscapes with unrivaled ferocity. Despite its recent classification as Varanus priscus, it remains known by its iconic moniker, the Megalania, a testament to its colossal stature and formidable presence in the annals of Australian paleontology.

As we delve into the depths of Australia's natural history, we are confronted with a world both awe-inspiring and terrifying, where the line between predator and prey blurs beneath the harsh Australian sun. From the lethal serpents that slither through the underbrush to the ancient giants that once roamed the primordial landscape, Australia's deadly menagerie continues to captivate and inspire, reminding us of the untamed wilderness that lies just beyond our doorstep.

5 Most Mysterious Ancient Masks

In the annals of archaeological exploration, tales of remarkable discoveries and enigmatic artifacts abound, offering tantalizing glimpses into the distant echoes of human history. From the sun-drenched shores of Greece to the verdant landscapes of England and the arid deserts of Peru, each excavation unearths a tapestry of intrigue, weaving together the threads of ancient civilizations and the enduring mysteries that shroud them.

In the hallowed year of 1876, amidst the ruins of Mycenae, German archaeologist Heinrich Schliemann unearthed a treasure beyond compare—a gold funeral mask, radiant in its craftsmanship and steeped in the lore of antiquity. Crafted from a single sheet of hammered gold and bearing the unmistakable mark of three-dimensional artistry, this opulent visage came to be known as the Mask of Agamemnon, igniting speculation that it may indeed portray the legendary King Agamemnon himself. Yet, as the 20th century dawned, the mask's authenticity was called into question, its true age revealed through the lens of modern archaeology to predate the Trojan War by centuries. While confirming its genuine antiquity, this revelation dispelled the romantic notion of its association with Agamemnon, leaving scholars to ponder its origins and significance, even as it continues to mesmerize with its golden allure.

Meanwhile, across the windswept moors of England's Star Carr archaeological site, Cambridge archaeologist Professor Graham Clark stumbled upon a trove of mesolithic treasures, shedding light on the ancient practices of hunter-gatherer societies. Among the artifacts lay the skull of a red deer, its eyeholes bore out with primitive stone tools, fashioned into a curious form of mask known as a frontlet. These haunting relics offer a poignant glimpse into the harsh existence of our nomadic ancestors, their lives intertwined with the rhythms of nature and the pursuit of sustenance. While the purpose of these enigmatic headdresses remains shrouded in mystery, tantalizing theories suggest they may have adorned the visages of accomplished hunters, revered elders, or revered figures during sacred ceremonies, bridging the gap between the mundane and the divine.

Journeying further afield, to the sun-scorched plains of northern Peru, archaeologists unearthed a sepulchral marvel concealed within the depths of a thousand-year-old tomb. Here, amidst the remnants of the Sechín culture, a leader emerged from the sands of time, their skeleton adorned with crimson hues and positioned in a posture of reverence. The enigmatic treasures of the San culture, which flourished between 750 and 1375 CE, continue to unveil their secrets, offering tantalizing glimpses into a civilization shrouded in myth and legend.

In these tales of ancient discovery, we glimpse fragments of a forgotten past, where the echoes of antiquity resonate with the dreams and aspirations of generations long gone. Each artifact, each excavation, is a testament to the indomitable spirit of human curiosity, driving us to unlock the mysteries of our shared heritage and illuminate the corridors of time with the flickering torch of knowledge.

2,500-year-old Greek-Illyrian Helmet Unearthed in Croatia

In a momentous archaeological expedition set amidst the rugged terrain of the Pelješac Peninsula, the Dubrovnik Museums team has once again shattered the silence of millennia, revealing a stunning testament to the ancient past—a Greek-Illyrian helmet. Nestled within the confines of the "Gomila" site in Zakotorac, this discovery, nestled within one of the stone additions to graves and believed to hold votive significance, stands as a beacon of enlightenment, promising to illuminate the burial customs of Illyrian communities during the latter half of the last millennium BC.

Under the seasoned guidance of Dr. Domagoj Perkić, the indomitable Head of the Archaeological Museum, the Dubrovnik Museums team, fortified by the dedication of assistant curators Paula Knego and Vicenco Pijerov, embarked on a journey of discovery that transcends the confines of time. Their collaborative efforts, bolstered by the expertise of esteemed archaeologists such as Hrvoje Potrebica, Marko Dizdar, Borut Križ, Marta Kalebota, Miona Miliša, Miroslav Vuković, Mirna Šandrić, and supported by the unwavering assistance of Ivan Pamić, culminated in a revelation that resonates with the echoes of history.

Exciting Discovery Greek Illyrian Helmet Unearthed in Pelješac by Dubrovnik Museums Team As the dust of centuries settled, the unearthing of the Greek-Illyrian helmet not only amplifies our comprehension of ancient funerary rites but also bestows upon the Pelješac region a newfound reverence as a veritable crucible of archaeological significance along the eastern shores of the Adriatic. This remarkable find joins a pantheon of artefacts, including intricately crafted jewellery, remnants of garments, and a myriad of grave offerings, bearing silent witness to the rich tapestry of civilizations that once flourished in this land.

The pursuit of knowledge traverses boundaries, and thus, the Dubrovnik Museums team's endeavors are intricately woven into a tapestry of collaboration. In concert with the Centre for Prehistoric Research, esteemed colleagues from the Department of Archaeology at the Faculty of Philosophy in Zagreb, the Institute of Archaeology, and the Dubrovnik Museums, the research unfolds. The spirit of cooperation extends further, embracing comrades from the City Museum in Korčula, the Dolenjska Museum in Novo Mesto, Slovenia, and the Academy of Fine Arts in Split, forging bonds that transcend academic disciplines.

Photo: Dubrovnik Museums

As the excavation progresses, each layer peeled back unveils a fragment of the past, beckoning us to unravel its secrets. With bated breath, the world awaits further revelations, poised to absorb the wisdom garnered from millennia past. The Dubrovnik Museums team stands resolute, guardians of history's enigmatic whispers, steadfast in their mission to unearth the treasures of antiquity and share their discoveries with a world hungry for knowledge.

DNA Research Identifies Previously Unrecognized Ancestral Group in Modern Japanese Population

Unveiling Japan's Genetic Tapestry: A Tripartite Ancestral Legacy

An artist’s rendition of a man from the Kofun Period based on a skull excavated from the Kanai-Higashiura ruins in Shibukawa, Gunma Prefecture (Provided by the Gunma Prefectural Museum of History)

In a groundbreaking exploration of Japan's genetic landscape, a comprehensive DNA study has reshaped our understanding of the ancestral roots that underpin the modern Japanese population. Analyzing the genomes of 3,200 individuals across Japan, researchers have unearthed compelling evidence suggesting not two, but three distinct ancestral groups have contributed to the rich tapestry of Japanese heritage.

Traditionally, it was believed that modern Japanese ancestry stemmed from two primary sources: the ancient Jomon hunter-gatherers, who roamed Japan from 16,000 to 3,000 years ago, and the subsequent influx of Yayoi farmers who arrived around 900 BCE. However, the revelation of a third ancestral group, previously unknown, has illuminated a new chapter in Japan's genetic saga.

Building upon the foundation laid by prior studies, which identified this enigmatic ancestral group in the transition from the Yayoi to the Kofun period (300–710 CE), the latest research delves deeper into the genetic fabric of Japan. The study's authors elucidate, "Our analysis finds that the Jomon maintained a small effective population size of ~1,000 over several millennia, with a deep divergence from continental populations dated to 20,000 to 15,000 years ago, a period that saw the insularization of Japan through rising sea levels."

The introduction of rice cultivation by individuals with Northeast Asian ancestry marked a pivotal juncture in Japan's genetic evolution. Yet, the most striking revelation lies in the identification of a subsequent influx of East Asian ancestry during the imperial Kofun period, solidifying the tripartite model of Japanese genomic origins.

Mapping the distribution of ancestral components across Japan, researchers uncovered a mosaic of genetic legacies. Okinawa emerged as a bastion of Jomon ancestry, boasting the highest proportion (28.5 percent), followed by the Northeast (18.9 percent), with the West exhibiting the lowest percentage (13.4 percent). These findings not only underscore the diverse genetic landscape of Japan but also shed light on regional variations in ancestral heritage.

Moreover, genetic affinities between different regions of Japan and ancient populations provide invaluable insights into historical migrations and cultural exchanges. The team's analysis revealed a closer relationship between the West and ancient Chinese groups, particularly in the Yellow River region, hinting at historical connections that shaped Japan's genetic mosaic.

Furthermore, the study elucidates the genetic affinities of Northeastern populations with the Jomon and ancient Japanese genomes, as well as with ancient Koreans from the Three Kingdoms period. These findings align with historical records and archaeological evidence, suggesting a complex web of interactions and migrations that have sculpted Japan's genetic landscape over millennia.

Intriguingly, the study postulates potential ancestral groups responsible for these distinctive genetic signatures, including the enigmatic Emishi people of Northeast Japan. However, the true origins of these groups remain shrouded in mystery, underscoring the need for further interdisciplinary research to unravel Japan's intricate genetic tapestry.

As we peer into the genetic annals of Japan, each strand of DNA whispers a tale of migration, adaptation, and cultural exchange, weaving together the diverse threads of Japan's ancestral heritage. Through the lens of genomic exploration, we embark on a journey of discovery, unraveling the ancient mysteries that lie encoded within the genomes of modern-day Japanese individuals.

The study, a testament to the collaborative efforts of geneticists, archaeologists, and historians, offers a glimpse into the mosaic of human history, reminding us of the interconnectedness of our shared heritage and the infinite complexities that define the human experience. Published in Science Advances, this landmark research heralds a new chapter in our understanding of Japan's genetic legacy, inviting us to delve deeper into the labyrinth of human origins.

The study is published in Science Advances.

Strange Discovery in Maya pyramid reveals dramatic dynasty collapse

In the twilight of the Maya civilization, amidst the shadows of crumbling temples and fading glory, a saga of political upheaval unfolded, leaving behind a trail of burnt remnants that spoke of defiance and transformation. Nestled within the heart of Guatemala, within the enigmatic confines of the pre-Columbian city of Ucanal, lies a pyramid that once bore witness to the zenith of Maya power and, later, the fervor of revolution.

A recent excavation within this ancient sanctuary unearthed a startling revelation: the charred remains of Maya royalty, their once majestic visage reduced to ash and memory. Among the smoldering embers lay artifacts of opulence, remnants of a bygone era when kings and queens held court in splendor. Among these artifacts, a greenstone mask, adorned with the craftsmanship that bespoke regal lineage, whispered tales of dynasties now consumed by the flames of change.

Radiocarbon whispers from the ashes revealed a timeline steeped in intrigue, spanning from 773 to 881 CE, a period marked by tumult and transition. These noble souls, long entombed in reverence, were not merely victims of time's relentless march; rather, their tombs were violated, their remains subjected to the inferno's embrace, a deliberate act of defiance against the vestiges of the old order.

In the annals of Maya history, this conflagration marked the dawn of a new era, spearheaded by a figure shrouded in legend: Papmalil, the harbinger of revolution. His ascent to power heralded not only the demise of monarchic authority but also the dawn of a more egalitarian society, where distinctions of rank blurred in the crucible of change.

Drawing parallels to the tumult of the French Revolution, scholars discerned in this fiery spectacle echoes of the storming of the Bastille, a symbolic reckoning with the past and a clarion call for a future forged in the crucible of upheaval. Dr. Christina T. Halperin, one of the study's authors, illuminated the significance of this event, describing it as a "dramatic public affair," a spectacle imbued with ceremony and emotion, signaling the demise of an ancient regime.

In the wake of Papmalil's ascent, the landscape of Ucanal bore witness to a metamorphosis of monumental proportions. The edifices of yore, once symbols of dynastic supremacy, crumbled beneath the weight of progress, their stones repurposed to erect monuments to a new dawn. Likewise, the charred remains of the old guard found themselves relegated to the margins, discarded amidst the detritus of construction, their significance overshadowed by the march of history.

Through the lens of time, this pivotal moment in Maya history emerges not merely as the end of an era but as a crucible of transformation, wherein the flames of revolution illuminated the path toward a new social order. As Dr. Halperin aptly notes, it was a moment that transcended the confines of Ucanal, reverberating across the southern Lowlands and reshaping the destiny of a civilization.

In the annals of archaeological inquiry, this discovery stands as a testament to the resilience of the human spirit, a reminder that even in the ashes of the past, the seeds of revolution are sown, heralding the dawn of a new age.

The study is published in the journal Antiquity.

Exploring the Roots of Democracy: An Exclusive Interview with Prof. Paul Cartledge on Ancient Greek Political Directions

Directions in Democracy: Interview with Prof. Paul Cartledge. Richard Marranca for The Archaeologist

---

Q1. Can you define the word “democracy”? Where did it begin (and end) and how far did it spread?

A. Etymologically, the ancient Greek coinage dêmokratia (first attested c. 425 BC/E) combined dêmos and kratos. The meaning of kratos is unambiguous: power or might. The meaning of dêmos, however, is ambiguous: either ‘people’ (the people as a whole, the city or state, e.g., Athens) or the majority of the empowered (adult male citizen) people, a.k.a. the masses or (if you didn’t like them) the mob or rabble. So, ancient Greek dêmokratia could mean either ‘the power of the people’ (as in Lincoln’s ‘government of the people by the people for the people’) or the power of the masses (over both the organs of state governance and over the elite few citizens). If you were a member of the elite Few rich citizens, you might well prefer oligarchy (rule of the elite Few) to democracy, which you might see as merely mobocracy or mob-rule (further below, Q5).

Origins and spread: Some scholars have sought to identify ‘democratic’ or ‘proto-democratic’ institutions in other times and places and cultures (see further below, towards the end of this interview), but if what is taken to matter most is the power of decision-making and, as part of that, the power to call executive office-holders to account by judicial or other means, then the first democracy properly so called anywhere in the world was that of Athens, brought into being in stages during the approximately half-century between c. 508/7 and 462/1 BC/E. There were some 1000 separate political entities in Hellas (the Greek world) between about 500 and 300 BC/E; of those, perhaps a quarter, perhaps as many as half at one time or another within those two centuries experienced some form of democracy (Aristotle in his Politics treatise of c. 330 identified four main types); but pioneering Athens (which experienced three or four forms over time) was the most consistently and extensively democratic of all.

The Roman conquest of Greece in the last two centuries BC/E put an end to all forms of ancient Greek (direct) democracy. The recuperation and revival of (indirect, representative) democracy began in the 17th century in England, spread from there to the United States and France in the 18th, and more widely in the world from the end of the 19th. Full adult (women as well as men) suffrage democracy was an achievement of the 20th century. The ‘largest’ existent democracy (since 1947) is India. But all modern democracies (especially those that are democracies merely in name, e.g., the People’s Democracy of China) are representative, not direct: it is representatives (however selected, whether nominated or elected) who actually govern and rule on a day-to-day basis, not ‘the people’ (however defined) as such.

Q2. According to your brilliant, wide-ranging study, Democracy: a Life (O.U.P., NY & Oxford, new edition 2018), there are solid reasons for the invention of democracy. Can you situate us back then to show what inventions and trends in Greece, and specifically in Athenian society, led to democracy?

A. This is an exceptionally tough ask! Preconditions of what I take to be the origins of democracy at Athens (see below on Solon v. Cleisthenes) include: invention c. 700 BC/E of the polis (city-state, citizen-state), a rule-bound political entity based on a definition of the privileges and duties of citizens (always free adult males); weakening of the original rule over poleis by exclusive aristocracies (literally ‘the power of the best’, in fact of the richest and most noble families) through such factors as intermarriage between noble and non-noble families, the impoverishment of some aristocrats, and the rise of new-wealthy families due to for example success in overseas trade; the shift from long-range fighting conducted only by the most wealthy to the dominant role of infantry phalanx fighting undertaken by more middling-rich heavy-armed soldiers; and the emergence in some of the larger, more important poleis(Athens was one) of sole-ruler autocrats called ‘tyrants’ who found it helpful to dispossess or weaken the older ruling families by spreading political power more widely down to poorer, commoner citizens.

Q3. What about Greek religion, oracles and such? How was that part of the conversation on democracy? And how about science and democracy?

A. Religion, oracles, etc. Religion was never seen as a distinct sphere, separate from a secular sphere, so democratic politics was always heavily invested in and inflected by religion. Yet the Greeks had no single word for ‘religion’, but used periphrases such as ‘the things of the gods’, ‘gods’ being understood as a plural, polytheistic term embracing both gods and goddesses. The overriding goal of human relations with the divine pantheon was to keep the most relevant gods and goddesses happy, to maintain the ‘peace’ of the gods, by duly ‘acknowledging’ them through animal blood-sacrifices, prayers, festivals, etc. The democratic Athenians between them devoted more days of the year to festivals of the various divinities than did any other Greek city. All such Athenian festivals, whether national or local, were managed democratically. Likewise, all matters of religion, including oracles,. There were many Greek oracular shrines scattered throughout the Greek world (in Asia and Africa as well as Europe), but the most famous was that of Apollo at Delphi in central mainland Greece. Consultations here, both personal and state, began in the 8th century BC/E. One of the most famous episodes of the Athenian official state consultation of the Delphic Oracle occurred under the democracy in the 480s BC/E in anxious preparation to face a massive impending invasion by the empire of Persia. The Delphic priestess gave conflicting responses to different consultations, so it fell to the Assembly of the Athenians to decide which interpretation to favour and act upon. Happily, they chose correctly, built a large fleet of trireme warships, and Athens emerged victorious from the Persian Wars—and with its still-evolving democracy intact.

Science: Around 600 BCE, there emerged a tendency for a very small elite group of Greek intellectuals on both sides of the Aegean Sea to question the inherited religious worldview in favour of a more scientific, mechanistic understanding of the cosmos, how it came into being, and what it was composed of.  But it took a very long time before the role of gods and goddesses in making and determining the nature of the world was seriously challenged by any large number of citizens. The earliest thoroughgoing Greek atheists are not attested until towards the end of the 5th century BC/E, well after the introduction of democratic systems of government.

Q4. In order to understand Athenian democracy, is Solon or Cleisthenes a good starting point? Who are the major Democrats? And what were the major institutions of democracy?

A. Solon or Cleisthenes? Greeks liked the idea of ‘founding fathers’, people they called ‘legislators’ or ‘lawgivers’ and to whom they sometimes actually paid religious worship as ‘heroes’ after their deaths. The earliest of them belonged to what we call the 7th century BC/E, but some of them (e.g., Lycurgus of Sparta) were more mythical than historical. The Athenians had two rival ‘Founders’ of their democracy: the more conservative citizens looked back to Solon (c. 600 BC/E), the more radical to Cleisthenes (c. 500 BC/E). Both men belonged by wealth, family, and upbringing to the elite few, but both, like Pericles most famously later on (c. 450 BC/E), believed in giving power to the ‘People’. The question is: what kind of power, how much, and to which people? Most scholars now agree that Cleisthenes was the true founder of classical Athenian democracy. The reforms that went under his name in 508/7 included a redefinition of citizenship itself, a recalibration of relations between the central organs of governance and the local constituencies, the invention of a new council to serve as the standing committee for the Assembly, and a reorganisation of the regionally recruited and arrayed hoplite land army. Further reforms were introduced in a package proposed by Ephialtes with the support of Pericles in 462/1. But Ephialtes was murdered shortly after, in a contract killing, and rather unfairly, his name was never added to the list of ‘legislator’ founders.

Major Democrats: very few surviving writers were ideological Democrats (see further below), and none of the leading democratic politicians of Athens apart from Demosthenes (below) has left us any written works on the theme. The four most prolific extant authors on classical Greek democracy—the Athenian aristocrat Plato (c. 428–347) and his most famous pupil, originally northern Greek Aristotle (384–322), son of a royal physician; and the Athenian pamphleteers Isocrates (436-338) and Xenophon (c. 428–354)—were all non-democrats, though of these, Plato was by far the most hostile to democracy, which he saw as the rule of the ignorant, fickle, unenlightened majority over the educated, intelligent minority. Outside Athens, several tens of other Greek cities were at one time or another more or less democratic, e.g., Thebes in the 4th century BC/E, but, as at Athens, no leading democratic statesman (e.g., Epaminondas of Thebes) has left us any writings. Apart from Pericles (below) and Demosthenes, the leading Athenian democrats of different stripes included: Cleisthenes (c. 570–500), retrospectively credited as the founder of Athenian democracy as such, though he was by birth an aristocrat with a foreign (Sicyonian) mother; Cleon (??–422), the principal successor to Pericles as the most influential war politician of the 420s; and Aeschines (389–314), who lost out to Demosthenes on the major issue of resistance to the rise of the (non- and anti-democratic) kingdom of Macedon.

Institutions.

Local: At base were the 139 or 140 Attic (Athenian) demes: in order to be an active, empowered (free adult male) citizen, one had to be officially enrolled at the age of 18 on the register of the deme of one’s (citizen) father. One’s father or nearest relative swore that the 18-year-old was who he said he was and who his father was, and that his parents had been legally married when they produced him. Demes held assembly meetings, celebrated festivals, and managed military call-ups.

National/Central: The ultimate decision-making body was the ‘demos of the Athenians’, meeting regularly (at first once a month, eventually four times every 35 or 36 days) in Assembly to decide on matters put to them by a steering committee known as the Council (Boulê), a body of 500 citizens aged over 30 chosen by lot on a deme-quota basis, which was in almost permanent session throughout the civil year. Councillors counted as ‘officials’, of which there were altogether some 700 domestic and (during the last seven decades of the 5th century) a further 700 holding office abroad in what we call an Athenian ‘empire’ (though it wasn’t anything like the Persian, Roman, or British). Most officials were, like the 500 Councillors, selected by lot; only the top three executive offices, the Generals, Treasurers of Athena (Athens’s patron deity), and (in the 5th century only) the ‘Treasurers of the Greeks’, and one or two other officials (e.g., in the 4th century, the Water Commissioner), were chosen by election—partially because of the need for expertise and partly so that, if they failed or committed crimes in office, they could be brought to account through heavy fining—or worse (up to and including execution). Generals and Treasurers served on boards of 10, and almost all boards were appointed and reappointed annually. Elections were considered undemocratic or anti-democratic since they favoured notabilities, whereas the random lot encouraged, recognized, and favoured the essential contributions of ordinary citizens.

Q5. What about Greeks who didn’t like democracy? Did they see it as a precarious mob rule?

A. They did. They coined a special word, ochlokratia, meaning the power of the ochlos, or mob. An elite writer such as the historian Thucydides spoke scornfully of the ‘naval mob’, meaning that most of the Athenian citizen sailors who rowed the warfleets that were the basis of Athenian external power in the 5th century were drawn from the lower socioeconomic orders, the masses. Some fanatical Greek ultra-oligarchs, as reported by Aristotle (who was himself a moderate oligarch), even took a religious oath that they would do as much damage and harm as they possibly could to the hated poor masses of citizens! By that, they meant not only keeping them out of power by monopolising offices themselves and by making and enforcing other anti-democratic laws, but also using their monopoly power to exploit the masses economically through rack rent or other forms of debt.

Q6. You write about how Athens and its allies promoted democracy and how other powers (Sparta, Philip, Alexander, and Rome) didn’t. Were there common methods used to crush democracy?

A. It’s difficult to generalize. One of Thucydides’s major themes is stasis: civil strife (usually economic, often ideological) or outright civil war. He takes as his paradigmatic instance the outbreak on the island of Corfu (in ancient Greek, Kerkura) in 427 BC/E, in which the Athenians militarily supported the democrats and the Spartans the oligarchs. It was paradigmatic because, he says, from 427 on, stasis broke out ever more frequently throughout the Greek world, and the two great powers of the day, Athens and Sparta—who were also at the time warring enemies—would use their interventions on behalf of democrats and oligarchs in different cities as a technique of both imperial expansion and military engagement. The two typical demands of Democrats in oligarchically run cities give a clue as to the nature of the economic basis of stasis: ‘cancel debts’ (often agricultural loans or town rents) and’redistribute the land’. Most Greek cities and states were fundamentally agrarian, and the source of most oligarchs’ wealth, apart from trade, was agricultural landownership and surpluses of staple crops (cereals, olives, and wine grapes—produced for them by slaves or tenants). Oligarchs reinforced their economic superiority by making moral-cultural claims, saying that only they were the ‘good’ or ‘best’ citizens, whereas the poor Democrats were the ‘bad’ or ‘worst’.

Q7. Along with the political champions of democracy, who were the historians and authors who were on the side of democracy?

A. There were very, very few such champions! Of the historians, I’d single out Herodotus (c. 484–425), who, arguably, was a moderate democrat. When trying to explain the democratic Athenians’ unexpected victory over the Persians at the battle of Marathon in 490 BC/E, he put it down to their fundamental notion of citizen equality. (The other core concept of democracy was freedom—both freedom from and freedom to.) But even Herodotus reported scornfully that the Athenian democracy could make stupid collective decisions. Among other kinds of authors, the most prominent democrat on record is Demosthenes (384–322), super-wealthy like Pericles. His democratic views were expressed in the published versions of speeches he had delivered without a text in the Athenian Assembly meetings (held on the Pnyx hill), usually on matters of foreign policy, so that he would often contrast the (superior) Athenian democrats and democracy with their non-democratic Spartan opponents. But that didn’t stop him from also blaming the citizens of the Athenian democracy, either for being more interested in hearing speeches than taking appropriate action or (in the case of the richer citizens) failing to pay their taxes.

Q8. Was Aristotle for a mixed constitution and governing system? Is that the same kind of path as modern democracies? Is this similar to the balance of powers idea in the modern world?

A. Yes, Aristotle was for a mixed constitutional and governmental system, which he saw as a compromise between giving exclusive or preponderant power to either the rich Few or the poor Many citizens. It is and it isn’t similar to our ‘balance of powers’ notion. Similar, because it includes the idea of checks and balances between the two salient groups. Not similar, because our notion of a balance of powers depends on the prior notion of a separation of the powers of government: legislative, executive, and judicial. ancient Greeks did not hold that notion; they believed that political power-holders should exercise power in all three spheres alike, even to the point of acting in one sphere (judicial) to revise or counteract a decision they themselves had taken in another (legislative). An ancient Greek polity was seen as a strong community—strong but therefore all the more worth fighting for control over! Hence stasis; see above.

Q9. It was great the way you explained Pericles and the (5th-century) Golden Age (as well as Alexander the Great) on BBC’s In Our Time and in your books. Can you tell us about Pericles, his famous speeches, and his great role as a leader and promoter of democracy? Who advised him? What were his failings?

A. That’s a huge question, big enough for a whole book—there have been several life-and-times modern biographies of Pericles (c. 492-429), and I’m contemplating writing another soon! Our main surviving source is a life written by the famous Boeotian biographer Plutarch (c. 100 CE), and he had available to him many written texts that have since been lost. But he wasn’t a historian (he was mainly interested in moral character), and he didn’t know what to do with what seemed a contradiction to him, living as he did in a non- or anti-democratic age under the Roman Empire. The contradiction was that Pericles seemed to him to be, on the one hand, a true statesman who rose above sordid personal and ideological politics to act impartially for the good of the Athenians as a whole, but yet, on the other hand, just another political operator keen to achieve and maintain personal power by any means possible!

The answer to the apparent contradiction is that Pericles was probably quite a lot of both. The chief piece of evidence for his views on democracy as a governmental system and way of life is a speech that historian Thucydides wrote, based no doubt on what Pericles had actually said in a civic funeral oration in 431/0, but expressed according to Thucydides’ memory and in Thucydides’s own style of Athenian Greek. Since Thucydides was not himself a democrat (he was a somewhat moderate oligarch), it is thought that that explains why Pericles’ views expressed here are less than radically egalitarian and democratic. Pericles had a small coterie of intellectual advisers with whom he discussed and initiated policy. He regularly spoke persuasively in the Assembly before audiences of upwards of 5000 or 6,000 in the open air. But he was also a tireless backroom technocrat, particularly good at public finance, including helping to manage the public, religio-political (re)building programme on the Acropolis that produced the Parthenon temple. His one big failing was to overestimate the reserves and other resources Athens had at its disposal in 431 in order to resist the onslaught from Sparta and to underestimate the effect on morale that his strategy of mostly passive resistance would have on his people. He couldn't, of course, be blamed for failing to predict the Great Plague of Athens (from which he himself died, as did his two sons), but his policy and strategy did make the funereal effects of it much worse.

Q10. Did the Roman Republic (or other ancient societies) have any inkling of democracy? How about tribal or pre-political cultures? Do tribes have informal practices that can be identified as democratic?

It’s vital to distinguish between the supremely political Roman Republic and cultures that may be labelled ‘tribal’ but are certainly in key respects pre-political. This is a distinction that those who wish to assign the term ’democracy’ even to such pre-political societies, notably in Asia and Africa, fail to observe. For example, ‘primitive’ democracies have been identified in 3rd millennium BC/E Assyria or ‘traditional’ (pre-colonial) India, but in all such cases, not only is politics properly so-called absent, but the most that is permitted to ordinary ‘people’ (not of course citizens) below the (usually hereditary) tribal chief or dynastic monarch is some form or degree of ‘discussion’, but nothing approaching collective, popular decision-making power.

The Roman Republic is a special case—and a special problem—from the point of view of democracy. Its very name means, literally, the ‘popular thing’ or the ‘thing of the people’, and formally speaking, absolutely every public political decision, whether taken by vote in one other legislative or electoral assembly or in a ‘People’s’ lawcourt, was a decision of the Roman people. However, here we would do well to remember Lincoln at Gettysburg, quoted above: was the government of the U.S. ‘people’ in 1863 really, in any useful sense, democratic? The great historian Polybius, a conservative, oligarchic Greek of the 2nd century BC/E who was so much an admirer of the Roman governmental system that he attributed to it the source of Rome’s external power and empire, something of which he approved, thought that he could see a strong democratic element or elements in the Roman system, but even he categorised it overall not as a democracy but as a’mixed constitution’, the democratic elements being counterbalanced and outweighed by the oligarchic and the monarchic or residually regal. We, however, might better take our cue from another historian of Rome, the great Tacitus (c. 55–120 CE), who wrote that’mixed’ constitutions existed only in speculative theory and not in hard, material practice. For in reality, the Roman Republic was a traditional, aristocratically inflected oligarchy of wealth, in which there were no one-man, one-vote legislative, policymaking, or electoral assemblies, but state policy was determined by a handful of senior elected executives within the aristocratic-oligarchic Senate, literally a body of ‘Elders’ but actually composed of nobles and notables aged over 30, and delivered by a small body of all-powerful, non-responsible’magistrates’.

Q11. Was democracy too quixotic or odd for societies—from Imperial Rome to the 1600s or so—to bother with it? Was the subject too hot to handle?

A. Not, I think, too quixotic (though both Republican and Imperial Rome produced relatively few speculative, utopian political thinkers, as opposed to Cicero, the classic prophet-of-things-as-they-are, steady-state, reactionary oligarchic thinker), but, yes, too hot. Rome as an imperial power, first in Italy then throughout the Mediterranean and beyond, always followed the lead of Sparta, systematically favouring, to the extent of radically intervening militarily to impose, oligarchies of conservative, propertied aristocrats or semi-aristocrats among their subordinate ‘allies’. Imperial Rome from Augustus (27 BC/E-14 CE) on was of course an autocracy or dictatorship, no matter how hard at least the earliest Emperors tried to disguise it as a (restored) republic. For the nature of the Republic as a political system, see immediately above.

Q12. I recall a lot in your book about the Magna Carta, Machiavelli, Cromwell, Hobbes, Rousseau, Tocqueville, and more. Can you comment on some of the important aspects and people?

A. The reasons for which the object and persons you mention are included in my book vary greatly! Broadly speaking, Machiavelli, Rousseau, and Tocqueville may be invoked as democratic or proto-democratic, whereas Cromwell and Hobbes belong firmly to the anti-democratic tradition. In more detail, the Florentine Machiavelli (1469–1527), author of The Prince, was heir to a medieval Italian tradition of city-republics in which a political place was reserved for some construction of il popolo (‘the People’), but the very title of his most famous work tells us that in practice, the most he could have been hoping to achieve was moderate autocracy or dictatorship inflected in a vaguely populist direction. J-J Rousseau (1712–1778), a Swiss-French philosopher and educator, first formulated the notion of the ‘general will’, a far more democratic notion than, say, Cicero’s ‘will of the populus’. He was considered, together with Voltaire, one of the two greatest intellectual influences on the French Revolution (which had a democratic element). Alexis, count of Tocqueville (1805–1859), was the author of a brilliant, officially commissioned study that he entitled Démocratie en Amérique (1839–40). The word ‘democracy’ in its French form had been borrowed into anglophone discourse; Tocqueville repaid the compliment by emphasising the egalitarian, democratic spirit of (settler, colonial) Americans a score of years before Lincoln became the first US President to be elected, in 1860, on an explicitly anti-slaveowning ticket.

Oliver Cromwell (1599–1658) was, of course, by definition, a small republican, since he led the movement of regicide that executed King Charles I in 1649. But as Lord Protector under the shortlived English Republic (1649–1660), he showed definite authoritarian, undemocratic, and even regal tendencies. Three authors of the Republican period exemplify the fierce ideological debates that caused and were caused by the act of regicide: the poet John Milton (1608-1674) and the political theorist James Harrington (1611-1677) were both for the Republic and showed proto-democratic leanings, whereas Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679), a political philosopher, was all for the re-establishment of an all-controlling sole rule and blamed the ancient Greeks (some of them!) for being all too peskily democratic.

Magna Carta (1215 CE, sworn between King John of England and a select group of Barons) is ambiguous: a couple of its clauses, most famously the one prescribing habeas corpus, can be seen as folding without friction into more genuinely democratic regimes such as that (‘constitutional monarchy’) established by the so-called Glorious Revolution of 1688/9, but in origin and intent there is nothing democratic whatsoever about Magna Carta as such.

Q13. There is little direct democracy in Western countries, though there are many representative democracies and republics. Can you explain that?

A. The issue is tripartite: size, ideology, and technology. In the ancient Greek world, which was endowed with communications technology at a distance, democracy had to be direct. But that technological necessity was reinforced by ideology: it was believed that the people as such ought to or had to govern, both as themselves and for themselves, for a set purpose. And the combination of low technology with a belief in the virtue of direct rule was further reinforced by the very small size of ancient citizen bodies, the modal size of which is estimated to be between 500 and 2000 adult males. The ancient Athenian democratic citizen body, normally around 30,000 but sometimes increasing up to 50 or 60,000 and sometimes decreasing to 20,000 or below, was altogether exceptional, off the scale. But a normal figure for the attendance at a regular Athenian democratic assembly meeting on the Pnyx hill is thought to have been a more manageable 5 or 6,000, with 6,000 being set as the minimum required, the quorum, for valid voting on certain issues, such as the award of citizenship to a non-Athenian foreigner. Whoever/however many turned up at an Assembly meeting or at an electoral meeting were officially deemed to be ‘the people’ for legal-constitutional purposes. Likewise, any ‘People’s’ jury, selected by lot from a panel of 6,000, whether 201 or 2,501; a usual figure (as at the trial of Socrates) was 501, the large size aimed at preventing effective bribery. The Athenians were therefore perfectly able to incorporate the idea of representation into their fundamentally and definitionally direct system of democracy.

Direct democracy within the basically representative systems of contemporary (Western) democracy is understandably very rare, given all the fundamental ways—size, technology, and ideology—in which contemporary democracies differ from those of ancient Greece. There is, however, one mode of democratic political action that, as used in some modern democracies and in some (e.g., Switzerland) much more frequently than others, approximates more nearly the ancient Greeks’ direct ways of reaching political decisions, and that is the use of the plebiscite or referendum. Significantly, both of those terms have a Latin, not a Greek, etymology, since far more contemporary European and Euro-American civil and criminal law is derived from Roman than from ancient Greek law. Different democratic countries have different rules for how, on what issues, or in what form a referendum may be couched, held, and evaluated in the overall process of governance. Radical Democrats today argue that direct democracy—or elements of direct democracy—should be enhanced, for example, by incorporating it into the very lawmaking process itself. But few if any argue that a modern democracy, one in possession of nuclear weapons of mass destruction, for instance, should take advantage of the latest digital communications technology to introduce direct self-government by referendum on a daily basis.

Q14: Is there an inherent contradiction? Like this: cities and civilization created democracy. But this produces extremely powerful individuals and groups—hierarchies. What do you think?

A. Only indirectly did cities and civilization (the latter derived etymologically from the former) produce/create democracy. It is true, however, that democracy was/is a culture, a way of life, not just a system of governmental organization and popular decision-making. For instance, humans in ‘nature’ aren’t all equal, so to make equality a fundamental core democratic value is to act culturally, not naturally. Institutions, of course, take time to establish and have to be forged and tested to destruction. Humans are social beings, but they require conscious acculturation to dominant shared values. Democracy is not the work of a day. On hierarchy, see answers to Q15 and 18.

Q15. Most, if not all, organizations have one leader or an oligarchy. Would that be the case for corporations and universities too, and so on?

A. In the early 20th century, German sociologist Robert Michels promulgated his ‘Iron Law’ of oligarchy, to the effect that, no matter how democratic any large organization—or society!—might intend and proclaim itself to be, actually in time it would in practice be run oligarchically, that is, by a small group of people effectively beyond the reach and control of the ‘ordinary’ members of the organization (whether a business corporation or a university). Specialists in the history of the ancient Athenian democracy have argued vigorously—and I believe successfully—against applying any such ‘iron law’ to Athenian politics between about 500 and 320 BC/E, but they are happy to claim (and again, I agree with them) that the ‘Law’ does apply to the Roman Republic. As for modern organizations and societies, I’d say that a weak version of Michels’s Law—a lead rather than iron law, perhaps—does generally apply universally, though in some cases (Xi Jin Ping’s China, e.g.) more obviously than in others.

Q16: Is direct democracy slow and inefficient for organizations? Is it also the case that the rich and powerful (or anyone) just prefer a steady state or enlargement of their position?

Q17. One thing I’ve noticed is that powerful people on the Left make all sorts of lovely ideal announcements, but that much of it doesn’t stand for themselves but for society or “the masses” out there. Like celebrities with their private jets. Or in the USA, people who tout the equality of public schools or busing their kids to more diverse schools or affirmative action—but don’t have that for their kids, of course.

A. I think those two questions/observations can usefully be answered together. It all depends on what you mean by ‘efficiency’, and whether you’re thinking only in terms of values that can be measured quantitatively or/and of issues that can and should be evaluated qualitatively. Aristotle was surely right to give an essentially economic, class-based analysis of how power was distributed and exercised in the Greek political communities and societies he knew. I would add that that analysis can also usefully be applied universally, mutatis mutandis. On the side of values, the Funeral Speech attributed by Thucydides to Pericles (see above) contains one remarkable passage on shirkers, or what we call free riders. Such people, who fail to make their proper civic contribution to the common good, have, Pericles says, no place in democratic Athens. Again, I would suggest that that argument doesn’t apply only to an ancient democracy.

Q18. Our cousins on the evolutionary scale are prone to having alpha males; chimpanzee colonies have male leaders that rule over everyone and rule by might.Is the hierarchical nature of things (as a researcher such as Jane Goodall might say) just built into human &comparable non-human animal social life?

Sociobiologists (such as the late E.O. Wilson) and ethologists would say yes, certain tendencies—such as the aggressive struggle for alpha status—are hardwired into, say, chimpanzee colonies and, insofar as humans are evolutionarily the direct descendants of such primates, into human ‘colonies’ (polities, societies) too. Against which I, as a historian, would urge the claims of ‘culture’ or ‘nurture’ as being comparable or even superior to those of ‘nature’, from two main points of view, one ancient, one modern. From the ancient point of view, I would call in evidence again Herodotus and his pioneering histories. Running like a red thread throughout is the interpretive notion that humans, when organized politically, make strikingly different political choices, often overdetermined by considerations such as religion or warmaking. Some go for imperial autocracy (the Persians), others for democracy (some Greeks). Yet evolutionarily speaking, they were all much the same as human social beings. Likewise in modernity: in 1934, brilliant US social anthropologist and ethnographer Ruth Benedict published her Patterns of Culture, in which she examined closely three ‘cultures’ widely scattered in space and therefore unable to interact with or upon each other. Her point was: My, how different! All three were human cultures, but their underlying norms and beliefs and their attitudes and social practices were so utterly different from each other.

Q19. You mentioned digital democracy on p. 310. What are the five major qualities of democracy?

A. I’m not sure that ‘digital’ is what I would have thought of first when thinking about democracy’s major qualities, partly because digital technology is an enabling and not intrinsically a determining factor, and partly because some of the consequences of the digital revolution have been, in my view, dire for my understanding of what democracy is or could best be. Ironically, ancient Athenian democracy was also digital: votes in assembly were taken by raising the right hand, and in the lawcourts, jurors scratched on wax tablets—a longer line for the heavier penalty, a shorter line for the lighter penalty.

Five major qualities (which all have to be interpreted, cashed out, and finessed): equality (especially of respect, and of opportunity); freedom (from slavery or other external force, and freedom to participate); what’s been known – since Aristotle – as the ‘wisdom of crowds’ (some people are smarter, more committed, more persuasive etc etc than others, but – throw as many persons’ opinions as possible into the mix and the resulting compromise agreement is likely to be as good or a better decision than one achieved by just one or a few persons); democracy of necessity uniquely fosters the four cardinal virtues both individually and more especially collectively (prudence, justice, courage/fortitude, and temperance/self-control); finally, negatively, as Prime Minister Churchill memorably put it, democracy is the least worst system of governance out of all those that have so far been tried!

Q20. Lately with students I’ve been discussing literature / culture from the 1920s, Fitzgerald’s Great Gatsby, Hemingway stories, the Harlem Renaissance… We were talking about how our era shares a lot of scary stuff from the 1920s -- the rise of fascism and nationalism,militarism, economic problems, and more? Lenin started the idea of the one-party vanguard state, and although he considered that to be a form of democracy, it was anything but liberal. The governments of China and Russia and others today hate any form of, and especially liberal Western-style, democracy. How fragile are our Western democracies? Is this authoritarian or fascist streak gaining ground around the world?  

A. Very fragile, and yes, they are increasingly under threat globally, both externally and sadly, internally, from authoritarian or neofascist regimes. If I may, I would like to bring the debate much closer to home—that is, your home in the USA and mine in the UK. Was (ex-President) Donald Trump behind the January 6, 2021, insurrection and assault on the Capitol?The jury is still officially out, but the evidence is increasingly conclusive that he was. Likewise, there is surely little doubt that his other legal attempts to reverse the actual popular vote of November 2020 were similarly motivated, namely by a fierce desire not to surrender the exceptional powers entrusted to a US President in office and, above all, not to make himself vulnerable to due legal retribution for any crimes or misdemeanours he may have committed in or when seeking office. On my side of the pond, if on a far smaller scale, ex-Prime Minister Boris Johnson (trained as a classicalist) was the first PM in UK history to have been found guilty of a criminal offence and fined for it. But it is rather his reckless desire to ride roughshod over longstanding parliamentary conventions as well as over formal legal constitutional rules that concerned and still concerns me most as a Democrat. In both those individual cases, the norms, rules, and laws of democracy as currently framed seem to have triumphed. But for the future...

Q21. What about the misnamed countries with democracy in the title but which are totalitarian states? Or the democracies with antidemocratic qualities? It’s confusing out there! Can you comment on this?

A. The ‘People’s Democracies’ usually are or were not at all democratic: the People’s Republic of (Communist) China or the late and unlamented GDR (German Democratic Republic a.k.a. ‘East Germany’ – 1949–91) are classic cases. And those two are or were undemocratic for the same reason: ‘the People’ has been substituted politically by the (vanguard) Party, members of which are nominated and self-appointed and not responsible or accountable to the (real) People. To call the system ‘totalitarian’ is a rather more tricky issue conceptually, however, since the word implies that every political decision affecting individual and collective prosperity is taken centrally, hierarchically, and unidirectionally. Not even ‘absolute’ monarchs, however, actually wielded absolute power.

Q22. Overpopulation, climate change, the rise of technology, wealth inequality around the world, entertainment culture, and so on and so forth—what of those is a danger to democracy?

A. All of the above! But not only to democracy and democracies, of course. Climate change threatens us all alike with extinction. If by ‘entertainment culture’ is meant or included’social media’, then, alas, yes, the promised egalitarian and educational benefits of the online world have been overbalanced by fiercely regressive, antidemocratic exploitation.

Q23. What can each of us do to promote democracy, whether representative or direct?

A. Oscar Wilde, an Anglo-Irish writer, critic, and political activist (also classically educated), once observed that the trouble with socialism was that it took too many free evenings. Ditto democracy, or, at any rate, democratic activism. Since party politics seems to be here to stay for as long as representative democracy does, active membership in the local branch of a national political party is one obvious way to promote it. Another, purely modern way is to start and promote an online campaign, either as an individual or as hosted by an activist organization such as (in the UK) the New Citizenship Project. If by chance one’s campaign gains tens of thousands of supporters, even over 100,000, the UK government is obliged to hold an open debate on the topic, which might be a cultural-political issue such as the reunification back in Athens of all the Parthenon Marbles currently held outside (e.g., in the British Museum) or a definitionally political issue such as Brexit.

Q24. Do you have any favorite films, books, organizations, or people that promote direct democracy / democracy in general?

A. If I may interpret your question loosely: Aristophanes’s comedy Wasps (422 BC/E) is a brilliant satire on the workings of Athenian democratic justice, but its underlying message is that doing public-political community service as a juror was of the essence of being a democrat. If it’s the culture of modern democracy, its egalitarian spirit, that one is looking for, then US poet Walt (‘Leaves of Grass’) Whitman (1819–1892) and his Democratic Vistas (1871) are your men. Still, alas, of our own time and for our own time are George Orwell’s Animal Farm (1945) and 1984 (1949), which magnificently, terrifyingly, bear out Churchill’s ‘least worst’ dictum quoted above.

Q25. The future. It’s hard to see anything positive in most sci-fi literature and movies. Governments imagined there are often totalitarian and oligarchic. Do artists serve as radar—feeling and seeing something dreadful ahead? Are they warning us?

A. Apologies, but I must recuse myself here. My experience of sci-fi in any form is nugatory. But to use another analogy, independent, creative artists in all media may be likened to the topmost branches of a tree, which, in a storm, are the first to shake, bend, and even possibly break, giving advance notice of even greater change and either renewal or destruction to come down below.

Revolutionizing Archaeology: The Big Exchange Project Maps Humanity's Prehistoric Networks

Ancient Roots: A Promising New Project to Organize Humanity’s Universal Heritage

An international group of researchers and data scientists are creating a comprehensive database of the world’s archaeological knowledge—and changing our understanding of humans’ prehistoric heritage.

---

By Eric Laursen

---

Archaeology isn’t what it was in Indiana Jones’s heyday. The traditional image of the khaki-clad researcher scrambling over an excavation site with rock hammer and camel-hair brush has been supplemented by aerial and satellite photography, CT scanners and 3D modeling, and lidar that can isolate the smallest details of long-buried settlements. What archaeologists do with the artifacts and data they gather is changing dramatically as well, as they use network science and new software tools to map the complex connections between regional economic networks in the millennia before written history.

With this new, technology-driven approach, researchers can form a far more comprehensive picture of early communities’ ties with other human clusters, sometimes thousands of miles away, by examining the goods and raw materials they exchanged and tracing these from their points of origin to the far-flung places where they were abandoned and then rediscovered centuries later. This is yielding additional insights into social inequality and power relations within communities, differences and similarities between communities living next to each other, and patterns of migration and settlement.

“You get more of a sense of a dynamic,” says Tim Kerig, an archaeologist at Kiel University’s ROOTS Cluster of Excellence in Social, Environmental, and Cultural Connectivity in Past Societies, in Germany, “of people coming from other places and how, over the generations, they filled that landscape. So we’re looking at the whole system, over not centuries but millennia.”

Network science is the study of complex relationships—and probable relationships—between physical, biological, social, and cognitive phenomena. Applying network science to archaeology was an idea in the minds of researchers as far back as the 1960s, says Kerig, whose own work focuses on the European Neolithic period—from about 8000 BC to 2000 BC—and the evolution of social inequalities. But while interest grew in succeeding decades, archaeologists lacked the tools to easily collate and analyze the millions of data points that had been gathered over many decades. The few efforts to do so proceeded punishingly slowly, on top of which there was less interest at the time in exploring the connections that material and economic exchanges between far-flung communities could reveal.

“Sociological questions were mostly answered by looking at goods that were found in graves—the’sphere of kings’—which tended to be highly valued luxury items,” Kerig says, while archaeologists were less interested in “the daily stuff”: fragments of flint or stone objects or implements that made up the fabric of most people’s everyday lives. This was partly due to an overabundance of these humbler items. “Don’t forget that at a Stone Age site in Denmark, for example, you might have 100,000 artifacts to deal with, and they all look to most of us exactly the same.”

“Big Exchange” is the name of a project that an international cluster of scholars and data scientists, including Kerig, launched in 2020 with the aim of using digital tools to break down the barriers to applying network science to archaeology. The most critical hurdle they faced was overspecialization. Traditionally, archaeologists have focused on specific objects or raw materials—amber, obsidian, jade, flint, and other metals—rather than the totality of findings at a given site, which prevented them from seeing the totality of that community’s networks of exchange. Big Exchange’s first objective is to create a database that collates all these materials and makes them available for more sophisticated, cross-referenced study and analysis.

“The approach of our project is to include all recordable raw materials, their locations, and places of origin in the analysis for the period from the end of the Middle Stone Age [or Mesolithic, 10,000 years ago] to Antiquity,” Johanna Hilpert, a Big Exchange postdoc researcher at the ROOTS Cluster, told Phys.org in July 2023. “This can only be done by means of network analysis and with AI [artificial intelligence].”

A Deeper, More Granular Understanding

As of July 2023, Big Exchange has already collected data from 6,000 sites from which millions of artifacts have been recovered and expects to complete the task in another two and a half years. The objective is to collect and digitize as much information as possible and establish classifications for all of it—for example, by site location, time period, and how far a material was found from its place of origin.

Establishing the database itself has not proven to be an easy task. Some of the source data for Big Exchange had already been digitized in some form; some of it is being digitized for the first time. It quickly became clear that the way researchers analyze these findings has changed over the past hundred years, “and so you can imagine all kinds of technical problems,” Kerig says.

Big Exchange used PostgreSQL, a common relational database management system. Working bottom-up, they started by inputting the individual datasets, developing the formal structure of the database, including comparisons of attributes and concepts, as they went along. Once all existing data is integrated, the database can be used by researchers working to reconstruct long-vanished economic and social networks.

But the project is already producing results. One study, published this year in the journal Antiquity, analyzed the geographic expansion of one of the most studied Neolithic cultures, the Linear Pottery culture (LPC), that extended from roughly the present-day Netherlands to the Black Sea and flourished from about 5500 BC to 4500 BC.

Applying a heterogeneous information network (HIN) analysis—a sophisticated graphic model that can map the relationships between diverse but interconnected sets of data—to raw materials in circulation at the time, researchers were able to detect differences in material culture between the northwest subgroup of the LPC and other subgroups that surrounded it. For example, sites associated with the northwest group contained no shells of Spondylus, a bivalve mollusk, that were a prestige good in Neolithic burial sites farther east in the Carpathian Mountains.

Previously, researchers assumed this was because of poor preservation conditions in the area that the northwest group occupied. But HIN mapping revealed that the region lacking Spondylus shells was much wider than the area where preservation was difficult and that it contained a good supply of flint that had originated much farther west. This suggested that the blend of raw materials used by the northwestern group wasn’t dictated by local availability but by cultural or economic choice, linking the group to exchange networks that other LPC subgroups didn’t participate in, in spite of the fact that those other subgroups were close neighbors.

The HIN analysis allowed the Big Exchange researchers to develop a deeper, more granular understanding of the LPC—a culture that archaeologists thought they had already acquired a detailed knowledge of—that teases out previously undetected cultural and economic differences between subgroups.

Combining Big Exchange’s practice of looking at all the objects found at a particular excavation site with its focus on networks of exchange, the project is also producing new insights into inequality and power relations within groups. “The meaning of these objects changes depending on the regional and chronological context,” says Kerig. For instance, a fragile item found in a protective leather wrapping with no evident practical use will tend to come from a greater distance than more common items, indicating that a distant origin and the difficulty of obtaining it conferred a prestige value on the object. A large finding of such objects would indicate that an elite was emerging in the community connected with that site.

Clearing Away Cultural Bias

Already, however, the researchers are confronting limitations in the data they are collecting—limitations that point to larger issues. The vast majority of known archaeological sites outside the Americas are in Europe and, to a lesser extent, the Near East—a comparatively small area—with far fewer elsewhere, Kerig notes. Exchange networks in the Neolithic era certainly stretched far beyond these two regions. The more connections revealed by projects like Big Exchange, the more urgent will be the need to expand excavation and recovery into other parts of Eurasia; one goal of Big Exchange is to offer guidance as to where the most promising sites might be located.

Cultural bias is another issue. “We are not only collating datasets; we are also collating the authors of the datasets,” Kerig says. For some sites that he and his colleagues wanted to include, no actual data is available; perhaps research began in those areas but then was interrupted, or else documentation was lost during wartime, and all that remains are published or unpublished writings, often with less quantitative content and heavily informed by the preconceptions of the time. While evidence can be teased out of these sources, it has to be handled with care.

“These more qualitative things are very, very important—perhaps worth more than the actual datasets,” says Kerig. “But we meet regularly to discuss these things, and it’s new for all of us. I would expect that we will get a bloody nose if we don’t.” This is where technologies like artificial intelligence could become more useful in the future by helping researchers tease out valid observations from the mass of culturally biased material.

Big Exchange’s most pressing challenge, however, is keeping the project going. The painstaking work of inputting and mapping data into the project’s evolving database is currently being carried out by students at the Kiel ROOTS Cluster. “It’s a very labor-intensive thing,” says Kerig. He is now looking for a long-term home for Big Exchange that can host its growing data-analytic treasure trove and make it available to archaeologists and other investigators in the coming decades.

But he remains hopeful about Big Exchange’s future. “I am pretty sure that something is coming in this direction,” he says.

---

Eric Laursen is an independent journalist, historian, and activist. He is the author of The People’s Pension, The Duty to Stand Aside, and The Operating System. His work has appeared in a wide variety of publications, including In These Times, the Nation, and the Arkansas Review. He lives in Buckland, Massachusetts.

Source: Independent Media Institute

This article was produced by Human Bridges, a project of the Independent Media Institute.

Discovery of a Prehistoric Monument Shrouded in Mystery

In a profound archaeological endeavor, the esteemed scholars of the French National Institute of Preventive Archaeological Research (INRAP) embarked on a voyage of discovery within the idyllic commune of Marliens, nestled in the eastern reaches of France, a mere stone's throw—nine miles, to be precise—from the bustling city of Dijon.

The fruit of their labor yielded not merely artifacts but a veritable tapestry of human existence, spanning epochs from the dawn of the Neolithic era to the twilight of the Iron Age. Yet, amidst this rich tableau of antiquity, one singular structure emerged, shrouded in an enigma as dense as the mists that cloak its ancient form.

At the heart of the excavation site lies a monument, its design a testament to a bygone era's ingenuity and vision. A circular bastion, measuring a formidable 36 feet in diameter, stands as the focal point, encircled by the embrace of two satellite enclosures. To the north, a sinuous horseshoe-shaped enclave extends, while to the south, a square with softly rounded corners projects its silent sentinel.

This triad of architectural prowess presents a puzzle that defies easy solutions. The monument's purpose, its raison d'être, remains veiled in the mists of time, resisting the probing inquiries of modern scholars. Although flint artifacts, relics of a bygone age, whisper tantalizing clues to its Neolithic origins, the monument's true antiquity remains an enigma.

In the annals of archaeological inquiry, such a discovery stands as a rarity—a testament to the enduring mysteries of our ancient past. INRAP, in its solemn pronouncements, acknowledges the unprecedented nature of this find, noting with measured awe the absence of comparables within the known corpus of ancient structures.

As the excavation proceeds, meticulous efforts are underway to unlock the secrets held within the monument's weathered stones. Radiocarbon dating, a beacon of scientific inquiry, promises to illuminate the murky depths of time, providing a precise chronology to this hitherto elusive relic.

Yet, the monument is but one facet of a larger tableau—a tableau replete with artifacts that bear witness to the ebb and flow of human civilization. Artifacts attributed to the Bell Beaker culture, dating back over four millennia, stand as testament to ancient craftsmanship and trade. Wells, silent sentinels of the Bronze Age, hold within their clay-laden depths echoes of a distant past, offering glimpses into the lives and landscapes of antiquity.

But the excavation does not end there, for beyond the confines of the monument lie further marvels—a necropolis, its silent halls adorned with the remnants of rituals long past. Copper alloy pins, rare ceramics, and a necklace of amber beads speak volumes of a culture steeped in reverence for the departed.

And yet, there is more—a second necropolis, its sepulchral halls echoing with the whispers of cremated remains and ornamental artifacts. Here, in this hallowed ground, the Iron Age asserts its presence, leaving behind traces of a civilization poised on the cusp of history's inexorable march.

In the quietude of Marliens, amidst the rustle of leaves and the whisper of wind, this prehistoric marvel stands as a testament to the resilience of the human spirit—a beacon of light illuminating the shadowy recesses of our ancient past.

An Ancient Recipe for Social Success

---

By Linda M. Nicholas and Gary M. Feinman

---

New evidence and understandings about the structure of successful early societies across Asia, Africa, and the Western Hemisphere are sweeping away the popular assumption that early societies tended toward autocracy and despotism.

Archaeology has a more valuable story to tell: Collective action and localized economic production are a recipe for sustainability and broader well-being. The Mesoamerican city of Monte Albán, which was a major regional urban center for 1,300 years, is a shining example. It is a powerful case study that shows that early investments in public infrastructure and goods foster longer-term sustainability.

There is a rich vein of insight here for some of the most pressing challenges faced by humanity: billions of people living in poverty and collapsing social structures in the developing world. Additionally, the flaws in our political and economic models are making many people in the wealthy industrialized world more and more disillusioned.

But if we’re going to use models from the ancient past, can we be confident about how early societies really operated?

Researchers have begun to identify archaeological evidence that works as an indicator for political and social behaviors and institutions.

●      Is there evidence of extreme wealth disparity or equality in lifestyle or burial?

●      Does monumental architecture foster exclusivity (elite tombs, aggrandizing monuments, evidence of dynastic legitimation) or access (e.g., open plazas, wide access ways, community temples)?

●      Are palaces prominent, or is it not clear where the leader resided?

●      Does art emphasize lineal descent, divine kingship, and royal patron deities, or does it feature more abstract themes such as fertility or integrative cosmological principles?

There is a lot we can determine from a society’s tendency toward the first or second option in each of these questions about whether it is more autocratic or associated with collective/good governance.

In a study of 26 early urban centers in Mesoamerica, Monte Albán was one of 12 that was characterized as a collectively organized city based on a series of indicators. Prior to the city’s abandonment, Monte Albán was not highly unequal: there were few, if any, lavish tombs, no great caches of household riches or other evidence of extreme wealth differences, and no large, ornate palace that was unequivocally the ruler’s residence.

From early in the site’s history, the city’s core was centered on a large plaza that could have accommodated a significant proportion of the site’s population. Flattening the hill’s rocky top and then defining and creating this large open space entailed planning, coordination, and cooperation. Until very late in the city’s history, material representations of rulers were relatively rare, and there is an overall lack of ruler aggrandizement. During the city’s first four centuries (500–100 BCE), there were few depictions of seemingly important individuals or leaders. Rule was largely faceless.

How did it happen?

In this light, let’s travel to the early sedentary villages (c. 1500–500 BCE) in the Valley of Oaxaca—the largest expanse of flat land in Mexico’s Southern Highlands. They were situated on or near well-watered land.

Around 500 BCE, however, a new hilltop center, Monte Albán, was established at the nexus of the valley’s three arms, where agriculture was far riskier due to unreliable rainfall and a dearth of permanent water sources. During the era of its establishment, not only was Monte Albán larger than any earlier community in the region, but many other settlers moved into the rural area around Monte Albán.

This marked shift in settlement patterns and the underlying processes associated with the foundation of Monte Albán have long been debated. How can we account for the immigration of people, some likely from beyond the region itself, to an area where they faced greater risks of crop failure?

One perspective, reliant on uniform models of premodern states as despotic, viewed the process from a basically top-down lens: leaders coerced their subjects to move near the capital to provide sustenance for the new center.

Yet more recent research has found that governance at Monte Albán was generally more collective than autocratic, and in its growth period, productive activities were collective, centered in domestic units, and not managed from above.

By the time Monte Albán was established in the Valley of Oaxaca, more than a thousand years had passed since foragers transitioned from mobile lifeways to sedentary communities. Maize, beans, and squash, which had been domesticated prior to village formation, were key elements of an agricultural economy, with maize providing the bulk of calories. Early villagers also exploited a mosaic of other natural resources including clay for making ceramic vessels and figurines, stone for making tools and ornaments, and plant materials for processing into a range of woven products.

The shift to sedentary life was a long social process through which formerly dispersed populations not only adjusted but also committed to living in larger communities and interacting with more people on a daily basis.

The Valley of Oaxaca has a climate that is semiarid, rainfall is unpredictable and spatially patchy across the region, and not all sectors of the valley floor receive the minimum annual precipitation necessary for reliable rainfall farming of maize, the region’s staple and culturally most important crop.

The prime factor that determines the productivity of maize is the availability of water, and a diversity of water management practices have been used since prehispanic times. These manipulations, which increase agricultural yields, include wells and pot irrigation, check dams, and small-scale canals, all of which were easily managed or implemented at the household level.

The Valley of Oaxaca was a core political-economic region. Prior to Monte Albán’s founding, most of the populace resided in one of three clusters of settlements that were separated from the others by largely unoccupied areas, including the center of the valley where Monte Albán was later situated. In each arm, a cluster of smaller communities surrounded one larger settlement that had special functions and served as the “head towns” of small competing polities.

This millennial pattern was broken when Monte Albán was built on a steep hilltop in the center of the valley. The settlement’s establishment and rapid growth in size and monumentality set off a dynamic episode of innovation and change that included demographic, dietary, and other economic shifts. Populations grew rapidly not only at the new center, which became the largest and most monumental city in the valley’s early history, but also in the surrounding countryside. The center and rural communities were integrated through an emergent market network that provisioned the city.

This dramatic episode of change required the coordination of labor to build the new city. The rocky hilltop was flattened into a large main plaza with monumental buildings constructed along its edges. The scale and orientation of this central plaza represent a key transition from prior community plans in the region. Residences for the city’s burgeoning population were constructed on the steep slopes of the hill by creating flattened spaces, or terraces, shored up by stone and earthen retaining walls, each of which sustained a domestic unit.

The allocation of the hill’s apex for civic-ceremonial space and the lower slopes for commoner residences was a blueprint for a broad social accord. Built environments are not neutral but political, and Monte Albán’s footprint with a large, relatively open central space and little display of hierarchical leaders points to a collective arrangement.

The city’s concentrated residential precincts comprised strings of artificially flattened terraces that shared long retaining walls. Construction of the terraces required allotments of domestic labor to clear trees, flatten steep inclinations, erect stone walls to retain flat spaces where houses would be built, and construct drainage channels to divert rainwater from living spaces. The construction, sharing, and maintenance of front retaining walls involved high degrees of interhousehold cooperation between neighbors.

Additionally, commoners adopted construction techniques and basic ceramic wares that were previously the domain of high-status families. In the early city, most houses included contiguous rooms with plaster floors, often constructed around a patio; they were built with adobe bricks on stone foundations instead of the mud and thatch typical of earlier commoner houses. The pottery wares that previously were largely used by higher-status families or as ceremonial vessels became more broadly distributed in the centuries after Monte Albán was established. This level of cooperation and coordination is evidence of a social charter or norms, in which a wider array of residents had access to what previously had been higher-status materials and goods.

No large-scale production has been uncovered, and there is no indication of central-governmental food storage at Monte Albán, as one might expect with top-down economic control or redistribution.

Economic production at Monte Albán was situated in domestic contexts. Instead of being coerced to move to Monte Albán, people were attracted to the city. Monte Albán was settled by a sizable group, possibly as large as 1,000 people, and rapidly grew to about 5,000 people within a few hundred years. Populations also increased in the rural areas around Monte Albán, and the annual rate of population growth in the valley exceeded what could have been maintained by natural increase alone. Populations expanded again in and around Monte Albán after c. 300 BCE. The threefold growth was too large to be accounted for by local, “natural growth,” so people must have been drawn to Monte Albán and the valley from more distant, extra-regional locations.

Evidence indicates that the agricultural catchment for feeding Monte Albán likely extended 20 kilometers from the city. The market and exchange networks that moved food to the city created a high degree of interconnection among small settlements and Monte Albán. This interdependence required cooperation, infrastructure, and institutions that together provided the means of moving food and distributing seasonal surpluses.

Prior to Monte Albán, early “head towns” were generally positioned adjacent to good farmland. But the new city was located in an area of the valley where agriculture was riskier and largely dependent on unpredictable rainfall. Why would people move to a place where they faced a high risk of crop failure, where they could have been taxed more highly, and where, if governance were coercive, they had little voice? Such a scenario seems improbable, and it is far more likely that people moved to Monte Albán to take advantage of economic opportunities, a parallel to most migrants in the world today.

---

Linda M. Nicholas is an adjunct curator of anthropology at the Negaunee Integrative Research Center at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, Illinois. Gary M. Feinman is the MacArthur curator of Mesoamerican, Central American, and East Asian anthropology, also at the Negaunee Integrative Research Center.

This article was produced by Human Bridges, a project of the Independent Media Institute.

Stone carvings discovered within the caves of China's Longmen Grottoes

Deep within the mystical depths of China's Longmen Grottoes, a UNESCO World Heritage site nestled in central Henan Province, archaeologists have unveiled a treasure trove of stone carvings and architectural remnants.

Amidst the labyrinthine chambers of the Leigutai caves, concealed within the west wall of the south cave, lie more than 80 remarkable artifacts, a testament to the rich tapestry of history woven into these ancient caverns.

This groundbreaking discovery marks the first instance of stone carvings being unearthed within the confines of the Longmen Grottoes. Lu Wei, director of the history and humanities research center at the Longmen Grottoes research institute, heralds this find as a milestone in archaeological exploration.

Leigutai, situated at the southern terminus of the grottoes' Dongshan area, harbors three caverns and numerous niches dotting the cliffside. Among the treasures unearthed are the remarkably intact head of a Buddha, standing at 38 centimeters in height and 22 centimeters in width, alongside fragments of Bodhisattva statues and intricate rosettes and patterns.

This undated file photo shows a Buddha head found inside the west wall of the south cave of Leigutai caves in Longmen Grottoes in Luoyang, central China's Henan Province. Archaeologists have discovered more than 80 stone carvings and building components inside the Leigutai caves in Longmen Grottoes, a UNESCO World Heritage site, in central China's Henan Province.

(Longmen Grottoes research institute/Handout via Xinhua)

Through meticulous analysis, researchers deduce that these relics were meticulously stacked and embedded into the cave wall during the mid to late Ming Dynasty, serving as materials for the repair and fortification of the caverns.

Lu emphasizes the significance of these findings, underscoring their invaluable contribution to the study of Tang Dynasty stone carving art, the historical narrative of the Leigutai caves, and insights into ancient maintenance and restoration practices.

As archaeologists meticulously unearth and examine these ancient wonders, the Leigutai caves stand as a beacon illuminating the timeless allure of China's cultural heritage.

This undated file photo shows a staff member cleaning a Buddha head unearthed from Leigutai caves in Longmen Grottoes in Luoyang, central China's Henan Province. Archaeologists have discovered more than 80 stone carvings and building components inside the Leigutai caves in Longmen Grottoes, a UNESCO World Heritage site, in central China's Henan Province.

(Longmen Grottoes research institute/Handout via Xinhua)

The sprawling metropolis constructed on a large rock was described as a lost city built with sophisticated technology

Discover the enigmatic marvel of Sigiriya, an ancient metropolis perched atop a colossal rock in Sri Lanka. Archeologists remain astounded by its sprawling ruins, pondering the utilization of advanced technology in its construction.

Sigiriya, often dubbed the 'Lion's Rock', boasts a labyrinth of galleries and staircases leading to its summit, where the remnants of King Kassapa's capital stand proudly. The granite peak, rising 180 meters high, offers a vantage point veiled in jungle, a testament to the architectural prowess of its creators.

This architectural wonder, hailed as the 8th wonder of the world, entices thousands of tourists annually, drawing them to explore its ancient palace and fortress. Carved into the slopes of an extinct volcano, Sigiriya stands elevated, its rocky plateau towering above the surrounding forest.

The site's allure extends beyond its sheer magnitude, with frescoes adorning its western walls, offering a glimpse into the past. Among them, an iconic depiction of a woman, believed to be Kassapa's wife or a priestess, evokes intrigue and admiration for its historical significance.

The ruins contain many frescoes, a brick lion and mirrored walls (Image: Getty Images/iStockphoto)

Yet, perhaps the most captivating feature lies within its mirrored walls, reflecting not just the king's image but also the echoes of a bygone era. Inscribed with ancient poems and scripts dating back centuries, they echo the voices of past visitors, affirming Sigiriya's status as a timeless tourist destination.

Unveiling Viking Women's Cranial Mysteries: The Enigmatic Legacy of Skull Modification

Delving into the depths of Viking history, researchers have uncovered a remarkable aspect of cultural interaction: intentional cranial modification among Viking women. While the notion of filing teeth for various purposes is not uncommon in ancient civilizations, the discovery of deliberately reshaped skulls among Viking remains adds a fascinating layer to our understanding of their society.

In a study led by Matthias Toplak of the Viking Museum Haithabu and Lukas Kerk of the Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster, skulls from the island of Gotland in the Baltic Sea were scrutinized. Among them, three adult women's skulls exhibited distinct oblong shapes, a result of intentional cranial modification practiced around 1,000 years ago. Published in Current Swedish Archaeology, this finding sheds new light on Viking interactions with diverse cultures.

The practice of cranial modification, though observed in various regions globally and still present in isolated communities today, had not been associated with Viking culture until now. Toplak suggests that Vikings might have adopted this practice during their trade expeditions.

People are able to reshape skulls using bandages on infant heads. © SHM/JOHNNY KARLSON/CC BY 2.5 SE

While the exact origin of these women remains uncertain, DNA analysis indicates their Baltic Sea heritage. It's plausible that their cranial modification occurred in regions like the Black Sea, where such practices were common, before returning to Gotland. The elongation of their skulls likely involved wrapping bandages around infants' heads during their formative years.

In modern times, medical professionals like Chief Jesse Goldstein of UPMC Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh find parallels between historical skull modification and contemporary corrective measures for infant skull deformities. Although passive methods like bandaging likely had minimal impact on cognitive development, more forceful techniques could potentially pose risks.

The significance of these cone-shaped skulls among Viking women suggests they may have symbolized status or commercial success, rather than royal lineage. Their distinctive appearance would have distinguished them as individuals with extensive trade connections and perhaps societal influence.

Toplak speculates that these modified skulls might have conveyed ideals of beauty or membership in elite social circles, or possibly both. Regardless, they serve as tangible evidence of cultural exchange and the multifaceted meanings behind physical modifications throughout history.

A scarce discovery of a Tasmanian Devil tooth has been made in an Australian gorge.

Recent discoveries in the Juukan Gorge rock shelter in Western Australia, infamous for its destruction by Rio Tinto in 2020, have unveiled significant archaeological treasures. Among these finds is a rare Tasmanian Devil tooth, marking the first such discovery on the mainland in over 3,000 years.

The Tasmanian Devil, a formidable carnivorous marsupial and once a dominant predator on Australia's southern island, vanished from the mainland approximately 3,500 years ago.

This excavation, conducted as part of a remediation agreement between Rio Tinto and the Puutu Kunti Kurrama and Pinikura (PKKP) peoples, offers fresh insights into human history spanning at least 46,000 years, according to a statement by the PKKP Aboriginal Corporation.

These recent findings complement previous excavations in 2008 and 2014, which unearthed remarkable artifacts such as a segment of braided human hair dating back roughly 5,000 years. Notably, this discovery revealed a genetic connection to present-day Aboriginal populations residing in the Pilbara region.

The excavation will continue for 12 months.

CREDIT:SCARP ARCHAEOLOGY AND PKKP ABORIGINAL CORPORATION

Rivers of Life: The Foundation of Ancient Civilizations

---

By Dimosthenis Vasiloudis

---

In the annals of human history, few phenomena have shaped our development as profoundly as the advent of river valley civilizations. These early societies, which emerged along the fertile banks of the world’s great rivers, laid the groundwork for the complex tapestry of modern human culture. The rivers of the Tigris-Euphrates, Indus, Nile, and Yellow River were not merely bodies of water; they were the cradles of civilization, fostering advancements that echo through the ages.

The Hydraulic Cornerstone of Prosperity

Water is more than a mere necessity for survival; it has been the keystone of prosperity throughout human history. The Tigris and Euphrates, nurturing Mesopotamia; the steadfast Nile, cradling Egypt; the bountiful Indus, sustaining the Harappan civilization; and the fortifying Yellow River, cradling China's early dynasties—all played central roles in the economic and agricultural systems that supported these ancient societies. The predictable flooding cycles of these rivers not only deposited nutrient-rich silt onto the plains, perfect for crop cultivation, but also fostered the creation of irrigation techniques, propelling these communities into the forefront of agricultural innovation.

A map illustrating the earliest stages of human civilization spanning from c. 8000 BCE to 2000 BCE. It showcases the emergence of organized societies, agricultural practices, and the origins of urbanization. by Simeon Netchev

The reliability of water sources enabled these civilizations to shift from subsistence lifestyles to surplus-based economies. Surpluses in turn fueled trade, both internally and with distant lands, leading to the accumulation of wealth and the expansion of influence. The rivers, thus, were the ancient superhighways along which goods, ideas, and cultural practices flowed, knitting together diverse communities in a web of economic interdependence.

Cultural and Social Stratification through Agriculture

These civilizations underwent a significant social shift thanks to the abundance the rivers provided. The transition from nomadic hunter-gatherer groups to settled agriculturalists brought about a new era of complexity. Farming created the need for territoriality and the management of resources, leading to the establishment of property rights and social hierarchies. Agricultural surplus allowed some members of society to pursue endeavors beyond farming, giving rise to specialized trades and the concept of occupational specialization.

This stratification was mirrored in the emergence of social classes and governance structures. From the rulers who claimed divine rights to the laborers bound to the soil, each person had a role within a system that depended on the consistent bounty of the river. It was this very stratification that laid the foundations for political entities and institutionalized power dynamics that are recognizable precursors to modern governance.

View fullsize

View fullsize

The Spiritual Tapestry Woven by Rivers

The early river valley civilizations were deeply spiritual societies with belief systems that imbued the natural world with divine significance. Rivers, in particular, were seen as the embodiment of gods or as gifts from the divine, essential not only for life but also for the spiritual well-being of the community. The annual floods of the Nile, the changing courses of the Tigris and Euphrates, and the vastness of the Indus were all seen as manifestations of the gods’ will, and their rhythms dictated the ceremonial cycles of these peoples.

These belief systems provided more than comfort; they offered explanations for the inexplicable and established moral codes that bound the community together. Rituals and religious ceremonies not only appeased the deities but also reinforced the social hierarchy, affirming the power of priests and rulers. Thus, the rivers shaped not only the physical landscape but also the metaphysical worldview of the societies they nurtured.

The Diverse Legacies of the River Valley Civilizations

The legacies of the four great river valley civilizations are as distinct as they are similar. Each civilization harnessed the potential of their respective rivers to build societies that, in turn, contributed unique advancements to the human story. Mesopotamia's Tigris and Euphrates enabled the flourishing of cities and the invention of writing, which revolutionized communication. The societal order and agricultural efficiency it introduced set a blueprint for urban development and administration.

The Nile’s consistency allowed Egypt to become a land of architectural marvels and profound cultural depth. Its pyramids, temples, and tombs reflect an unparalleled precision and grandeur, encapsulating the Egyptian understanding of eternity and their reverence for the afterlife. The advanced urban planning and metallurgical skills of the Indus Valley civilization demonstrate a keen understanding of urban needs and craftsmanship. China’s Yellow River saw the dawn of an agricultural revolution that would lead to some of the most enduring philosophies and cultural practices that continue to influence East Asia.

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

The Enduring Influence of River Civilizations

In conclusion, these ancient river valley civilizations provided the blueprint for the societal, cultural, and technological advances that we often take for granted today. They showed us the power of harnessing the natural environment for agriculture, the strength of social structures in maintaining order, and the value of spiritual beliefs in unifying a community. As we reflect on the significance of these ancient civilizations, we are reminded of our shared humanity and the continuous thread of innovation and adaptation