Sarah Goodell
Mr. Ippolito
AP Bio: Current Event Review
25 November, 2017
Current Event #9
Fleur, Nicholas St. “Rock Carvings of Ancient Dogs Getting Taught New Tricks.” The New York
Times, The New York Times, 20 Nov. 2017
www.nytimes.com/2017/11/20/science/dogs-rock-art.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience.
This week, I read “Rock Carvings of Ancient Dogs Getting Taught New Tricks” by The New York Times author Nicholas St. Fleur. As St. Fleur describes, archaeologists in the Saudi desert have recently discovered rock engravings depicting some of the earliest evidence of “human-canine companionship.” According to scholars, the rock art dates back about 8,000 to 9,000 years, during the early Holocene period, which began when the Paleolithic ice age closed. They show hunters using dogs, which closely resemble modern breeds of Canaan dogs, to intimidate and catch prey, such as ibex and gazelles. As stated by Michael Petraglia, an archaeologist from the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History in Germany, “This is the first imagery of a dog with a leash…” Maria Guagnin, another archaeologist from the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, has also claimed that “We can now say about 9,000 years ago people already controlled their dogs and had them on leashes and used them for really complex hunting strategies.” It has also been speculated that humans in this region began to train dogs before they began to herd cattle.
This article is relevant to society because it is very important for us, as humans, to understand our past and how we have evolved on this planet. In order to do so, we must rely on archaeological finds and other engraved items to tell us about life thousands of years ago. Through understanding humanity’s history, we can further our own society and can work to build a more developed world for future generations. Although this may seem like a small find, the discovery of human relationships with canines from thousands of years in the past opens up a whole new field of discovery and innovation for us to explore. Thus, we can improve our own societies and work towards larger goals. Beginning with small excavations, such as the rock art discovered here, we can build upon those findings to learn more about our cultures and to investigate further.
St. Fleur’s article was very well-written and his argument was easy to follow throughout the piece despite the little knowledge that was available to him on this topic. Because these etchings are fairly recent findings, it is difficult to cite an exact time period regarding the rock art. However, St. Fleur did a great job building his piece. He also quoted and spoke with credible sources, which allowed him to uncover and absorb as much knowledge as he could at the time. As a result of his direct contact with archaeologists on the site, St. Fleur was able to establish his credibility as an author. Next time, he can try talking about the effects of these findings and where the archaeologists will go from here. He could also address which group of people may have created this rock art. We know that it was most likely a nomadic band, but we are unsure about how long it would have taken them and if multiple groups had added onto it.
Kunzang Namgyal
ReplyDeleteMr.Ippolito
AP Biology-EF even
29 November 2017
Fleur, Nicholas St. “Rock Carvings of Ancient Dogs Getting Taught New Tricks.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 20 Nov. 2017
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/20/science/dogs-rock-art.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience
I read Sarah’s analysis of the article “Rock Carvings of Ancient Dogs Getting Taught New Tricks,” by the New York times writer, Nicholas St. Fleur. Overall, Sarah’s review is comprehensive and well-written. Sarah set the scene of the time period from which these rock carvings were found, explaining that these carvings were from a pre-civilization time when hunters and gatherers roamed the globe. Sarah also did a good job of explaining the human’s relationship with the dogs, “ hunters using dogs… to intimidate and catch prey, such as ibex and gazelles.” Dogs have aided humans in many ways throughout history and in that era, dogs helped humans hunt for survival. I also love the fact that she included details that called attention to the significance of this find. Sarah detail for the reader, “It has also been speculated that humans in this region began to train dogs before they began to herd cattle,” the Neolithic Revolution has been defined as the change from hunting and gathering to farming and herding animals, so it is very interesting that training dogs came before the Neolithic Revolution
There were a few areas of improvement I recognized. When relating this article to society I believe that she could have found a better relation between our society and this find. She says that it’s important for us because we need to “understand our past and how we have evolved on this planet,” however all archaeological finds and discoveries we make help us to do this. She could have highlighted the relationship between canine and human, speaking about the bond between our species as many people love their pet dogs. Sarah also could have included more quotes from distinguished individuals in the field of this discovery. She mentions that the author included many quotes from credible sources, I believe if Sarah had quoted these sources it would have added credibility to her review and furthered the reader’s understanding of these carvings as experts often can give unique insights.
From reading Sarah’s analysis, I learned that humans have interacted with dogs since about 9,000 years ago. This astonishes me, I had believed that humans began keeping dogs as pets during colonial times, I had no idea that human-canine companionship stemmed back to the pre-Neolithic time period. This leads me to wonder how humans began the process of domesticating dogs and how they became partners rather than strangers.
ReplyDeleteComment:
Sarah Goodell wrote an excellent review of “Rock Carvings of Ancient Dogs Getting Taught New Tricks” by Nicholas Fleur. One aspect well done can be found throughout her summary of the article she reviewed. Here, Goodell incorporated multiple quotations from the article at appropriate parts of her summary. For example, Goodell incorporated quotes spoken by archeologists on the topic and quoted their words exactly. By including these quotations, Goodell is not only better explaining the article through included evidence in the quotes but is also including the opinions and views of the archaeologists, or the people interpreting the rock engravings. Another aspect well done can be found in the summary as well. Goodell strategically explained and defined terms that may have been too abstract for the reader to understand. For example, after she mentioned the age of the engravings of about 9,000 years old, she further described the time period by giving it a name, the Holocene period. For readers who may not be familiar with that time, Goodell then included the fact that it “began when the Paleolithic ice age closed” (paragraph 1) so they could understand. Lastly, an aspect done exceptionally can be found in Goodell’s relevance paragraph. Here, she introduces the idea that “a whole new field of discovery and innovation” (paragraph 2) has been created by this discovery. Goodell was able to make this connection and clearly stated why it was important to society- because it could help us expand on the knowledge of our cultures. This connection is extremely effective on the reader, as it is somewhat hidden without having prior knowledge that there are not many fields of study dedicated to the ancient history and relationship between humans and dogs.
Despite the fact that Goodell did excel in many areas of her review, there was room for improvement. One area of confusion can be found in her critique of the article. Goodell states that Fleur used “credible sources”(paragraph 3) in his article, but never states what those sources are. To improve on this vague section f her review, Goodell could write a sentence about the sources, explaining their credibility. Another area which could have been improved can be found in the relevance paragraph. Here, she argues that with the findings of the dog carvings and the aid of other discoveries, we can build a “more developed world for future generations” (paragraph 3). However, she does not explain how we can develop our world and society specifically, and what the dog carvings mean in terms of our society currently. A solution to this error could be a few sentences explaining the relationship of man to canine in society and how dogs are referred to as “man’s best friend,” therefore providing evidence that the ancient carvings hold significance to our society now and not just in the future. She could also expand on the development of the world by describing how scientists can now utilize this information to use dog companionship to better the way we live.
From this review, I learned that dogs are truly, and always have been, the best friend of mankind. I have a dog that I’ve grown up with and learned to care for. He has certainly changed the way I view the world. As a result, it made complete sense to me that there is now evidence supporting the seemingly everlasting relationship of dogs and people. In a sense, it almost feels inevitable that the two species have an ancient history together. My outlook on the world of dog owners has changed slightly, as I realize they are carrying on a practice of their ancestors of keeping and training dogs.
Gigi Chrappa
ReplyDeleteNovember 29, 2017
AP Biology
Current Event Comment
Fleur, Nicholas St. “Rock Carvings of Ancient Dogs Getting Taught New Tricks.” The New YorkTimes, The New York Times, 20 Nov. 2017
www.nytimes.com/2017/11/20/science/dogs-rock-art.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollecton%2Fscience.
This week, I decided to read Sarah’s review of the article, “Rock Carvings of Ancient Dogs Getting Taught New Tricks” as the title peaked my interest. Sarah’s review was very well thought out and extremely thorough. She successfully explains the first sightings of canine companionship and successfully relates the topic to our daily lives. I found this particularly interesting as rock carvings don’t seem to be a topic that relates to our lives, yet Sarah managed to relate the topic. It was interesting to read a review which detailed the evolution of canine companionship! Personally, I have a dog and I rarely think about how pets became domesticated. However, her review actually addressed this which I found incredibly interesting. Sarah also does a wonderful job of including reliable sources and personnel who provide insight on the topic. She includes references to historians and special scientists which helps to authenticate her review (ethos!!!) Lastly, in addition to writing a stellar review, Sarah succeeded in professionally critiquing the article. She skillfully approached the article and determined the ‘weak’ areas that could be improved upon. This is a great ability to have, especially when dealing with and giving constructive criticism to peers in the work force.
Although Sarah wrote a superb review, there are areas in which she could improve upon (as there always are). It might be interesting for Sarah to continue this research and actually find additional outside information to include in her next review. It would be interesting to see if she could find other carvings or other ancient depictions of early canine companionship. In addition to this, although she includes references to several historians, she may want to include opinions from other scientists, both agreeing and disagreeing with the assumptions made in the article. This would allow for the audience to make informed opinions as they would be given both points of view. Lastly, in the future, Sarah may want to connect the ideas she expresses in her review a tad better. Her first paragraph gives a wonderful and detailed summary of the article. However, she chose an extremely difficult topic to relate to us currently. But, she did an exceptional job relating the topic to us. However, the topic itself was just a tad of a reach in general.
Overall, I read a well-written and engaging review on an important article. I soon plan to go back and read the article her review was based on because I believe her topic to be extremely interesting. Interestingly enough, I actually decided to read Sarah’s review because the title of her review peaked my interest. However, after reading her review, I feel more inclined to read the article as Sarah was able to provide a wonderful review.
Hannah Beldotti
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
Current Even Comment #9
Nov. 29, 2017
Fleur, Nicholas St. “Rock Carvings of Ancient Dogs Getting Taught New Tricks.” The New York
Times, The New York Times, 20 Nov. 2017
www.nytimes.com/2017/11/20/science/dogs-rock-art.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience.
This week I read Sarah Goodell’s review on the article, “Rock Carvings of Ancient Dogs Getting Taught New Tricks,” by Nicholas St. Fleur. Sarah did a great job of reviewing this article. In her beginning paragraph, she included a concise summary of what the article discussed. In her summary, she included specific information that she regurgitated and also specific quotes. She includes opinions of different archaeologists. This is important to account for this when writing a current event review to show that the author succeeded in creating a worthy report based on scientific evidence and opinions. One aspect of the review that was well done is how when Sarah introduced a new person, archeologist or scientist, she explained who they were and how their occupation makes them relevant when being discussed in the article. The second and third aspects that are commendable is how Sarah related her topic to society and then how she distinguished between what the author did well on and how he could improve. She is able to provide specific examples of how the author can improve, “Next time, he can try talking about the effects of these findings and where the archaeologists will go from here. He could also address which group of people may have created this rock art.”
Although Sarah did a great job of writing her review, there are a couple of areas of which she could improve upon. For example, in her beginning paragraph, I thought she could have went into more depth; there was little background into the study itself. Also, when she related her topic to society, she could have went into more detail on how this would impact our lives specifically. For example, she could have researched other articles on topics similar and incorporated outside information to support her review.
I learned many things from reading Sarah’s current event review. For example, gained knowledge on how the idea of having dogs as companions and tame is not a current concept as it was developed many years ago. Also, I found this topic highly relatable as many people own pets, specifically dogs. This is important because the reader should be able to relate to the article in order to fully absorb the information presented and reflect.