Monday 14th July 2025
Blog Page 1997

Deep in the Vatican vaults

When I arrived in Rome three months ago, I wasn’t to know that I was about to get a first-hand experience of one of the biggest crises of the western world’s oldest and largest institution: the Roman Catholic Church.
As I started my internship with the BBC, I was immediately intrigued by the subtle yet omnipresent power of the Church that pervaded all of Rome: not only a visual and physical power – the colossal St Peter’s church, hundreds of priests and nuns walking silently on the streets – but also a fiercely strong political and social one.

I understood what it meant to live in the same city as the Pope when I was sent to interview the head of a Roman state school. The man had provoked the Vatican’s wrath by installing a condom machine for students. It ‘trivializes sexuality’ wrote Cardinal Augosto Vallini, Vicar General of Rome, in an official statement that was relayed by most Italian newspapers. Within a few hours, everyone knew about the small Kepler school situated in a lower-middle class district on the outskirts of Rome. Heading to the interview, I gave the taxi driver the school’s address not expecting that he would know about it but he immediately replied: ‘Ha, you want to go to the ‘condom school!’ and seeing me surprised he added, ‘It’s been on the radio all day’. On that afternoon, I witnessed the Vatican’s success in creating a media storm in Italy out of a decision that many schools around the world had made before without any particular public interest.

I observed a similar attempt by the Church to control the lives of the Italian laity during the regional elections in March 2010. Two women were competing for the presidency of Lazio, the region comprising Rome and the Vatican; Renata Polverini was from Berlusconi’s PDL party and Emma Bonino was the centre-left Democratic Party’s candidate, well known for her pro-abortion views. They had been head-to-head in the polls throughout the campaign. It has been argued that what eventually gave Polverini the advantage was the Church’s official intervention asking citizens to act according to their Catholic conscience thus avoiding voting for pro-abortion candidates.
‘It is with regard to the primordial right to life that in this third millennium, the whole of society still has to carry out an examination of conscience. Every citizen must bare this in mind when voting, both for national and local elections’, wrote Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco, head of the Italian Bishops Conference, in an official statement issued a few days before the elections. On the 29th of March 2010, Renata Polverini won the elections with 51.14% of the votes.

The problem is that the Vatican tends to impose its views when it does not strictly need to intervene, but conveniently remains quiet on more critical matters when they threaten its reputation. This wall of silence has been under attack for many years but when I arrived in Rome it finally seemed to be breaking down.

It is not the first time that the Vatican has been plagued by sex scandals – the Boston priests’ case in the 1990s caused public outrage and forced Pope John Paul II to call an emergency meeting with US cardinals in 2002, which resulted in Archbishop Bernard Law’s resignation later that year. But this particular crisis seems particularly tenacious, and therefore extremely dangerous for the Church. ‘I have never seen a graver crisis affecting the Church’ said David Willey, the BBC’s Vatican specialist who has been reporting from the principality for the past forty years and for whom I had the privilege to work. ‘The façade is finally beginning to crack’, he added. That is because the scandals now directly involve the Vatican’s most holy and powerful representative: the Pope.

Did Benedict XVI (Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger at the time) know about all these atrocities, and if so, why did he not report them to the authorities? The fact that the press all around the world has repeatedly raised this question is quite an exceptional event in itself. For the first time, the Church’s leader is accused of being somewhat responsible for covering up heinous crimes that were allegedly reported to him while he was Archbishop of Munich in the 1970s and later in Rome. Indeed, between 1981 and 2005, Cardinal Ratzinger was Prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) in charge, amongst other things, of dealing with clerical sexual misconduct.

In May 2001, Ratzinger sent a letter to all Catholic Bishops ordering that ‘preliminary investigations’ into claims of sexual abuse should be sent directly to the CDF office, without informing authorities for ‘cases of this kind are subject to the pontifical secret’. Some argue that this letter proved Cardinal Ratzinger’s deliberate attempt to obstruct an inquiry into sex abuse, but others claim it showed his determination to organize the Church’s chaotic system by centralizing all the allegations to his office. As a matter of fact, Ratzinger’s defenders portray him as the first Pope who has demonstrated a real dedication to free the Church from sexual crimes. Not only has Benedict XVI commented on the scandals more frequently than his predecessor, but he also tried investigating an estimated two thousand sexual abuses on boys committed during the 1990s by the Austrian Cardinal Groër, John Paul II’s close friend, but the Vatican stopped him. Could John Paul II, the much-loved pope, have done a worse job than the austere Benedict XVI in handling cases of sexual abuse? ‘I doubt that Ratzinger will go down in history as a better pope than his predecessor, but he may well have prevented him ever becoming a Saint’ David Willey told me.

It is interesting to see how Ratzinger’s 2001 letter can be interpreted in such drastically opposed, yet justifiable, ways. Unfortunately, the Vatican’s media strategy has been appalling throughout the crisis and therefore the other side of the story has rarely been heard. The Vatican would ‘shoot the messenger’ – a New York Times’ article was said to be an ‘ignoble attempt to attack at any cost Benedict XVI’ – but never rationally invalidated the accusations regarding the Pope’s handling of the sexual abuse cases.

It is key to remember that the word ‘cases’ objectifies what is fundamentally a terrible human tragedy, as I realized during the afternoon I spent at the BBC office with two American men who had been sexually abused by priests more than thirty years ago. No words could ever describe what they had to endure, and the psychological torture they still suffer today. They had come to Rome to be heard, having felt that the moment of truth had finally arrived. ‘It is amazing to see that no matter where we come from, the same rule of silence has been imposed upon priests’ victims’ one of the men told me. ‘I still believe in God, but not in the Church’, he added in a calm but resolute tone. When I left the office that night and walked through St Peter’s square, not even the beautiful façade of the church in the twilight could make me forget what I had heard.

Hometown: Hexham, Northumberland

0

Typical freshers’ week scene: the JCR bar, a hundred post-pubescents desperately attempting to look cool and the same four or five questions asked again and again. After name/course/building comes the inevitable question ‘so, whereabouts are you from?’ For me, to reply to this question is to look like a wanker. If I reply ‘near Newcastle’, questions about my accent, or lack thereof, would be raised, leading me to make some excuse about being ‘educated in the south’; yet if I say ‘Northumberland’ I am met with blank stares and feel obliged to patronise them (it is England’s sixth largest county after all) with ‘almost Scotland, but not quite’. So either I look pompous or they look stupid. Maybe it would have been easier to have just picked them up on their fag-end preposition?

Hexham might be familiar to any of you studying Classics or Ancient History, as it is located just off Hadrian’s Wall. As such, much of the town’s tourism is devoted to all things Roman, including a particular local known as ‘Jefficus’ who holds talks for tourist in full Roman officer get-up. Perhaps the town’s golden era was in the early nineties when Kevin Costner’s 1991 epic Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves decided to use a local portion of the Wall in the film. Not only did it introduce Hexham to black people (Morgan Freeman played Robin’s Moorish sidekick) but it also gave weight to Tourism North East’s claim that, when travelling from Dover to Nottingham, Northumberland is worth the 300 mile detour.

It seems that no ‘Hometown’ piece would be complete without the obligatory mention of the local nightclub. Dontino’s (technically renamed ‘Studio’) is the only place to go on a Friday night, and by that I mean that there really is nowhere else. Being a classy establishment, entry is denied to those wearing tracksuit bottoms (although it is only a short walk to the new, controversial, 24-hour Tesco Extra). Yet still I have never been without a male member of my group and another member of the throng having a physical disagreement. Men from Hexham, however, are extremely chivalrous and willing to buy any girl a pizza in exchange for a mobile number.

Joking aside, Hexham, like much of the North East, is famous for its cheery locals, a trait that works as a happy counterbalance to the miserable weather. However, one can’t help to feel claustrophobic in a town so static that the imminent arrival of Waitrose was front page news for about a year, giving the local populus a break from such gems as ‘TRAMPOLINES: This Summer’s Death Trap!’ and ‘Jimmy, the Talented Tyneside Teenager’ who can hold twelve eggs in one hand. Mammia Mia sold out, two screenings a day, for twelve consecutive weeks (honestly).

Finally, as it is Election Day, I would like to mention briefly local politics and bring up a bugbear of mine. Hexhamshire is a painfully safe Tory seat and today a new Conservative candidate is running. Very few areas have the same strength of regional pride as the North East, and it is an area typically misunderstood by Westminster. Rather than fielding a local candidate, Conservative HQ has shipped in one of Cameron’s catamites: a city lawyer who has until now had no connection with the region. To believe that someone like him could represent an area with such a sense of local identity is the typical condescension of the South Eastern elite. All they needed was to choose a candidate of their political leaning, who was engaging and had spent some proper time in the area. Kevin Costner, anyone?

Now that’s what I call an essay crisis

Like many other graduates without a meticulously structured career plan post-university, the jarring need to move onto the next big thing came as something as a shock. I moved into a new house, convincing myself that my degree meant any spell of unemployment was likely to be an aberration and nothing more, but as the days turned to weeks, desperation crept in. Never kind to ditherers at the best of times, the post-recessionary job market put a large dent in my jejune optimism. Everything was taking a long time to materialise – all except for the bills, of course. They were always punctual.

It was during this period that I had the name of a well known essay-writing site mentioned to me – the ones that write essays for order for paying students. The deal seemed a good one. Freedom to work from home – or indeed, wherever I wanted, and a salary which could reach £500 per week. The greatest appeal was, however, to my vanity – after countless knockbacks it seems I had finally found an employer who was willing to give creative license to my professional intentions.

When I mentioned my new employment to my flatmate, he was appalled, citing the undermining of academic integrity, and the effects on inequality which such sites engender. Now, I can’t pretend that I took seriously the statement provided by these sites which emphasised the purely guiding role these ‘sample’ essays were meant to perform, but I didn’t see clearly in those early days who I was harming in the course of my late night writing sessions.

As my argument ran, the essays of the length I was writing would be unlikely to be coursework, and that marks for such things could never make up a substantial proportion of the student’s overall grade. Tutors would easily catch out exceptionally advanced work, and furthermore, I reasoned that essay-writing was so conducive to the learning of the subject that the students lazy enough to pay the money would show themselves up badly in exams, thus not disrupting the meritocratic principles of the academic system. This stance was to take a beating in the weeks that followed, as it became clear from the information submitted along with the briefs which I was bidding for, that the pieces were assessed, that some did count towards their overall grade, and finally, that one was a dissertation.

My disillusionment was compounded by the particulars of the site’s policy when bidding for briefs. I was contacted by an employee of the company who wanted me to know in what kind of academic areas I specialised. I realised later that the reason for this was their desire to work out which writers were most abundant, and thus the lowest price they could offer and still have the work written. This seemed the only plausible explanation for how some more esoteric subjects could offer vastly higher fees than more common ones for essays of similar length.

The deadlines offered by the site were also unrealistic. Thousands of words were expected within a one-or two day timeframe. This of course played into the hands of the company, whose terms of service allowed them to confiscate the entire fee if the brief was late by more than 48 hours. Panicked by the impending deadlines I faced, I resorted to a combination of research chemicals and not sleeping in order to complete them. This in turn made me irritable during the day, and resulted in terrible interviews for the few jobs I could still apply for. I became a mess – snapping at my housemates, sleeping in the day, and my eyes ached from all the time I was spending with the computer screen.

The last straw for me was an experience which vividly brought home how little these sites value their writers, and how powerless they are in the face of the contract they sign. I applied for and got a brief which turned out to be a dissertation. Vowing to myself that it was going to be the last piece of work I would do for the company, I set about writing it.

It soon became clear that the deadline was insufficient. Two weeks was always going to be optimistic when my masters dissertation had taken me two months, but I noted that the client’s deadline was not for many months yet. I begged for extensions to be made, only to find that instead of reasoning with the client in what should have been a matter of common sense, the company seemed instead keen to pander to the client’s every whim, vigorously chasing me up and even threatening me with refunding the client and making me legally liable for the value of their payment.

Nor did my problems end once the work was handed in. For weeks afterwards, the company refused to pay my invoice – amounting to £400 – citing a list of their client’s demands which had nothing to do with the original specifications of the project. As anyone who’s struggled on a low wage can attest to, losing £400 from a month’s wages is serious business. It caused me immense inconvenience having to ask for money from friends and family, but I was completely powerless in the face of the contract I had signed.

So I worked my way through the alterations, only to find that there was seemingly no end in sight. Bizarre requests for redrafting continued to hit my inbox. Eventually enough was enough, and I terminated my service agreement with the company, asking for part settlement of my fee for the article at the modest rate of two thirds of its original value. I have yet to receive anything, however. Each email I send is met with a sneering reply which alludes to deductions and potential legal action for my refusal to carry out more work for free.

My advice: consider well the contempt with which they hold their writers, and steer well clear. I am now making a living teaching my subject part-time, and I haven’t looked back since.

 

The secret life of an organ scholar

0

Organ scholars – a fundamental part of Oxford life, you might say. In all likelihood, there is one, probably two, pottering around your college (chapel) as you read, in raptures over their latest voluntary. Bach’s Fantasia and Fugue in G minor, perhaps. Their right to be here is protected in College Constitutions; they are a necessary cog in the endless, timeless cycle of evensongs, May Day madrigals and Communion services. No one questions them; they are simply accepted as part of the Oxford experience. You might, in fact, spend a whole three years here only glimpsing, during Evensong, the back of your college organ scholar’s head, sequestered from the lowly pews in their lonely loft. Unless you are at Jesus, that is, in which case the highlight of Sunday evening is the resident organist’s quick bow over the parapet to end the service.

Where else are they to be found? Practising, attending classical concerts, and, I have it on good authority, packing out the King’s Arms post-Sunday Evensong – check it out next time you’re there (they’ll be the immaculately-dressed ones, gossiping about chaplains and putting their respective services through a post-mortem).

You could, on the other hand, stalk them on Facebook, where they are easily identifiable by their generic profile pictures, which largely centre around an organ, or at a push, a piano. (This was true for six out of ten profiles examined). Indeed, the senior Jesus organ scholar was apparently unable to relinquish this beloved position even for a Fit College photo last term. A wall-post on one organ scholar’s profile, simply stating ‘sacrilege’ and containing a link, provided a further glimpse into their unfathomable lives.

The sacrilege in question, was the use of the setting for Thomas Tallis’ ‘If Ye Love Me’ for – shock, horror (evidently) – a completely different Latin text. This had caused serious bewilderment and pain to all scholars involved. The bonds between scholar and instrument clearly run deep. Their attachment to their music – you have to be dedicated when, outside of Oxford, the organ has become rather an obscure instrument – has led to unkind, and, I argue, unfounded comments concerning the existence of their social lives, and in fact, their characters as a whole.

Everyone knows the classic line,
‘What do organ scholars use for birth control?’
‘Their personality.’

Yet, is this fair? One need only go as far as looking at the outcome of last year’s Organ Scholars’ Dinner to be assured that this subculture is full of fun-loving, free-wheeling spirits. The smart four-course dinner, held at Brasenose College, became rather derailed after certain scholars indulged in the delights of food-fighting.

This did not go down well, as we can see from this e-mail of disapproval, which arrived the next morning (7th November 2009) and asserted that ‘whilst the majority of those who attended the dinner proved to be absolutely delightful company, a few scholars demonstrated a magnificent display of immaturity. I am very saddened to report that some people find ‘food fights’, and general silliness amusing. It is particularly disappointing (and embarrassing) when this is done in front of senior members, including, of course, Dame Gillian Weir.’

According to reports on the night, Dame Gillian narrowly escaped receiving a pomegranate to the face, courtesy of a rather sauced member of this musical Bullingdon Club. Terrified culprits were later summoned to a meeting with the fearsome dragon of Oxford’s ecclesiastical empire, the notorious Edward Higginbottom, New College’s Director of Music. I’m yet to ascertain whether they’ve been seen since.

Organ scholars’ general behaviour when drunk really does sound amusing, and from these anecdotes, I would recommend you spend a night with a few organists for baroque/classical/romantic decadence.
One organ scholar, for example, describes a life dogged by complaints concerning his drunken behaviour, as it often involves complying with requests for loud music on either the chapel organ or his bedroom’s piano.

Choir dinner is another frequently sordid affair, ‘notorious from a few years ago when a drunken orgy took place under the dinner table’. This event was swiftly followed by a ‘rave’ back at college, ‘in which clothing was swapped between debauched scholars and singers, and in which drunken blondes romped on my bed (the springs have never been the same since)’.

Indeed, choirs appear to provide happy hunting grounds for all organ scholars, and not just for one-night romps: a notable example is the Jesus scholar, who, upon learning of a fresher’s singing credentials as early as 0th week in Michaelmas, promptly ensnared her into the choir, and consequently made her his girlfriend.

It seems that our male organ scholars, surrounding themselves with choral groupies and exerting their musical egos, are certainly living the rock star life. The few female organ scholars will surely find this draining experience of a male-dominated society invaluable preparation for such careers as stockbroking or investment banking in the masculine world of the City.

From all of this, I conclude that organ scholars may be an institution, but they’re an institution that deserves exploring. Seek them out in the KA or chapel, watch them escape to London or Cambridge for a night at the opera or King’s College respectively. Moreover, take a look at the instruments they’re actually playing – the huge, daunting and earplug-warranting organ at New College, or the beautifully decorated affair at Exeter, check out the guy/girl in the loft: there might be more to them than you think.

It’s time to bake a cake filled with rainbows and smiles

Everyone knows the scene towards the end of the sublime Mean Girls, when the fat girl gets up on stage, her eyes filled with bittersweet tears, and reads from a crumpled piece of paper: “I wish I could bake a cake filled with rainbows and smiles and everyone would eat and be happy.”

Reading our feature on the secret lives of Organ Scholars this week, it’s hard not to be reminded of this speech. The article ends with the suggestion that “next time you’re at Evensong, check out the guy/girl in the loft. There might be more to them than you think.” It might not seem like a call-to-arms of a closing sentence, but the message is clear. It’s time to break down the walls which have been erected between the various tribes which form themselves in Oxford, look past the occasionally ghastly exterior and appreciate whatever we might find within.

Freshers’ events and the few weeks after are the only times most of us mix with genuinely different people. After that the cliques are formed, and thesps are rarely to be seen out drinking with Rugby U21s, while the Library Massive are unlikely to be tempted out to Park End.

Like the Mean Girls’ cameo, we think that’s a shame. As this week’s feature shows us, even Organists, the most lofty of social groups (pun fully intended) are just students like everyone else. So Union-haters, e-mail yourself in for President’s drinks and spend a night with the hacks. OCA members, stop and ask the student selling Socialist Workers how the revolution’s going. The lovecake is big, and there are enough slices for all.

 

Blind Date: Week 3

0

Rachel Cohen,
French, St. Hugh’s

Low-work, high maintenance Fresher linguist, searching for the Prince to her Jewish Princess.

After four minutes of sitting awkwardly next to a tall blonde at the bar I finally realised he was in fact Mark, my blind date. Awkward introductions aside, we sat down to our meal and the chat began to flow. When I say chat I mean stories about ‘attempted’ foursomes (his not mine), how Christ Church is ‘simply the best college ever’ and ‘strawpedoing’. After finding common ground in discussing our mutual love for The Bridge, he worryingly mentioned that he had seen me around said haven before in a little black dress, noticing me as I looked ‘very Jewish’…potential stalker attracted to my (not so) religious side? Overall, my date with this self confessed Big Dog in ‘The House’ (if the Cardinals actually let him in, that is) was an experience to say the least.

Banter: Lad
Looks: Not quite Fit College
Personality: ChCh lad – yawn
2nd date? Bbm me, sometime…

 

Matt Ramher, Biology, Christ Church

Upper class Christ Church millionaire looking for fun.

After agreeing to the blind date on the prospect of meeting a tall, blonde Australian I was initially let down, but things could only get better.
Her lack of conversation and desire to replenish her energy after the marathon from her college meant that this was a one-way conversation. Of course this was not all bad, I simply wracked out the bounty of stories that Christ Church had to offer, and she seemed fairly amused, well, it met her expectations anyway. I mentioned I had seen her in Bridge before but however stalkerish this sounded it could not deter the blatant love brewing in the air. By the end of this somewhat tiring event I figured we might as well stay in touch. After all, this is a numbers game.

Banter: Decent
Looks: Adequate
Personality: Vacant
2nd date? Yes, definitely 🙂 

 

The results of the election are in, so why are we still waiting for the verdict on fees?

By the time you read this, the polls will be closed, and we will probably have an idea of how the next government is going to be made up. One stage of months – years – of debate will have come to an end. What we won’t be any closer to knowing is what this government’s decision on University tuition fees will be.

The Browne review, the body which will advise on the future of University fees, will not release its findings until later in the year. As this newspaper reported last week, the Russell group of Universities, of which of Oxford is a member, will not release the information it sent to the Browne review into the public domain.

While the Liberal Democrats promised to scrap tuition fees altogether in their manifesto, and the Labour and Liberal Democrat candidates for both Oxford constituencies have pledged to vote against any rise in fees, the reality is, when we headed to the ballot box, we didn’t have any real confirmation of where the next government would stand on this issue.

We can hazard a guess, though. Chris Patten, our Chancellor, has repeatedly called for fees to be raised, labelling the amount we currently pay as “preposterously low”. And as reported this week, Browne has, unsurprisingly, privately recommended the removal of the current £3,225 cap. Fees would be raised by £1,000 annually from 2013 up to £7,000, while the price of a science course would reach £14,000.

The writing on the wall says that the cost of a University education will go up and up. Deliberately holding the Browne review’s report until after the election has stifled debate on the subject. What will our vote mean for the price of higher education? We don’t know, is the implication; let’s wait to hear from Lord Browne.

It may seem dull and obvious that a student paper has chosen to focus on this issue in a political event which necessarily encompasses so much more than this. But this isn’t simply a ‘student issue’. If Labour were serious when they set the target of fifty percent of young people going on to higher education, then this is an issue for fifty percent of the population. Not just us at University here and now – if anything, we have less of an interest in this, as at least we know exactly what we’ll be paying for our education.

It’s a question for every family with a child in school, for everyone – parents, grandparents, siblings – who will be thinking about where that £7,000 will be coming from. Maybe the state will subsidise tuition fees for the poorest. It is possible, though unlikely, that fees won’t be raised at all. We’re not reactionary enough to say that scrapping fees completely is unequivocally a good thing – this is obviously a complex issue and needs to be debated in depth. The problem is we haven’t been able to do that. However we voted, in this sense we’ve all been shut out of the system.

 

Top Five: Summer accessories for men

0

5th: Espadrilles

This classic rope-soled shoe is the elegant-casual summer footwear for the well-heeled gent. Once the preserve of Pyrenean peasants, espadrilles have grown in popularity over the years, graciously saving us from the unseemly sight of gnarly men’s toes.

4th: Financial Times

Poseurs read poetry, but the true Renaissance Man’s summer reading is definitely the FT. Inform teasing girls that it has by far and a way the best arts section of any newspaper. Comes in fetching pink and looks perfect rolled under the arm.

3rd: Clubmasters

Sunglasses, the most practical accessory of the summer. Wayfarers have unfortunately gone the way of Burberry, but timeless preppy elegance can still be achieved with the Ray-Ban RB3016. Express your individuality with a choice of bright block colours but for eternal style choose tortoise-shell.

2nd: A girlfriend

For the ultimate AMOG (alpha male of group), this much desired accessory immediately has your friends vying for your attention. Perfect for Port Meadows picnics, coffees in Radcliffe Square, and of course the VIP sofas at the Bridge. Comes in all shapes and sizes. The only problem, the cost.

1st: An apple

Nothing says ‘fresh’ like an apple. From Pink Ladies to Granny Smith, this is one accessory that’s sure to have heads bobbing. The one acceptable thing to eat in public, the al fresco apple eater is insouciant but healthy, carefree but considerate.  The best bit? Tossing the core casually over your shoulder.  Keep a penknife on hand for stylish sharing, and remember that it makes a fantastic addition to Pimms. Green is definitely the go-to colour – ‘core blimey!’

Dine Hard: Combibos Coffee

0

Combibos Coffee, 93 Gloucester Green

‘The arsehole of Oxford’. ‘Whoever designed it must have been on crack’.

Arguably an eyesore on the city of dreaming spires, Gloucester Green is contaminated by the bus station next door, a great prevalence of pigeons, and an ugly mix of shops. Sitting in the bleak square can feel like you’re trapped in a red brick box. To add to this all, on the particular morning I went to Combibos, my friend and I, before we had even uttered a word of our orders, were told by the lady behind the counter that there was a forty minute wait for food, because ‘the kitchen was very busy’. On what has been said so far, if I were the owners of this coffee shop, I would be worried about even so small a food review as this one is.

Fortunately the owners are the Hanss family. And they know good coffee. The roast they use has been ‘Hanss’ selected for its caffeinated goodness, so even though my partiality to black coffees means I don’t get the chance to appreciate the signature Combibos ‘latte art’, (down to the precise and fresh steaming of milk apparently), I enjoy my coffee a lot.

It also costs a mere £4.50 for said good coffee and a hearty breakfast, to satisfy even the most voracious of appetites. Their pancakes, sprinkled with icing sugar and served with a little pot of maple syrup, are delicious. By the time they arrive, I have finished my coffee but they do an equally good job of keeping my fear of pigeons at bay.

Combibos deserves its acclaim as one of The Independent’s top fifty coffee shops, if not for placating my bird phobia, then certainly for coming up trumps, and delivering something marvellous against the Gloucester Green backdrop.

5 Minute Tute: Human Evolution

0

When and where did humans evolve?

Palaeontology, archaeology and genetics confirm Darwin was right to identify sub-Saharan Africa as humankind’s area of origin. Hominins (the group of animals to which modern humans and our immediate extinct relatives and ancestors belong) split from the lineages leading to our closest relatives (chimpanzees and bonobos) 6-7 million years ago and are known from several places in South and East Africa. Our own genus, Homo, evolved – perhaps in East Africa – about 2.5 million years ago and was the first hominin to leave Africa. But the lineages that first did so are almost certainly evolutionary dead ends. DNA analyses of people alive today show beyond doubt that all modern humans have a much more recent African origin. Along with fossil finds, they indicate that our own species, Homo sapiens, evolved south of the Sahara about 200,000 years ago.

When did we move out of Africa?

The fossil record is clear that hominins moved out of Africa more than once, the first time about 1.8 million years ago. Those movements brought several species into Europe and Asia, including the ancestors of the Neanderthals and those of the ‘hobbits’ (Homo floresiensis) found a few years ago on the Indonesian island of Flores. However, modern humans spread beyond Africa much more recently than this. A first move, indicated by 100,000-year-old fossils from Israel, is often considered a failed colonisation, though new work by Oxford’s Mike Petraglia and others suggests that it could have reached as far as India. A further expansion some 60-70,000 years ago saw people cross the Red Sea into Arabia and move around the Indian Ocean rim from there.

Who were the Neanderthals and why aren’t they here today?

DNA analyses of Neanderthal bones show their ancestors split from ours about 600,000 years ago and that genetic drift and adaptation to the severe cold of repeated Ice Age conditions produced the distinctive skeletal characteristics known from fossils across much of Europe and western Asia. In general, Neanderthals seem to have been heavily carnivorous and they were clearly efficient hunters of medium and large game. However, archaeology suggests that they probably had more limited cognitive capacities than our own ancestors. In particular, there is next to no convincing evidence that Neanderthals made and used art, jewellery or complex tools of the kind associated with Homo sapiens. It seems likely that, socially and technologically, modern humans could cope better with severe fluctuations in climate and food availability, outliving, outbreeding and outcompeting Neanderthals across their range. The last known individuals died out in Spain about 28,000 years ago.

When did we first start producing art?

The cave paintings and decorated objects left by Upper Palaeolithic people in parts of Europe (especially southwest France and northern Spain) were long thought to place the answer to this question no more than 40,000 years ago. Now, shell bead jewellery from sites in Africa and Israel demonstrates that people have been using material culture to make statements about their identity for at least 100,000 years. Equally startling, geometric designs scratched into pieces of ochre go back to around 75,000 years ago at Blombos Cave, South Africa, and can be paralleled only a little later at other sites on ochre and on ostrich eggshell.

Are there any new discoveries?

Absolutely. Just in the past few months three big ones have occurred. First, the ancestors of the Flores ‘hobbits’ turn out to have got there, across the open sea, over one million years ago. Second, mitochondrial DNA analysis of a finger bone from a cave in Russia’s Altai Mountains shows its owner to belong to an evolutionary lineage that split about this same time from those leading to the Neanderthals and us. Not only does this mean there was a third (previously unknown) hominin species in Siberia as recently as 40,000 years ago, it points to a previously unsuspected migration out of Africa about 1.0 million years ago. And third, there are the two beautifully preserved partial skeletons of Australopithecus sediba from caves near Johannesburg, a new species perhaps directly ancestral to our own, from just under 2 million years ago. Human evolution continues to surprise.