Spotlight on Students: Hominid Profiles

The following post features exemplary student work from my Introduction to Physical Anthropology students.  They were tasked with discussing a specific hominid species of their choice.  I hope you enjoy learning about human evolution.

Homo floresiensis

April Bruan

Anth102: 1501 Introduction to Physical Anthropology

            Whenever a possibly new hominid species is found, it scrutinized relentlessly to make sure that it is, in fact, a new species and not an already known species. Homo floresiensis is a relatively newly found hominid species that is still in the middle of a debate about whether it is a new species or simply an altered form of another species. Whether H. floresiensis is an entirely new species or an altered modern human, it is a fascinating find.   

            H. floresiensis is named after the island of Flores in Southeast Asia. H. floresiensis was discovered under a layer of volcanic ash that is dated from about 12,000 years ago in a limestone cave called Liang Bau in 2003 (Stein and Rowe). Flores is the only place where H. floresiensis has been found. The first and most complete skeleton that was found was named LB1 after the name of the cave. Various pieces of up to 12 additional skeletons have also been found (Human Origins). LB1 was a 30-year-old female that is believed to be from approximately 18,000 years ago. It is believed that H. floresiensis lived on the island of Flores from approximately 17,000 up to 95,000 years ago which means that they lived during the age of modern humans (Human Origins). LB1 stood at about three and a half feet tall, was bipedal and weighed around 70 pounds (Stein and Rowe). For this reason, the species has been given the nickname “Hobbit”  after J. R. R. Tolken’s book The Hobbit that is about little people (Livescience). The brain of H. floresiensis was about a third of the size of the modern human’s (Stein and Rowe).    

            Based on some of the findings in and around the cave where LB1 was found we can get an idea about the life of  H. floresiensis. Stone tools such as blades and other utensils were found along with fossils of animals that were most likely hunted by H. floresiensis (National Geographic). Remains of a dwarfed species of Stegodons, extinct mammals that were very similar to elephants,  were found on Flores. Some of the remains have evidence of butchering on them indicating that they were used as food (Nature). Also found were giant rats and lizards. H. floresiensis used fire to cook their food as evidenced by hearths that were found (National Geographic).   

            Controversy surrounding H. floresiensis has to do with its belonging to its own, separate species. There is debate about H. floresiensis being a descendant of H. erectus or possibly even H. sapiens (Sci-news). One of the doubts is based on the brain size of H. floresiensis and the complexity of the tools that were used. Some people believe that H. floresiensis is H. sapiens with a form of microcephaly or even Down Syndrome. The remains of H. floresiensis do not support that hypothesis (Indonesian-find).  Another question about H. floresiensis is how the species came to be on the island of Flores. One hypothesis is that a small group of H. erectus made it to the island where over time they evolved into H. floresiensis by what is known as insular dwarfism. Insular dwarfism is when a mammal evolves into a smaller body because of the isolation of living on an island (Stein and Rowe). Insular dwarfism also helps to explain the dwarfed Stegodon species found on Flores. So far there is no evidence of H. sapiens and H. floresiensis living together on Flores, but it is possible since their times overlap (National Geographic).    

            In conclusion, whether H. floresiensis remains a unique species or turns out to be a form of another species, one thing is certain, and that is H. floresiensis is a fascinating species. The fact that H. floresiensis may be the last human before H. sapiens, possibly even have interacted with modern humans, is fascinating to me. Not only is H. floresiensis still mostly a mystery, but the artists’ impressions that I have seen make them out to have been a very interesting looking species. I am very curious to see what becomes of the Hobbit species as the debate continues.

Works Cited

Bryner, Jeanna. "Homo Floresiensis: Facts About the 'Hobbit'" LiveScience. TechMedia Network, 26 Apr. 2013. Web. 13 Nov. 2014. <http://www.livescience.com/29100-homo-floresiensis-hobbit-facts.html>.

"Hobbit-Like Human Ancestor Found in Asia." National Geographic. National Geographic Society. Web. 13 Nov. 2014. <http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/10/1027_041027_homo_floresiensis.html>.

"Homo Floresiensis." Homo Floresiensis. Web. 13 Nov. 2014. <http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species/homo-floresiensis>.

"Homo Floresiensis." Nature.com. Nature Publishing Group. Web. 13 Nov. 2014. <http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v441/n7093/abs/nature04618.html>.

"Homo Floresiensis - Australian Museum." Homo Floresiensis - Australian Museum. Web. 13 Nov. 2014. <http://australianmuseum.net.au/Homo-floresiensis>.

"Homo Floresiensis Distinct Human Species, Says New Research." Breaking Science News SciNewscom. Web. 13 Nov. 2014. <http://www.sci-news.com/othersciences/anthropology/science-homo-floresiensis-01226.html>.

"Infobase Learning - Login." Infobase Learning - Login. Web. 13 Nov. 2014. <http://icof.infobaselearning.com/support-materials/special-reports/2004/indonesian-find-complicates-human-evolution-picture-(special-report).aspx?sr=1>.

Stein, Philip, and Bruce Rowe. Physical Anthropology. 11th ed. McGraw-Hill Education, 2014. Print.

Homo erectus/ergaster

Denise Reed
Anth 102: 1001 Introduction to Physical Anthropology

Homo ergaster, also known as Homo erectus, have been found in Africa, Europe, and Asia.  Although both H. ergaster and H. erectus as phenotypically similar, they are named for the geographic area of their finds.^[1]  The first discovery was made by Eugene Dubois, a 19th century anatomist, who was working as a military doctor, in the Dutch East Indies, now known as Indonesia.  As the excavations of the species continued on, the finds came with more and more advancement in tools.^[2]  There are many fascinating aspects attributed to H. ergaster/erectus, but the greatest discovery was the large distances that they have traveled.  Their skulls and brains are similar in symmetry and hemisphere separation to modern Homo sapiens.  Many defining characteristics are becoming more “human like” at this time.^[3]  H. ergaster/erectus has taken the evolutionary step to looking and acting more human like. 
            In 1890 to 1892 Eugene Dubois began searching through Asia looking to prove that humanity did not have their origins in Africa.  Although this is a racist way of thinking, it was not uncommon at this time in history.^[4]  In 1890 Dubois found a jaw fragment at Kedung Brabus.  Then in 1891 he was was working at Trinil Java where he found a skull cap, and in 1892 he  found a femur, also at Trinil Java.  The femur was of a hominin that walked upright bipedal.^[5]  Dubois, since he was the first to find the species, called it Pithecanthropus erectus, which literally translated means “Ape Man Who Stands Erect”.^[6]  In 1895 Dubois went back to the Netherlands and presented his findings.  This created quite a stir among paleontologists, and more professionals came to Asia to look for evidence that Dubois did find a new species.  They have found other remains at Sangiran, Modjokerto, Ngandong, and Sambungmacan.^[7]     In Africa in 1960 the first discovery of a partial cranium was found by Louis Leakey.  In 2003 a partial cranium of KNM-OL 45500 a juvenile or small adult was discovered.^[8]  The findings in Asia are called H. ergaster and the findings in Africa are called H. erectus.  The two species although separated by miles are phenotypically similar, leading us to believe that they are the first to travel long distances.^[9]  There is some speculation that there were two migrations into China, first into Java and the second into north eastern China^[10]

Homo ergaster/erectus made astonishing strides in tool making.  They began with chip rock and progressed to hand axes, cleavers, and picks.  They began manipulating the natural world to suit their needs.  The tools that they used were more durable than that of the basic chip rock.  These tools were made from large stone flakes that were used to produce sharp edges.  The improvement created more durable tools, and they maintained their sharpness for longer periods of time than their predecessors of chip rock.  With examination of these tools it has been shown that the tools were used on meat, bone, animal hides and wood.  These new sets of tools are called Acheulian stone tools, after St Acheul in France where they found a similar cache of tools during the 1800s. 

It is even supposed that they began using fire to cook and stay warm.  Fire may have been used as far back as 1.5 million years ago, but this is not completely sustainable by facts.  They have found charcoal, burnt earth and charred bones with Homo ergaster fossils, but this may have been from natural fires.  There has been a discovery in Wonderwerk Cave, South Africa that does suggest the use of fire may have been occurring up to 1.7 million years ago.  Archeologists and anthropologists have found stratified deposits containing burnt stones, charred-calcined bones and traces of ash that point to repeated burning.^[11]

Homo ergaster/erectus was tall and thin with long legs.  Females were about five feet three inches or 160 centimeters and the males were about five feet eleven inches or about 180 centimeters.  Their bodies were possibly hairless for improving the cooling of the body, by sweating.  The average brain size was about 860 cubic centimetres, and their skulls were looking more human in shape, unlike their predecessors.   Differentiating from humans, “the cranium had a moderate postorbital constriction (indents behind the eye sockets).  This feature is linked to brain size.  As our ancestors’ brains expanded, their skulls became fuller and more round with increasingly smaller post-orbital constructions.” according to Dennis O'Neill who wrote  “early Human Evolution: Homo Ergaster and Erectus”.  Their noses now projected out and this is the first time that this has happened.  The noses of previous ancestors were flat.  They did have mild prognathism, but it is far less pronounced than previous species.  Their jaws were more slightly built giving them a short face, the front jaw sloped backward with no pointed chin, like we have today.^[12]  The arrangement of teeth were what Homo sapiens have today.  They had a reduction in the size of molars and premolars, making incisors and canines needing to do more in food processing.  The evolution of the genus Homo is synonymous with the teeth getting smaller.  The reason that they are getting smaller may be do to major changes in diet, increasing emphasis on meat, and new ways of preparing food, ie., the development of cooking, and more effective tools for hunting and butchering.^[13]  This is also the first species that has fully erect bipedal locomotion. 

Although we still had some major changes that would come to physically change us, there are many similarities with H. ergaster/erectus that shows the evolution of the species of mankind.  Some major milestones were met with this species, the capability of walking long distances and adjusting to different climates, the fully erect bipedal locomotion, and the possible use of fire.  Mankind was truly on his way to what we have today, thanks to the natural selection at the time of  H. ergaster/erectus. 

Works Cited

---

^[1] Dr. Boston, Christine. "Chapter 14 Lecture." Chapter 14 Lecture. Anthropology 102 Class, Reno. Nov. 2014. Lecture

^[2] Rowe, Bruce M. "Chapter 14 Early Species of the Genus Homo." ANTH 102 Introduction to Human Evolution. By Philip L. Stein. 11th ed. N.p.: Mc Graw Hill Education, 2014. 328-30. Print.

^[3] Rowe, Bruce M. "Chapter 14 Early Species of the Genus Homo." ANTH 102 Introduction to Human Evolution. By Philip L. Stein. 11th ed. N.p.: Mc Graw Hill Education, 2014. 328-30. Print.

^[4] Dr. Boston, Christine. "Chapter 14 Lecture." Chapter 14 Lecture. Anthropology 102 Class, Reno. Nov. 2014. Lecture

^[5] Rowe, Bruce M. "Chapter 14 Early Species of the Genus Homo." ANTH 102 Introduction to Human Evolution. By Philip L. Stein. 11th ed. N.p.: Mc Graw Hill Education, 2014. 328-30. Print.

^[6] O'Neil, Dennis. "Early Human Evolution:  Homo Ergaster and Erectus." Early Human Evolution:  Homo Ergaster and Erectus. Palomar, 2013. Web. 09 Nov. 2014. <http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo/homo_2.htm>.

^[7] O'Neil, Dennis. "Early Human Evolution:  Homo Ergaster and Erectus." Early Human Evolution:  Homo Ergaster and Erectus. Palomar, 2013. Web. 09 Nov. 2014. <http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo/homo_2.htm>.

^[8] Rowe, Bruce M. "Chapter 14 Early Species of the Genus Homo." ANTH 102 Introduction to Human Evolution. By Philip L. Stein. 11th ed. N.p.: Mc Graw Hill Education, 2014. 328-30. Print.

^[9] Dr. Boston, Christine. "Chapter 14 Lecture." Chapter 14 Lecture. Anthropology 102 Class, Reno. Nov. 2014. Lecture.

^[10] Dr. Boston, Christine. "Chapter 14 Lecture." Chapter 14 Lecture. Anthropology 102 Class, Reno. Nov. 2014. Lecture.

^[11] O'Neil, Dennis. "Early Human Evolution:  Homo Ergaster and Erectus." Early Human Evolution:  Homo Ergaster and Erectus. Palomar, 2013. Web. 09 Nov. 2014. <http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo/homo_2.htm>.

^[12] O'Neil, Dennis. "Early Human Evolution:  Homo Ergaster and Erectus." Early Human Evolution:  Homo Ergaster and Erectus. Palomar, 2013. Web. 09 Nov. 2014. <http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo/homo_2.htm>.

^[13] Rowe, Bruce M. "Chapter 14 Early Species of the Genus Homo." ANTH 102 Introduction to Human Evolution. By Philip L. Stein. 11th ed. N.p.: Mc Graw Hill Education, 2014. 328-30. Print.

 

 

Spotlight on Students: Tlingit in Review

The following is a post written by one of my students in Anth 101: Introduction to Cultural Anthropology.  This was an offshoot of another paper that was required of students, and this piece was so well written that it warranted publishing.  Please enjoy this great review on the Tlingit.

Veronica Chapman
Anth 101: Introduction to Cultural Anthropology

            Human cultures evolve in their own and different ways.  Some are isolated by continental and geological boundaries; some are catapulted forward by science and technology.  Culture itself is an exclusively human phenomenon, and since there are only two sexes, male and female, the discussion of any culture ultimately becomes a discussion about genders and their subsequent roles.  Unlike sex, which is a biological concept, gender is a social construct specifying the socially and culturally prescribed roles that men and women are to follow (Gender and Society).  Gerda Lerner described gender in The Creation of Patriarchy as the “costume, a mask, a straitjacket in which men and women dance their unequal dance”.  Though many Western cultures have made some progress in the realm of sexual equality, there still seems to be, even in the most progressive of cultures, a battle between the sexes.

            Having come of age in America in the latter half of the twentieth century, I am familiar with the feminist movement.  In one of the most industrialized and technologically advanced countries in the world, the ancient and archaic notion that women somehow are inferior to men prevails into the twenty-first century.  Male driven politics in this country still has a strong-hold on the reproductive rights of females in the form of abortion laws and laws governing birth control products.  Women still are pressured by media and society to conform to a certain ideal the one can only be a complete woman if one marries and procreates. 

            However oppressive things may seem in this country, it is interesting indeed that immigrants from other cultures find the freedoms and independence that American women enjoy “with at least suspicion and at most contempt” (J. LaVelle Ingram, Ph.D. “ Honorary Men”).  The fear that American women instill in others from even more oppressive societies has inspired some to actually provide written instructions on how people should try to accept American women in their own society.  In “Honorary Men”: The Role of Women in America, the content is devoted to explaining to immigrants of the U.S. that American women, despite the way they dress and participate in the workforce, are “within the norms of social correctness (and beauty) that all women follow in their own cultures”.  Apparently, though we lack actual equality with our male counterparts, the freedoms we do enjoy are so offensive to those who seek to share our country, that some feel the need to apologize for us.

            Culture that understands and embraces the contributions of the female in its society, beyond the production of children, is not completely unique, though it does seem harder to find.  Even where it did and still does endure, I have found that the authors of some resources seem reluctant to report or acknowledge its existence.  Sergei Kan of Dartmouth College gives an explanation for this trend in his essay Clan Mothers and Godmothers:  Tlingit Women and Russian Orthodox Christianity, 1840-1940.  He states, “One major reason is that there were many more men than women among the missionaries and that the written record they left behind sheds more light on the experience of native men than on that of native women”.  The contrast between the modern American society that feels the need to apologize to new immigrants for the behavior of their own women, and an ancient North American culture that embraced the female as an important and substantial member of their society is a dichotomy worth exploring. 

            The Tlingit is such a culture, and they flourished in southeast Alaska and northern British Columbia.  Before European contact the people of this area lived in beachfront villages in large matriclan-based wooden houses.  A typical summer fishing season could provide enough salmon and other seafood to be preserved for year-round use.  Additional foods from land and sea mammals and from plants allowed for a freedom from concern for subsistence needs.  The forests also provided cedar and spruce that were used for housing, basket, tools, and boats (Ackerman and Klein pg28).

            The area in which the Tlingit existed, the islands and mainland west of the Cascades and Coast Mountains, are among the richest in the world (Ackerman and Klein pg28).  The remoteness and environment helped isolate them, which sheltered them from outside influences, until 1741 when the ships of Vitus Bering explored the coast of Alaska for Russia.  Even today the area remains sparsely populated (Ackerman and Klein pg29).  For centuries the Tlingit, Hiada, and Tsimshian cultures evolved free from any foreign or religious influences.

            Left alone and blessed with a prosperity that not many indigenous people enjoyed, the Tlingit culture is multifaceted and complex, a characteristic of Northwest Pacific Coast peoples with access to easily exploited rich resources.  In Tlingit culture a heavy emphasis is placed upon family and kinship and on a rich tradition of oratory.  Wealth and economic power are important indicators of status, but so is generosity and proper behavior, which are all signs of “good breeding” and ties to aristocracy.  Art and spirituality are incorporated in nearly all areas of Tlingit culture, with even everyday objects such as spoons and storage boxes decorated and imbued with spiritual power and historical associations (New World Encyclopedia).

            According to the website Canada’s First Peoples, the assigned roles of men and women are as follows: men were responsible for all the hunting and fishing, building (longhouses), carving (canoes, totem poles); women stayed near the home, doing work on land, were responsible for all domestic chores, such as cooking, cleaning, and child rearing.  Women also dug for clams and shellfish and collected berries from nearby forests.  The women also pounded and softened cedar bark for weaving and making clothes.  Marriages were always between people from different clans.  Clans were individuals identified with their matrilineal clan (naa), a large group of people related by shared genealogy, history, and possessory rights.  The Tlingit clan functions as the main property owner in the culture, thus almost all formal property amongst the Tlingit belongs to clans, not to individuals (New World Encyclopedia).  When a man decided to marry a woman, he paid her father an agreed amount before the wedding.  After the birth of the couple’s first child (born into the mother’s clan), the wife’s clan paid her husband an amount equal to the initial wedding payment.  After the payment, the marriage was annulled and the woman could chose to stay with her husband or leave him.

            In his essay, “Clan Mothers and Godmothers:  Tlingit women and Russian Orthodox Christianity, 1840-1940”, Sergei Dan states:  “These gender roles were ordered by a rather rigid division of labor, with the men bringing home fish and game and the women turning them into food, clothing, and other household items.  In addition, women collected berries and edible plants as well as crustaceans, all of which were important parts of the diet but somewhat lower in status than meat and fish.  The process of the latter made the woman the essential contributor to Tlingit survival”.  The whole Tlingit economy of subsistence and luxury wealth rests ultimately on the stores of dried salmon prepared by the women.  The cutting and smoking of fish, in this wet climate, are tasks requiring far more skill and experience than catching the fish (De Laguna 1983:81).

            The New World Encyclopedia also states:  “Because of the heavy emphasis on clan and matrilineality the father played a relatively minor role in the lives of his children.  Instead, the father’s primary role was filled by the mother’s brother, the children’s maternal uncle, who was of the same clan as the children.  This man would be the caretaker and teacher of the children, as well as the disciplinarian.  The father had a more peripheral relationship with the children, and as such many Tlingit children have very pleasant memories of their fathers as generous and playful while they maintain a distinct fear and awe of their maternal uncles who exposed them to hard training and discipline”.

            In much of the literature on traditional culture and in the words of contemporary elders, the role of mother in the past seems strikingly different from the role of mother in Euro-American culture today.  Mother as nurturer is not the strong theme.  Grandmother often appears in that role.  Care of young children was often in the hands of grandmother, who received help from others in the family.  De Laguna (1957:507), quoting informants, writes, “The grandchild loved the grandmother more than their own mother and father, because their grandmother is always there’ commented a second woman.  ‘We love our grandchildren better than our own children,’ said a third”.  In other words, the day-to-day child care that has become defined as the primary responsibility of mother in Euro-American culture was not an all-encompassing role in traditional culture but one shared by many, especially grandmothers and grandfather (Ackerman and Klein pg42).

            Second, successful mothers who are able to increase their wealth and able to sponsor potlatches or aid with potlatches held by kin groups could effectively raise the status of all individuals within that group.  In other words, a highly successful woman could raise her own status and those of all clan mates, including her children.  Since the gathering of wealth was so clearly an important woman’s role, women were often important organizers of a potlatch even if a man might sponsor the event.  The good mother or good sister or even good wife, was a strong, successful individual who could honor herself and her kin (Ackerman and Klein pg44).

            Another unexpected surprise for the European traders and missionaries was, as reported by Jones (1914:51), “no person is more stubborn than the average Tlingit women”, while Krause (1956:136) noted “frequently the women carry on the trading and they are even more inclined to be stubborn than the men”.  Many likewise were surprised that often women were given their husbands’ money to handle for them.  Jones (1914:15) put it most bluntly:  “The husband’s earning are wholly turned over to his wife.  She is, therefore, the banker of the household.  If he desires to make a purchase he must appeal to her and get her consent”.  In a more poetic turn of phrase, James H. Condit (1926:257) complained that a particularly bothersome Tlingit woman “evidently believed that the hand that pulls the purse string rules the world as well as the hand that rocks the cradle”.  Apparently their financial sensibilities are much the same today.  Modern informants contend this tradition was a practical response to the fact that “men are foolish with money” and a good women’s role includes the protection of her family’s wealth (Ackerman and Klein pg35).

            So for centuries, through the separate but equally important roles of both the men and women of the Tlingit, they all enjoyed a level of wealth and luxury and a kind of equality that few societies achieve.  Eventually, though, outside influences did intrude.  Foreign traders, explorers, and missionaries found their way to the Pacific North West and all its many treasures and made their presences known.  With the purchase of Alaska by the United States in 1867 full-scale efforts to change the culture reached throughout the Tlingit communities (Ackerman and Klein pg32).

             In modern society the territory of the Tlingit is complicated by the fact that they are spread across the border between the United States and Canada.  The Tlingit people envision the land from around Yakutat south through the Alaskan Panhandle and including the lakes in the Canadian interior as being the Lingit Aani, the Land of the Tlingit (New World Encyclopedia).

            So now they live as most Americans, in single family homes with their nuclear families.  The shamans are gone, but the stories and the rituals remain.  They now have to live with all the same inequalities that the rest of us do in this modern and advanced society.  They have had to integrate themselves into a cultural quagmire of segregation, Christian ideologies, prejudices, and sexual stereotypes that come from centuries of female oppression.

            Though I am sure the Tlingit had their inner conflicts and struggles, just like any other people, the system that they developed could be a lesson to us modern Americans.  The structure of their clans and the way they raised their children prepared all, male and female, for the roles they would eventually fill, and both sexes were important for the survival of all.

            In America, if you ask any parent, “What do you want for your children?”  The answer is overwhelmingly, “I want them to be happy”.  The problem with this is that it leaves it to the child to figure out what that means.  To be happy is a very esoteric ideal, hard for most adults to decipher.  Whether our children, boys or girls, will be happy or not I think depends on how we prepare them to be contributing members of this society or culture.  The role that an individual takes on as an adult these days is up to the individual itself.  This, I think, makes it all the more important for us to have a direction or purpose, so as to not wander aimlessly.  To be a productive member of society, sometimes is no more than to not be a burden to that society.  Whether we choose to do work based on gender stereotypes or we choose to go against the norm, should not make our roles any less or more important.  It is said that we must learn from the past so as not to repeat it.  In the case of the Tlingit, their original culture, and their balance between the sexes, maybe it would be worth repeating.

                                                                   Works Cited

Ackerman, Lillian, and Laura F. Klein.  Women and Power in Native North America. Norman:

            University of Oklahoma Press, 1995.

Ingram, J. LaVelle. Honorary Men:  The Role of Women in America

            <http://www.lifeintheusa.com/people/women2.htm

Lerner, Gerda. The Creation of Patriarchy, Oxford University Press, 1986.

Kan, Sergei.  Clans Mothers and Godmother’s: Tlingit Women and Russian Orthodox 

            Christianity, 1840-1940.  American Society for Ethnohistory, vol.43, no,4, Native

             American Women’s Responses to Christianity, (Autumn, 1996)

http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Tlingit.aspx

http://firstpeoplesofcanada.com/fp_groups/fp_nwc6.html

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Tlingit

http://www.trinity.edu/mkearl/gender.html

 

Applied Anthropology Profile: Theron Huntamer: HIV & AIDS Epidemiology Capacity Coordinator

Source: http://www.healthonearth.net/2011/11/medical-anthropology-and-global-health.html

Unlike other anthropologists interviewed for this Applied Anthropology series, Theron Huntamer was not drawn to anthropology because he found it provocative, alluring, or interesting.  He honestly was drawn to the discipline because he found it easy.  Having been raised in a family of salesmen Huntamer had learned early in life how to read people, and he realized that this learned skill set not only made his anthropology courses easier but it was an asset to the discipline that is based on learning about people and cultures.  While pursuing his bachelor’s degree in Anthropology Huntamer focused on a variety of courses by what he referred to as good professors who guided him.  These courses included (Arch) GIS, statistics, computer (database management), English language, cultural anthropology, and public health courses. He believed that he would ultimately become an English as a Second Language teacher, but upon graduating he found that there were a great deal of opportunities in the public health fields, which ultimately drew him to his current position as a HIV & AIDS Epidemiology Capacity Coordinator for the state of Nevada. 

As a HIV & AIDS Epidemiology Capacity Coordinator Huntamer is not only charged with tracking Nevada residents who are diagnosed with HIV & AIDS but additional health outcomes among marginalized populations across Nevada.  One project that he could talk about involved tracking the health statuses among high school athletes who were diagnosed with sickle cell anemia.  Because of his diverse skill set, particularly due to his anthropological and statistical backgrounds, Huntamer is often employed on a variety of public health projects.  The state of Nevada, however, is not the only employer interested in him.  He admits that he has and continues to receive multiple job offers from businesses across the country who find these skills and therefore Huntamer particularly attractive for marketing their products. 

Huntamer credits his anthropological background in providing him these various employment opportunities because he acknowledges the multidisciplinary and applied nature of anthropology today.  He said that he appreciated his anthropology courses as they challenged him in a variety of ways, instigating him to work hard and learn as much as possible.  According to Huntamer, anthropology is a discipline that requires outside of the box thinking and encourages creative problem solving skills, which he did not find in his other course work.  He admits that this has been one of the most valuable lessons he took away from his anthropological training because life is not predictable and problem solving and nontraditional thinking is therefore required in order to become successful. 

He also credits his current success and job placement to one professor in particular.  He said that his medical anthropology course was one of the hardest he had ever taken, but it was also the one he learned the most from because he was made to work.  If it had not been for that course and that professor’s high standards Huntamer does not believe he would be working in the position he has today and he would not be as successful either.  His one piece of advice for anthropology students is to listen to your professors.  Your anthropology course may not be a requirement for your degree but it does not mean it is any less important.  As demonstrated by Huntamer’s story that course could lead to an unexpected but fulfilling career.