Friday, September 19, 2025

Early humans may have walked from Türkiye to mainland Europe, new groundbreaking research suggests

“Emotional and inspiring” archaeological discovery of Paleolithic tools uncovers a lost, prehistoric passing which may have made it possible to cross between the Ayvalık and Europe

Taylor & Francis Group

image:
A Paleolithic handaxe with a broken distal end, discovered during the Ayvalık survey
view more
Credit: Credit to Kadriye, Göknur, and Hande

Continuous landmasses, now submerged, may have made it possible for early humans to cross between present-day Turkiye and Europe, new landmark research of this largely unexplored region reveals.

The findings, published today in the peer-reviewed Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology, unveil a previously undocumented Paleolithic presence in Ayvalık and more importantly could redocument our species’ migration into the continent.

It has long been thought that Homosapien reached Europe primarily coming via the Balkans and the Levant, from Africa into the Middle East.

However, with this new discovery of 138 lithic artifacts at 10 sites, across a region of 200km², the suggestion is that long before its olive groves and seaside charm, the northeastern Aegean coast of Ayvalık (now Turkey) was in fact another route for early humans navigating a changing prehistoric world.

“Our archaeological discovery has unveiled that this now-idyllic region once potentially offered a vital land bridge for human movement during the Pleistocene era—when sea levels dropped and the now-submerged landscape was briefly exposed,” explains Dr Göknur Karahan, from the Department of Archaeology-Prehistory, at Hacettepe University, in Turkey, who was part of a fully female team of expert archaeologists from the country.

“We are very excited and delighted with this discovery. These findings mark Ayvalık as a potential new frontier in the story of human evolution, placing it firmly on the map of human prehistory – opening up a new possibility for how early humans may have entered Europe.

“It feels like we are adding an entirely new page to the story of human dispersal. Our research raises exciting possibilities for future exploration, and we hope it emerges as a body of work that will shift the approach of Pleistocene archaeology for decades to come.”

How were these findings possible?

During the Ice Age, sea levels dropped by more than 100 meters, exposing vast coastal plains that are now under water. At that time, today’s islands and peninsulas of Ayvalık would have in fact been part of a continuous landmass, forming a natural bridge between Anatolia and Europe.

The tools found in this current discovery are right along the present-day coastline and mark evidence of people living and moving across these now-lost landscapes.

Factors like environmental processes and the depth of deposits have previously limited the ability to detect and preserve remains in Ayvalık.

“In all these periods, the present-day islands and peninsulas of Ayvalık would have formed interior zones within an expansive terrestrial environment,” explains co-author Professor Kadriye Özçelik, from Ankara University.

“These paleogeographic reconstructions underscore the importance of the region for understanding hominin dispersals across the northeastern Aegean during the Pleistocene.”

What was found?

The region’s shifting geology and active coastlines in the North Aegean made preservation difficult and the number of items uncovered “limited”, however this research team managed to uncover Levallois technologies from various Paleolithic periods, as well as handaxes and cleavers.

Among the most significant finds include Levallois-style flake tools, sophisticated implements linked to the Middle Paleolithic Mousterian tradition – these are often associated with Neanderthals and early Homosapiens.

“These large cutting tools are among the most iconic artefacts of the Paleolithic and are instantly recognizable even today, so are a very important find,” explains Dr Karahan.

“The presence of these objects in Ayvalık is particularly significant, as they provide direct evidence that the region was part of wider technological traditions shared across Africa, Asia, and Europe.”

Describing the initial discovery of the 131 items, Dr Karahan adds: “It was a truly unforgettable moment for us. Holding the first tools in our hands was both emotional and inspiring.

“And each find from there on was a moment of excitement for the whole team.

“Holding these objects —after walking across landscapes where no one had ever documented Paleolithic remains before— was unforgettable.”

What does this discovery tell us about early humans?

The experts’ key argument hinges on the potential of Ayvalık as a dynamic site for interaction and exchange, facilitating early human movement between the Anatolia peninsula and Europe.

Exploring how Anatolia, with specific focus on Ayvalık, and Europe were linked during glacial sea-level low stands offers alternative pathways for how early humans moved around the region beyond dominantly emphasised northern mainland-centred routes.

Addressing a gap in the scholarship, the authors’ work provides a new foundation for examining resources and migration routes in which Ayvalık may have featured as part of a mobility corridor.

The survey’s yield of tools demonstrates a “consistent use of Levallois technology and flake production… and a diversified toolkit,” whilst all artefacts together offer what the team state are “valuable insights into early human presence, raw material preferences, and technological variability”.

“The findings paint a vivid picture of early human adaptation, innovation, and mobility along the Aegean,” Dr Karahan explains.

“The results confirmed that Ayvalık – which had never before been studied for its Paleolithic potential – holds vital traces of early human activity.”

Incredible recoveries, hundreds of thousands of years later

As this was a survey (carried out across a two-week period in June 2022) rather than an excavation, the team could not be certain of what they would find when they set off. They knew from the region’s geology and paleogeography that there was potential. They explored – often muddy, (particularly in lowland basins and coastal plains) – sites by foot.

What followed was a “discovery of such a diverse and well-preserved set of artefacts, which exceeded our expectations,” Dr Karahan says.

Although these recovery efforts were not without challenges, the authors explore what both the challenges and findings reveal in the paper.
They state: “The widespread, muddy cover was considered a limiting factor for the preservation and detectability of Paleolithic materials.

“However, despite these constraints, high-quality raw material sources, such as flint and chalcedony, were identified in multiple locations, including areas affected by alluvial deposition.”

Future potential

Fellow author Dr Hande Bulut, from Düzce University, adds: “Ultimately the results underline Ayvalık’s potential as a long-term hominin habitat and a key area for understanding Paleolithic technological features in the eastern Aegean.

“While preliminary, the current findings underscore the region’s potential to contribute to broader debates on Aegean connectivity and technological evolution during the Pleistocene.

“Excitingly, the region between the North Aegean and the Anatolian mainland, may still hold valuable clues to early occupation despite the challenges posed by active geomorphological processes.”

The team recommends future research uses a multidisciplinary approach to outline absolute dating, stratigraphic excavation, and paleoenvironmental reconstruction, which they describe as “essential to clarify the temporal depth and functional character of the Ayvalık assemblage”.

Journal

The Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology

DOI

10.1080/15564894.2025.2542777

Method of Research

Observational study

Subject of Research

Not applicable

Article Title

Discovering the Paleolithic Ayvalık: A Strategic Crossroads in Early Human Dispersals Between Anatolia and Europe

Article Publication Date

19-Sep-2025

Field survey in Ayvalık from left to right, Kadriye, Göknur, and Hande

During the field survey in Ayvalık. from left to right, Göknur, Kadriye, and Hande
General view of the Ayvalık region, where the Paleolithic survey was conducted
Credit
Credit to Kadriye, Göknur, and Hande

Process for dealing with sexual misconduct by doctors requires major reform

Sanctions are inconsistent and overly reliant on subjective evidence, say experts

BMJ Group

The current process for managing sexual misconduct perpetrated by doctors in the UK requires major reform, say experts in The BMJ today.

Mei Nortley and colleagues argue that sanctioning of doctors is inconsistent and overly reliant on subjective evidence and they call for a dedicated, evidence driven approach “that treats sexual misconduct by doctors not as a regulatory outlier, but as the grave abuse of trust it truly is.”

They point to several recent high profile cases that have fuelled concerns about the consistency and adequacy of the UK Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) sanctions against doctors found guilty of sexual misconduct.

The MPTS is an independent adjudicator that is funded by and accountable to the General Medical Council (GMC). Its primary role is to protect the public by ensuring doctors meet the required standards to practise medicine.

For example, an acute medicine consultant who was found to have committed rape by an MPTS tribunal was given only a 12 month suspension based on the tribunal’s view of the incident as a “one-off event” and further justified by the time since the incident and testimonials of high clinical competence.

And a doctor who knowingly entered into a sexual relationship with a vulnerable patient whom he had pursued and groomed from the age of 14 was suspended for 12 months rather than erased from the register. The panel cited evidence of insight, remediation, and remorse.

The authors say these cases raise questions about the adequacy of protection for victims and the public and affect public confidence in the profession, and ask how can the process be improved?

They explain that MPTS guidance currently directs tribunal panels to balance aggravating factors (eg, lack of insight, abuse of position, discrimination) against mitigating ones such as insight, remediation efforts, positive character references (testimonials), and the time elapsed since the incident.

The aim is to promote consistency, fairness, and transparency in tribunal decisions, but they argue that many of these elements, particularly insight and remediation, are highly subjective, leaving them open to different interpretations.

Concurrently aggravating factors key to sexual misconduct such as grooming, manipulation, coercion and persistent behaviours are not recognised in MPTS sanctions guidance.

In addition to the procedural shortcomings, MPTS panel members lack the specialist training and tools required to deal with serious cases of sexual misconduct that include rape, sexual assault, and offences against children, they write.

They also point to a stark imbalance in support, where accused doctors often receive full legal support, including strategic guidance on presenting evidence and mitigating factors, but victims are ineligible for legal representation, support or guidance.

New research published in The Bulletin of the Royal College of Surgeons of England has found that in nearly one in four cases, the sanctions imposed by MPTS tribunals were more lenient than those proposed by the GMC. The Royal College of Surgeons of England (RCS England) is calling for urgent reform as these findings demonstrate that the current system of medical regulation - overseen by the MPTS and the GMC - is failing targets of misconduct.

Against this background, the authors suggest changes to the MPTS process that would improve its adjudication in sexual misconduct cases, such as specialist tribunal panels, reduced reliance on mitigating factors, better support for victims, and sexual misconduct training for all tribunal members.

“We need a dedicated, evidence driven approach that treats sexual misconduct by doctors not as a regulatory outlier, but as the grave abuse of trust it truly is,” argue the authors. “Sanctions must be sufficiently severe to deter these behaviours, and vulnerable witnesses must be supported and protected.”

“Without concerted effort to change, we risk preserving a system that is more skilled at facilitating abusers than protecting victims, and that continues to erode public trust,” they conclude.

In a linked news article, Nortley and colleagues also point to a lack of fair treatment for victim witnesses in MPTS hearings. “Victims told us they experienced hostile cross examination and there were unexplained errors in the preparation of their evidence, such as large chunks of their evidence redacted without explanation and without consultation,” they say.

This is borne out by a patient involved in a recent case who describes the MPTS tribunal process as “victim-hostile and utterly unfair” and says the tribunal “focused on protecting Dr Hughes's career, not the profound impact of his actions on me.”

The MPTS is expected to issue updated guidance within weeks which will come into effect before the end of this year.

A spokesperson told The BMJ this would reflect the development of recent case law and build on good practice. “We recognise the impact of our work and decisions on the lives of the doctors. It is paramount that our decisions are fair and proportionate, and are seen to be so, and that we are open to informed scrutiny in this regard.”

And since concerns about misconduct hearings cross the remit of both the MPTS and GMC, The BMJ also put the criticisms to the GMC.

A spokesperson said the Council took a zero-tolerance and proactive approach to all forms of sexual misconduct and at the heart of its efforts was the support it provided to victims and survivors. “We are actively listening and continuously seeking opportunities to play our part in ensuring that victims and survivors are supported and heard, and that cases of sexual misconduct are handled appropriately, with care and compassion.”

In a linked editorial, Carrie Newlands and colleagues discuss the future role of the GMC and outline the case for a single healthcare regulator to address “serious inconsistencies” in the fitness to practise process.

They point out that the UK’s Health and Care Professions Council regulates 15 different health professions, including paramedics and psychologists, at considerably lower cost than the GMC, while Australia has had a single professional health regulator for 15 years with responsibility for 16 health professions, including doctors, dentists, and nurses.

“As evidence continues to emerge on the damage caused to complainants, registrants under investigation and witnesses in the fitness to practise process, constructive multiprofessional dialogue in the UK should explore building a streamlined, evidence based, regulatory framework that puts patients first and holds everyone to the same ethical standard,” they conclude.