1. Describe how you prepared/studied for the untit test.
I firstly looked and read through the facts in my notebook everyday until the weekends. During the weekend, I taught my mom everything we've studied, and since she knew most of the things already, she was testing my knowledge. She asked me questions such as; Who first created fire? And how did early humans develop their culture? That helped me understand and check my thinking.
a) Do you think your studying strategies were effective - why/why not?
I think they were effective. This was the first time I studied this way- testing my mom. I was quite shocked on a few things I didn't know which I was sure we would have on the test. It all went really well.
b) How will you prepare for next time?
I will study the same way I studied for this unit test. Because It was quite effective and easy. However, I didn't really read through the articles that we read, that's something I'll pay attention more to.
2. What was the most surprising thing you learned about during this unit?
The most surprising thing I learned during this unit was how short early humans were, and how amazing their creativity skills were. I never thought they could make such sharp tools, but that was, however, later when they developed more. Lastly, the weirdest thing I learned, is that early humans ACTUALLY EXIST! At first, I thought they were made up creatures from stories, but they are actually real. I thought that only dinosaurs existed, but early humans? Well that's hard to believe.
3. If we had more time to spend on Prehistory and Early Humans - what would you want to learn more about?
I'd like to learn more about specific things- such as; how a specific human died, who was earlier, Adam and Eve or early humans? However, we covered everything that I wanted to know, there is nothing really I'd like to know more about, because I don't know if there is anything else we would have studied- that is, if we had more time. Honestly, this was one of my favorite units in Humanities, (even though it is the second unit) and I hope the next unit will be as interesting.
Wednesday, 22 December 2010
Monday, 13 December 2010
Sunday, 28 November 2010
Who were the hobbits?
The hobbits were small humans who suffered from microcephaly-something that produces a small brain and head. An example of a hobbit would be Homo florensis, or “Flores Man.” Hobbits had intensively small brains, but they were also smart. However, people say that the bigger brain, the better. In this case, it’s quite the opposite. Hobbits were very old, about 38,000 to 18,000 years old. How did researchers know this? They used radiocarbon dating to figure out their age. Since they were so old, archaeologists could find their pelvis, skull, hands, feet, and other fragments. They found a female, and found out a lot about her including, how she looked like, and who she mostly related to from ll the early humans that we’ve studied.
We know that most of the early humans made tools, some made advanced tools, and some made poorer tools. These small humans made some kind of tools, but didn’t know how to use them.
Do you want to know how I decided to think of these small humans? The article gave me an idea. “Hobbits are the size of a soccer player today.” This means that we also have short people, which in those days were the hobbits.
We know that most of the early humans made tools, some made advanced tools, and some made poorer tools. These small humans made some kind of tools, but didn’t know how to use them.
Do you want to know how I decided to think of these small humans? The article gave me an idea. “Hobbits are the size of a soccer player today.” This means that we also have short people, which in those days were the hobbits.
Sunday, 21 November 2010
Why were tool-making and language important for the development of human culture?
What do we use and do to maintain a healthy living? How did our early ancestors work together and make things in order to survive? The answers are very simple. Early humans communicated and made tools to produce food, water, stone- axes, and many other objects, in different shapes, sizes and textures. Without communicating they wouldn’t be able to work together, leading to working by themselves and maybe causing some problems. Communication back then was simpler and easier than ours today. They used their hands just like we use them today to explain something in general. Communication helped them to make tools too in order to survive. For example, like I said, they made stone- axes and bows and arrows and many other things to kill animals so they can feed themselves. They used sticks to make fire and heat themselves at night, or use fire as light if they cannot see appropriately. Without tools and language, most things wouldn’t have worked out for them. Even today, we use tools and language to reach our goal and to feed ourselves. Do you see how things are similar today like back then? But, of course, we have richer and more valuable tools for example, computers, machines, electronical objects etc… Imagine how much harder it was for them back then without electricity! I could talk forever, anyways, in conclusion, tool-making and language was important for their development to survive and to maintain a survivable community.
Wednesday, 17 November 2010
Why did early humans begin to walk on two feet?
Do you ever wonder what we use our hands for? Why did we decide to walk upright? Humans today are adapted to walk straight and upright, or bipedal. This question also goes for early humans. Generally, prehistoric people walked on two feet, but most of them walked quadrupedal, or on all fours, like all the non-human apes.
Early humans had to use a lot of objects in order to maintain a healthy living. For example, they used bow – and – arrow to strike the animal for instance a hippopotamus as a food source, they used their hands to make tools like sharp hand axes or jewelry, and to communicate with each other using hands- with this really weird language which is easier than ours and including snapping clapping sounds etc… They obviously cannot eat with their legs, head or back, but they could eat with using their hands, just like every other person today.
Today most of the people don’t make objects, yet they can buy the objects in the supermarkets resulting in easier work. In conclusion, early people began to walk on two feet because they needed to make tools, to communicate and to make life easier to them.
Early humans had to use a lot of objects in order to maintain a healthy living. For example, they used bow – and – arrow to strike the animal for instance a hippopotamus as a food source, they used their hands to make tools like sharp hand axes or jewelry, and to communicate with each other using hands- with this really weird language which is easier than ours and including snapping clapping sounds etc… They obviously cannot eat with their legs, head or back, but they could eat with using their hands, just like every other person today.
Today most of the people don’t make objects, yet they can buy the objects in the supermarkets resulting in easier work. In conclusion, early people began to walk on two feet because they needed to make tools, to communicate and to make life easier to them.
Sunday, 14 November 2010
Journal Entry
How does the use of fire demonstrate prehistoric people's ability to adapt to their environment?
Provide examples and relevant details to support your thinking.
The use of fire demonstrates prehistoric people’s ability to adapt to their environment by the heat of the fire, if it is at night, for example, they can use fire to heat themselves and be able to survive. Since they didn't have lighters back then, they can make fire with two sticks rubbing onto each other. This is how prehistoric people were adapting to their environment.
Another way they can survive in an environment by using fire would be cooking, and when they are in the dark, they simply use fire to see, they can get warm if they are cold with the help of fire and a lot more reasons. Thanks to fire, prehistoric people could survive easily with fire than without.
Provide examples and relevant details to support your thinking.
The use of fire demonstrates prehistoric people’s ability to adapt to their environment by the heat of the fire, if it is at night, for example, they can use fire to heat themselves and be able to survive. Since they didn't have lighters back then, they can make fire with two sticks rubbing onto each other. This is how prehistoric people were adapting to their environment.
Another way they can survive in an environment by using fire would be cooking, and when they are in the dark, they simply use fire to see, they can get warm if they are cold with the help of fire and a lot more reasons. Thanks to fire, prehistoric people could survive easily with fire than without.
Stonehenge Essay
Stonehenge is a megalith, or many large stones put together to make a monument. Stonehenge was built between 3100 - 1100 BC, it is located about two miles west of Amesbury, Wiltshire in Southern England. There were two types of stones that were used in the construction of Stonehenge: Bluestones and Sarsen stones. Bluestones= 4 tons, brought from 240 miles away. Sarsen Stones= 18 feet in height and weighted 25 tons. That’s a lot! It took the people 30 million hours. I agree because the stones were quite big and heavy. I will be explaining three theories: domain of the dead, bluestones, and the woodhenge.
Theory 1: Domain of the dead
Stonehenge is known to be a place of the dead- because archaeologists found dead bodies and injured body parts around the Stonehenge circle, but I will get to that later. Now I’ll explain who they found near the Stonehenge burial and why it is known as a domain of the dead. While archaeologists were digging, or excavating and observing the Stonehenge site, they found an injured man who is named Amesbury Archer. They found out two interesting facts about him; 1. He died in the time when the Stonehenge circle was just built 2. He was from the Alps. Now, getting back to my previous point, archaeologists usually find bones and axe heads special material and stuff under the surface. In this case next to the Stonehenge circle, they found dead bodies and injured hands, knee parts, legs, heads etc… That is why Stonehenge is part of the dead, and that’s why it is called that way.
I think that “domain of the dead” is a great way to discover what happened in the past, and how many people were killed or injured. Archaeologists can figure out who was dead and if that person is someone known- as in already discovered or read about, like Amesbury Archer. They date the time they were killed or injured by radiocarbon dating.
Theory 2: Stonehenge- a place of healing
Many people and archaeologists are asking themselves “who built Stonehenge” and “why Stonehenge was built.” Nobody actually knows, but when they figured out that Stonehenge was a place of healing, they then had an idea in their head. Stonehenge is a holy place for calculating dates. But they think Stonehenge was a site for healing, like I said before. Why was Stonehenge built? It was built for people to heal themselves when they are injured. For example if you are sick, you just go the Stonehenge and solve your problem! Why would they build Stonehenge for us in the future today? Most archaeologists thought they would, because they would keep calendars, religious and social events, which makes agriculture better in the future.
"When you enter the building… and cast your eyes around, upon the yawning ruins, you are struck into an exstatic [sic] reverie, which none can describe." That is what William Stukeley said in the 1720’s. This means that when you arrive to Stonehenge and look around, you see something so amazing that no one can describe. That is how I visualize it. Thank technology for allowing us to find out new things about Stonehenge’s purpose! Without technology, 50% of the information we wouldn’t get about Stonehenge!
Theory 3: Woodhenge:
Woodhenge is the opposite of domain of the dead. In fact, Woodhenge is made out of wood. It once included forests with many leaves and flowery green grasses, but now it is plain wood standing high just like Stonehenge. It used to include everything that is living. The Woodhenge site is about 200 ft (57 meters) wide. Woodhenge was discovered in Ohio a few kilometers away from Stonehenge. Examples of living things in the Woodhenge would be Oak timbers.
Conclusion:
I personally think that “place of healing” does not seem true, because, while I was doing the essay I have been asking myself: How can Stonehenge possibly heal a person? What kind of “power” or “magic” does it use? Well, I hope I find the answer to that, because I’m really curious. That’s why I don’t really find place of healing true-not reliable because it sounds fictional. I mostly agreed with a place of the dead, because it is reliable that dead people were buried under ground and some bones too. I found all of these theories interesting, and I do have some questions in mind. Who was building the Stonehenge? How were they building it?-Since they didn’t have such rich material back then like we do today. Why were they building it? People don’t exactly know why, because they couldn’t communicate with people in the earlier days. The most interesting theory to me was Woodhenge. Although I don’t think that is a theory, but it does relate to something once living, which is the opposite of “domain of the dead.”
If I were to sum this whole essay up, it would be: Stonehenge has a variety of theories which are explaining where, when, and why Stonehenge was built.
Bibliography:
1. "Stonehenge." Stonehenge. Not written. , 10 July 1999. Web. 27 Oct. 2010.
.
2. "STONEHENGE An Extract Of An Essay. ." STONEHENGE An Extract Of An Essay. . Not
written, 3 Apr. 1652. Web. 27 Oct. 2010.
.
3. "Was Stonehenge originally a place for the dead?" The World's No.1 Science &
Technology News Service. Linda Geddes, 10 May 2008. Web. 8 Oct. 2089.
4. "Who Built Stonehenge?" Who Built Stonehenge? . N.p., 5 June 1387. Web. 27 Oct.
2010.
5. "Who built Stonehenge? Why?" Who built Stonehenge? Why? Bradley Keyes, 5 May
1696. Web. 27 Oct. 2010.
6. Wilson, Hugh. "Stonehenge- the healing stones." BBC home. History TV and and
Radio Programmers, 17 July 1995. Web. 14 Nov. 2010.
.
Theory 1: Domain of the dead
Stonehenge is known to be a place of the dead- because archaeologists found dead bodies and injured body parts around the Stonehenge circle, but I will get to that later. Now I’ll explain who they found near the Stonehenge burial and why it is known as a domain of the dead. While archaeologists were digging, or excavating and observing the Stonehenge site, they found an injured man who is named Amesbury Archer. They found out two interesting facts about him; 1. He died in the time when the Stonehenge circle was just built 2. He was from the Alps. Now, getting back to my previous point, archaeologists usually find bones and axe heads special material and stuff under the surface. In this case next to the Stonehenge circle, they found dead bodies and injured hands, knee parts, legs, heads etc… That is why Stonehenge is part of the dead, and that’s why it is called that way.
I think that “domain of the dead” is a great way to discover what happened in the past, and how many people were killed or injured. Archaeologists can figure out who was dead and if that person is someone known- as in already discovered or read about, like Amesbury Archer. They date the time they were killed or injured by radiocarbon dating.
Theory 2: Stonehenge- a place of healing
Many people and archaeologists are asking themselves “who built Stonehenge” and “why Stonehenge was built.” Nobody actually knows, but when they figured out that Stonehenge was a place of healing, they then had an idea in their head. Stonehenge is a holy place for calculating dates. But they think Stonehenge was a site for healing, like I said before. Why was Stonehenge built? It was built for people to heal themselves when they are injured. For example if you are sick, you just go the Stonehenge and solve your problem! Why would they build Stonehenge for us in the future today? Most archaeologists thought they would, because they would keep calendars, religious and social events, which makes agriculture better in the future.
"When you enter the building… and cast your eyes around, upon the yawning ruins, you are struck into an exstatic [sic] reverie, which none can describe." That is what William Stukeley said in the 1720’s. This means that when you arrive to Stonehenge and look around, you see something so amazing that no one can describe. That is how I visualize it. Thank technology for allowing us to find out new things about Stonehenge’s purpose! Without technology, 50% of the information we wouldn’t get about Stonehenge!
Theory 3: Woodhenge:
Woodhenge is the opposite of domain of the dead. In fact, Woodhenge is made out of wood. It once included forests with many leaves and flowery green grasses, but now it is plain wood standing high just like Stonehenge. It used to include everything that is living. The Woodhenge site is about 200 ft (57 meters) wide. Woodhenge was discovered in Ohio a few kilometers away from Stonehenge. Examples of living things in the Woodhenge would be Oak timbers.
Conclusion:
I personally think that “place of healing” does not seem true, because, while I was doing the essay I have been asking myself: How can Stonehenge possibly heal a person? What kind of “power” or “magic” does it use? Well, I hope I find the answer to that, because I’m really curious. That’s why I don’t really find place of healing true-not reliable because it sounds fictional. I mostly agreed with a place of the dead, because it is reliable that dead people were buried under ground and some bones too. I found all of these theories interesting, and I do have some questions in mind. Who was building the Stonehenge? How were they building it?-Since they didn’t have such rich material back then like we do today. Why were they building it? People don’t exactly know why, because they couldn’t communicate with people in the earlier days. The most interesting theory to me was Woodhenge. Although I don’t think that is a theory, but it does relate to something once living, which is the opposite of “domain of the dead.”
If I were to sum this whole essay up, it would be: Stonehenge has a variety of theories which are explaining where, when, and why Stonehenge was built.
Bibliography:
1. "Stonehenge." Stonehenge. Not written. , 10 July 1999. Web. 27 Oct. 2010.
2. "STONEHENGE An Extract Of An Essay. ." STONEHENGE An Extract Of An Essay. . Not
written, 3 Apr. 1652. Web. 27 Oct. 2010.
3. "Was Stonehenge originally a place for the dead?" The World's No.1 Science &
Technology News Service. Linda Geddes, 10 May 2008. Web. 8 Oct. 2089.
4. "Who Built Stonehenge?" Who Built Stonehenge? . N.p., 5 June 1387. Web. 27 Oct.
2010.
5. "Who built Stonehenge? Why?" Who built Stonehenge? Why? Bradley Keyes, 5 May
1696. Web. 27 Oct. 2010.
6. Wilson, Hugh. "Stonehenge- the healing stones." BBC home. History TV and and
Radio Programmers, 17 July 1995. Web. 14 Nov. 2010.
Thursday, 28 October 2010
Reflection
I found writing the conclusion most important because it makes me think and go through what I've researched about, because I've used a bunch of sites, and read through each, and decided how to write out my theories. If didn't include the conclusion, then I wouldn't be able to remember what I was doing. All the theories were really interesting, but if I had to choose one, it would be "A place for the Dead." I chose that theory because I never new that Stonehenge was for people who are buried, I think this is because the archaeologists found hurt knee parts and damaged legs near Stonehenge. Anther thing that I found interesting was that there is Stonehenge that is actually alive. Guess what it is: WOODHENGE.
I learned the above+ how to write an essay. Writing an essay is not easy. First of all you have to find a lot of sites that suit your topic. Then, choose three theory to support the topic-Stonehenge. At the end, you write out the conclusion and with which theory you agree with. Not only that, but writing the actual essay is hard-medium too. If it is interesting to you, (the topic) then you will do the essay easily. If the topic is harder and less amusing, then it won't be so fun doing the essay. I also learned that Stonehenge has a lot of theories- this would be a 10 page reflection if I were to explain each theory-
I learned the above+ how to write an essay. Writing an essay is not easy. First of all you have to find a lot of sites that suit your topic. Then, choose three theory to support the topic-Stonehenge. At the end, you write out the conclusion and with which theory you agree with. Not only that, but writing the actual essay is hard-medium too. If it is interesting to you, (the topic) then you will do the essay easily. If the topic is harder and less amusing, then it won't be so fun doing the essay. I also learned that Stonehenge has a lot of theories- this would be a 10 page reflection if I were to explain each theory-
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)