Which of the following would an archaeologist study in order to come up with the conclusion in the depicted table? a. the diary entries from early humans b. the artifacts that early humans left behindc. the oral traditions that early humans passed down. d. the fossilized bones of animals in the same area.

I agree, no table, but I'm thinking the answer is B. Because an archaeologist studies artifacts that have been left behind.

The answer would be: B The artifacts that early humans left behind.

Man made items are an indicator of where people lived. And the use of fire would allow people to live in those places

the answer is d the rejection of the olive branch petition.

explanation:

the olive branch petition was an attempt to state the rights of the colonists while keeping their loyalty to the british crown. hope this !

by kd

answer:   migrations were important in the neolithic period. "two major migrations passing through southeastern europe were confirmed by the means of archaeo-genetic studies."

the first migration was the early neolithic period -- 6,000 before common era (bce) -- when the first farmers, from anatolia -- asia minor -- spread through europe. the second migration occurred during the early bronze age (3,000-2,500 bce) when the so-called "steppe population," from the eurasian steppe, replaced much of northern europe's previous population.

the first farmers of northern and western europe passed through southeastern europe with limited hunter-gatherer genetic admixture, which occurs when two or more previously isolated populations begin interbreeding. however, some groups that remained mixed extensively -- without the male-biased, hunter-gatherer admixture that prevailed later in the north and west, according to latest discoveries. southeastern europe continued to be a nexus between east and west, with intermittent genetic contact with the steppe people up to 2,000 years before the migrations that replaced much of northern europe's population.

"in some places, hunter-gatherers and incoming farmers seem to have mixed very quickly," says iain mathieson, a geneticist at the university of pennsylvania, who was first author of the paper. "but, mostly, the two groups remained isolated, at least for the first few hundred years. these hunter-gatherers had been living there for thousands of years, and it must have been quite a shock to have these new people show up -- with a completely different lifestyle and appearance."