The Savannah hypotheses: origin, reception and impact on paleoanthropology

The reconstruction of the human past is a complex task characterized by a high level of interdisciplinarity. How do scientists from different fields reach consensus on crucial aspects of paleoanthropological research? The present paper explores this question through an historical analysis of the origin, development, and reception of the savannah hypotheses (SHs). We show that this model neglected to investigate crucial biological aspects which appeared to be irrelevant in scenarios depicting early hominins evolving in arid or semi-arid open plains. For instance, the exploitation of aquatic food resources and other aspects of hominin interaction with water were largely ignored in classical paleoanthropology. These topics became central to alternative ideas on human evolution known as aquatic hypotheses. Since the aquatic model is commonly regarded as highly controversial, its rejection led to a stigmatization of the whole spectrum of topics around water use in non-human hominoids and hominins. We argue that this bias represents a serious hindrance to a comprehensive reconstruction of the human past. Progress in this field depends on clear differentiation between hypotheses proposed to contextualize early hominin evolution in specific environmental settings and research topics which demand the investigation of all relevant facets of early hominins' interaction with complex landscapes.

Opening Reception

Attendees that preregistered for the speaker series are invited to the opening reception, featuring guest speaker David Salmela and remarks from Scott See, Executive Director of the Keweenaw National Historical Park Advisory Commission. A registration table will also be available for registrants who wish to pick up event materials.

Gender in Theology and Religion: a Success Story?! Report from a Conference

In January 2011 some fifty scholars from different parts of Europe met in Groningen, the Netherlands for an expert meeting entitled Gender in theology and religion: a success story?! to analyze the factors that contribute to the successful mainstreaming of gender in a theological discipline and to reflect on the future of gender studies in theology and religious studies. Different speakers highlighted the many successes of gender studies in theology and religious studies: its power to 'trouble' the disciplines and their heuristic categories; its contribution to the development of other disciplines such as queer studies and postcolonial studies; the many PhD studies produced; the number of significant publications that had appeared over the last years. All indicate that gender studies in theology and religious studies have matured. But the participants also pointed towards the ambiguity of the success of gender studies in the academy: the indeterminacy of the institutional position and positions of gender studies in the theological disciplines in seminaries, departments faculties and universities; the lack of male scholars’ engagement in gender studies, which is expressed by their absence in these studies and/or the low reception of gender studies publications in their disciplines. Both ambiguities represent a danger for the future of gender studies, according to the participants in the meeting. In order to further the success of gender in theology and religion they formulated the following recommendations: to analyze the position of these studies in their institutions from the perspective of the implied audience (church, academy, ordinary theologians); engage men in gender studies; embrace the cultural turn in religious studies; develop interdisciplinary cooperations with gender studies in the humanities; engage creatively with the changing role of religion in contemporary society; analyze whose perspective one follows and authorizes in the perception of theology, religious studies and gender studies themselves; record the history of women’s and gender studies in theology and religion, and honor and celebrate the successes.