Over the last several years, the numbers of relevant fossils have One can now, for the first time, start increased dramatically. This slide to talk about sample size and criteria for selection. shows Don Johanson at Hadar in Ethiopia. From one limited time period he's discovered remains from 36 individuals who were possibly members of a single social group. In her testimony submitted to this committee, Dr. Clark discussed "Homo afarensis", a newly described species which is now the earliest form of human known. The Hadar finds provide the material on which the species is based. The next two slides illustrate not only why human origins research has advanced the way it has, but also why some aspects of it are so time-consuming. The real secret to its success lies in carefully organized and integrated multidisciplinary research. One of the things such an approach does is allow for the more efficient search for fossils. This slide shows how paleomagnetic reversal data from the Siwalik Hills in Pakistan can be used to isolate just those strata in which early australopithecine remains might be found. This permits effective concentration of search effort. At long intervals the North and South poles periodically reverse their position and geophysicists can isolate strata which date to individual magnetic periods. Other techniques permit one to establish absolute chronologies, and to make tentative reconstructions to show what the landscape looked like when these early hominids were roaming over it. This slide presents a detailed, though of course, tentative reconstruction of the East Turkana landscape as it was in 14708" time. The gray shaded area in the smaller of the two insets shows the relevant stratum left today, and the large inset presents the reconstruction derived from it. It's only in this way that we can begin to understand the lifestyle of these early hominids and the selective forces which acted on them. - at a A second basic question that anthropologists ask is how technologically simple level people relate to and make use of their environment. I'd like to use examples from this area termed "Ecological Anthropology" to show how good basic research can also yield information with direct utility in developing nations. What we are learning in Central America is really intriguing because it is 80 unexpected. Anthropologists have long been interested in the Mayan empire, how it rose, functioned, and then very rapidly declined. Mayans lived in relatively large groups and it has been difficult to understand how such high population densities could be maintained in lowland tropical environments. Many of these same areas today are uninhabited. In the last several years, aerial photographs have revealed extensive field systems, in some cases directly associated with classic Mayan sites. The raised fields and intervening water filled ditches are associated with terraces and agricultural features as well as house mounds. Dr. Robert Turner from Oklahoma and Bruce Dahlin from Catholic University are two of a number of scientists trying to figure out how these raised fields worked and what was grown on them. It appears that most had a layer of crushed limestone, which may have acted as fertilizer, and it has been hypothesized that the canals may have been used to raise fish. Thus, research directed to understanding the development and requirements for maintaining a complex society has potential for producing very practical information. In fact, the Mexican government has begun an experimental program to reintroduce raised field agriculture, and raised fields are working successfully in several places in lowland Mexico. Many (in fact, most) ecological studies are focused on the ethnographic present. Anthropologists from SUNY--Binghamton are currently engaged in a long-term study of Turkana pastoralists of Northern Kenya. This region has a basically Sahelian environment the same as that of drought-plagued Western and Central Africa, where malnutrition and starvation are so prevalent. Livestock - - cattle, goats, sheep, camels lie at the core of a pastoralist's life. Social organization and values are centered around the herds. In an area such as Turkana, it would not be hard for a western range management expert to devise a successful ranching strategy. But it would very difficult if not impossible to graft such a western approach to a Turkana base, as the people would never accept it. On the other hand, pastoralists have successfully occupied Sahelian environments for thousands of years; the archaeological data makes clear. They have developed mechanisms for survival in these arid areas. Current research should not only provide more detailed knowledge of how these mechanisms work, but also provide a basis for sensible and sensitive expenditures by organizations such as AID, whose Sahel Development Program is budgeted at $100 million dollars in the current fiscal year. Mr. BROWN. Thank you very much, Dr. Yellen. What would be the impact, Dr. Yellen, on academic anthropology if there was no longer a source of funding in the NSF for selective research? If you can quantify that, I would like it. Dr. YELLEN. It would be disastrous. NSF now supports 90 percent of the basic anthropological research conducted in the United States today. The other 10 percent comes from the Smithsonian and that 10 pecent, as I understand it, is used to run their own anthropology program. They maintain what amounts to a research faculty. Essentially the only Federal money that supports academically based anthropological research comes through the National Science Foundation; $6.1 million last year, probably $6.8 million this year. If it is cut off, is it. The tap is closed. that Mr. BROWN. My question is broader than that. Obviously, as I indicated in connection with biological research, there was a good deal of research going on before Federal funds came on the horizon. The universities and other institutions supported anthropology because it is a matter of fundamental scientific importance. Presumably, universities will continue to carry on anthropological programs. How badly handicapped would they be, not just in terms of how much of their external funds would be cut off, but to what degree would they be able to continue with their programs? Ďr. YELLEN. It would be extremely difficult. Universities, other than for very small projects, did not do this. Human origin research is very small but to run, for example, a project for a year costs slightly in excess of $100,000. A university is not, at least as far as we can see, prepared to do this. Mr. BROWN. What you are saying, in other words, is essentially the universities would confine themselves to the teaching of what is known about anthropology but would not be able to fundamentally expand the horizon? Dr. YELLEN. Yes, I agree. Mr. BROWN. You should. Dr. YELLEN. I think that where field work is involved, and in that lies the heart of anthropological research, and where interdisciplinary research is involved, yes, that is true. It is too expensive to be funded through the universities. There is no history of it. ADDENDUM TO DR. YELLEN'S TESTIMONY.-Expanded answer to Mr. Brown's question. (1) The U.S. Government provided major support for anthropology long before the birth of the National Science Foundation. The center for such research in the late 19th and much of the 20th centuries was the Bureau for American Ethnography (a part of the Smithsonian Institution). Much ethnographic research was government supported during and immediately after World War II. Further, WPA projects in the 1930's trained a whole generation of archaeologists. (2) American anthropology came into its own only after World War II. With a few notable exceptions (such as Margaret Mead and Robert Redfield) British social anthropologists held center stage. Much of their work was funded through the British Colonial office and conducted in British colonies. (3) A significant cut in present U.S. Government support for anthropology would (a) Very drastically reduce the amount of research which could be undertaken. NSF provides the major support for academically-based basic anthropological research. It now costs about $60,000 for Americans to work abroad con |