Franchthi Cave on the Mediterranean Sea

Franchthi Cave on the Mediterranean Sea Franchthi Cave is a very large cave, overlooking what is now a small inlet off the Aegean Sea in the southeastern Argolid region of Greece, near the modern town of Koiladha. The cave is the epitome of every archaeologists dreama site constantly occupied for thousands of years, with wonderful preservation of bones and seeds throughout. First occupied during the early Upper Paleolithic sometime between 37,000 and 30,000 years ago, Franchthi Cave was the site of human occupation, pretty much consistently up until about the final Neolithic Period about 3000 BC. Franchthi Cave and the Early Upper Paleolithic Franchthis deposits measured over 11 meters (36 feet) in thickness. The oldest layers (Stratum P-R in two trenches) belong to the Upper Paleolithic. A recent reanalysis and new dates on the oldest three levels was reported in the journal Antiquity in late 2011. Stratum R (40-150 cm thick), lower part is Aurignacian, upper part Gravettian, 28,000-37,000 cal BPStratum Q (5-9 cm), volcanic tephra representing ash from the Campanian Ignimbrite, Aurignacian lithic materials, rabbit and cat bones, 33,400-40,300 cal BP-Stratum P (1.5-2 meters thick), undistinguished lithic industry, poorly-preserved mammal bone, 34,000-41,000 cal BP The Campanian Ignimbrite (CI Event) is a volcanic tephra thought to have occurred from an eruption in the Phlegraean Fields of Italy which occurred ~39,000-40,000 years before the present (cal BP). Noted in many Aurignacian sites across Europe, notably at Kostenki. Shells of Dentalium spp, Cyclope neritea and Homolopoma sanguineum were were recovered from all three UP levels; some appear to be perforated. Calibrated dates on the shell (with consideration for the marine effect) are in roughly the correct chronostratigraphic sequence but vary between ca 28,440-43,700 years before the present (cal BP). See Douka et al for additional information. Significance of Franchthi Cave There are many reasons why Franchthi Cave is an important site; three of them are the length and period of occupation, the quality of preservation of the seed and bone assemblages, and the fact that it was excavated in modern times. Length and period of occupation. The site was occupied, more or less continuously, for about 25,000 years, during which time came the invention of agriculture and pastoralism. What that means is that changes that were wrought by these phenomenal leaps in human understanding can be traced at one place, by examining differences between different layers. Quality of preservation. In most of the layers excavated at Franchthi cave, remnants of animals and plants in the form of bone, shell, seed, and pollen were preserved. These kinds of artifacts have provided researchers with a wealth of information concerning diet and the course of domestication. Modern excavation techniques. Franchthi cave was excavated in the late 1960s and early 1970s, by the Universities of Indiana and Pennsylvania and the American School in Classical Studies at Athens. These researchers paid attention to stratigraphic layers, and kept much of the faunal and floral materials that would have been ignored or thrown aw ay in earlier times. Franchthi Cave was excavated under the direction of T.W. Jacobsen of Indiana University, between 1967 and 1979. Investigations since then have concentrated on the millions of artifacts recovered during the excavations. Sources This glossary entry is a part of the About.com guide to Upper Paleolithic, and the Dictionary of Archaeology. Deith MR, and Shackleton JC. 1988. The contribution of shells to site interpretation: Approaches to shell material from Franchthi Cave. In: Bintlinff JL, Davidson DA, and Grant EG, editors. Conceptual Issues in Environmental Archaeology. Edinburgh, Scotland: Edinburgh University Press. p 49-58. Douka K, Perles C, Valladas H, Vanhaeren M, and Hedges REM. 2011. Franchthi Cave revisited: the age of the Aurignacian in south-eastern Europe. Antiquity 85(330):1131-1150. Jacobsen T. 1981. Franchthi Cave and the beginnings of settled village life in Greece. Hesperia 50:1-16. Shackleton JC. 1988. Marine molluscan remains from Franchthi Cave. Excavations at Franchthi Cave, Greece. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Shackleton JC, and van Andel TH. 1986. Prehistoric shore environments, shellfish availability, and shellfish gathering at Franchthi, Greece. Geoarchaeology 1(2):127-143. Stiner MC, and Munro ND. 2011. On the evolution of diet and landscape during the Upper Paleolithic through Mesolithic at Franchthi Cave (Peloponnese, Greece). Journal of Human Evolution 60(5):618-636.

About the Civil Rights Cases of 1883

About the Civil Rights Cases of 1883   In the Civil Rights Cases of 1883, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the Civil Rights Act of 1875, which had prohibited racial discrimination in hotels, trains, and other public places, was unconstitutional. In an 8-1 decision, the court ruled that the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution did not give Congress the power to regulate the affairs of private individuals and businesses. Background During the post-Civil War Reconstruction Period between 1866 and 1875, Congress passed several civil rights laws intended to implement the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments. The last and most aggressive of these laws, the Civil Rights Act of 1875, imposed criminal penalties against the owners of private businesses or modes of transportation that restricted access to their facilities because of race. The law read, in part:   â€Å"†¦ all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges of inns, public conveyances on land or water, theaters, and other places of public amusement; subject only to the conditions and limitations established by law, and applicable alike to citizens of every race and color, regardless of any previous condition of servitude.† Many people in both the South and the North objected to the Civil Rights Act of 1875, arguing that the law unfairly infringed on personal freedom of choice. Indeed, the legislatures of some Southern states had already enacted laws allowing separate public facilities for whites and African Americans. Details of the Civil Rights Cases of 1883 In the Civil Rights Cases of 1883, the Supreme Court took the rare route of deciding five separate but closely related cases with one unified ruling. The five cases (United States v. Stanley, United States v. Ryan, United States v. Nichols, United States v. Singleton, and Robinson v. Memphis Charleston Railroad) reached the Supreme Court on appeal from the lower federal courts and involved suits filed by African American citizens claiming they had been illegally been refused equal access to restaurants, hotels, theaters, and trains as required by the Civil Rights Act of 1875. During this time, many businesses had attempted to skirt the letter of the Civil Rights Act of 1875 by allowing African Americans to use their facilities, but forcing them to occupy separate â€Å"Colored Only† areas. Constitutional Questions The Supreme Court was asked to decide the constitutionality of the Civil Rights Act of 1875 in light of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. Specifically, the court considered: Did the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment apply to the day-to-day operations of privately-owned businesses?What specific protections did the 13th and 14th amendments provide for private citizens?Did the 14th Amendment, which prohibits state governments from practicing racial discrimination, also ban private individuals from discriminating under their right to â€Å"freedom of choice?† In other words, was â€Å"private racial segregation,† like designating â€Å"Coloreds Only† and â€Å"Whites Only† areas legal? The Arguments Presented to the Court Over the course of the case, the Supreme Court heard arguments for and against allowing private racial segregation and, thus, the constitutionality of the Civil Rights Act of 1875.    Ban Private Racial Segregation: Because the intent of the 13th and 14th Amendments had been to â€Å"remove the last vestiges of slavery† from America, the Civil Rights Act of 1875 was constitutional. By sanctioning practices of private racial discrimination, the Supreme Court would â€Å"permit the badges and incidents of slavery† to remain a part of Americans’ lives. The Constitution grants the federal government the power to prevent state governments from taking actions that deprive any U.S. citizen of his or her civil rights. Allow Private Racial Segregation: The 14th Amendment banned only the state governments from practicing racial discrimination, not private citizens. The 14th Amendment specifically declares, in part, â€Å"†¦ nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.† Enacted and enforced by the federal, rather than the state governments. The Civil Rights Act of 1875 unconstitutionally infringed on the rights of private citizens to use and operate their property and businesses as they saw fit.   The Court’s Decision and Reasoning In an 8-1 opinion written by Justice Joseph P. Bradley, the Supreme Court found the Civil Rights Act of 1875 to be unconstitutional. Justice Bradley declared that neither the 13th nor the 14th Amendment granted Congress the power to enact laws dealing with racial discrimination by private citizens or businesses. Of the 13th Amendment, Bradley wrote, â€Å"The 13th Amendment has respect, not to distinctions of race †¦ but to slavery.† Bradley added, â€Å"The 13th Amendment relates to slavery and involuntary servitude (which it abolishes); ... yet such legislative power extends only to the subject of slavery and its incidents; and the denial of equal accommodations in inns, public conveyances and places of public amusement (which is forbidden by the sections in question), imposes no badge of slavery or involuntary servitude upon the party, but at most, infringes rights which are protected from State aggression by the 14th Amendment.† Justice Bradley went on to agree with the argument that the 14th Amendment applied only to the states, not to private citizens or businesses. â€Å"The 14th Amendment is prohibitory upon the States only, and the legislation authorized to be adopted by Congress for enforcing it is not direct legislation on the matters respecting which the States are prohibited from making or enforcing certain laws, or doing certain acts, but it is corrective legislation, such as may be necessary or proper for counteracting and redressing the effect of such laws or acts,† he wrote. The Lone Dissent of Justice Harlan Justice John Marshall Harlan wrote the only dissenting opinion in the Civil Rights Cases. Harlan’s belief that the majority’s â€Å"narrow and artificial† interpretation 13th and 14th Amendments led him to write, â€Å"I cannot resist the conclusion that the substance and spirit of the recent amendments of the Constitution have been sacrificed by a subtle and ingenious verbal criticism.† Harlan wrote that the 13th Amendment did far more than â€Å"to prohibit slavery as an institution,† it also â€Å"established and decreed universal civil freedom throughout the United States.† In addition, noted Harlan, Section II of the 13th Amendment decreed that â€Å"Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation,† and had thus been the basis for the  enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which granted full citizenship to all persons born in the United States. Basically, Harlan contended that the 13th and 14th Amendments, as well as the Civil Rights Act of 1875, were constitutional acts of Congress intended to ensure African Americans the same rights to access and use of public facilities that white citizens took for granted as their natural right. In summary, Harlan stated that the federal government had both the authority and the responsibility to protect citizens from any actions that deprive them of their rights and to allow private racial discrimination would â€Å"permit the badges and incidents of slavery† to remain. Impact of the Civil Rights Cases Decision The Supreme Court’s decision in the Civil Rights Cases virtually stripped the federal government of any power to ensure African Americans equal protection under the law. As Justice Harlan had predicted in his dissent, freed of the threat of federal restrictions, Southern states began enacting laws sanctioning racial segregation. In 1896, the Supreme Court cited its Civil Rights Cases ruling in its landmark Plessy v. Ferguson decision declaring that requiring separate facilities for blacks and whites was constitutional as long as those facilities were â€Å"equal† and that racial segregation itself did not amount to unlawful discrimination. So-called â€Å"separate but equal† segregated facilities, including schools, would persist for over 80 years until the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s swayed public opinion to oppose racial discrimination. Eventually, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Civil Rights Act of 1968, enacted as part of the Great Society program of President Lyndon B. Johnson, incorporated several key elements of the Civil Rights Act of 1875.