DOCSLIB.ORG

Development Team

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Development Team Paper No. : 01 Physical/Biological Anthropology Module : 13 Emergence of Man Development Team Prof. Anup Kumar Kapoor Principal Investigator Department of Anthropology, University of Delhi Paper Coordinator Prof. Subho Roy Department of Anthropology ,University of Calcutta Dr. Arpita Mandal (Nandi) Content Writer Department of Anthropology, Narasinha Dutt College,Howrah Content Reviewer Prof. Barun Mukhopadhyay Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata 1 Physical/ Biological Anthropology Anthropology Emergence of Man Description Of Module Subject Name Anthropology Paper Name 01 Physical/Biological Anthropology Module Name/Title Emergence of Man Module Id 13 2 Physical/ Biological Anthropology Anthropology Emergence of Man Contents of this unit 1. Introduction 2. The debate on the origin 3. Important early modern Homo sapiens sites 4. Who are modern humans? 5. Anatomical features 6. Material culture 7. Origins 8. Explanation of their expansion 9. What mitochondrial DNA reveals? 10. New hypothesis 11. Summary Learning objectives: • Who are Humans? • Where did they come from? • When did they first appear? • What was their path of emergence? 3 Physical/ Biological Anthropology Anthropology Emergence of Man Introduction: All modern human beings belong to the genus Homo. Between 2.5 and 2.3 million years ago, the fossil record reveals the emergence of several new hominid species that anthropologists place into the genera Paranthropus and Homo. Both genera most likely have evolved from a late species of Australopithecus. Genus Homo evolved some 400,000 years ago. This is known from the fossil evidence of a lower jaw found in Africa. The time dates approximately to 2.8 million year when it is learned that Homo branched out from a common ape-like ancestor. The early fossils belonging to the genus Homo were originally placed into a single species, Homo habilis (handy human being). The first specimen of H.habilis was discovered by Louis and Mary Leakey in 1960 at Olduvai Gorge. Kaya Reed, 2013. Source: www.theguardian.com2013 photo provided by Kaye Reed 2013 photo provided by Kaye Reed 2013 photo provided by This lower jaw found in the Afar region of Africa show features common to both the Australopithecus and Homo. The sloping chin was somewhat similar to Australopithecus while narrow and symmetrical molars push it towards the genus, Homo. Two early modern hominids from Israel, one from Jebel Qafzeh and the other from Tabun, placed anatomically modern humans well back into the Neanderthal 4 Physical/ Biological Anthropology Anthropology Emergence of Man time range, the dating being between 115,000 and 96,000B.P. and 100,000 B.P years respectively. Early modern humans are often seen in terms of a population called Cro-Magnon, which lived about 28,000 years ago or later. In 1868, several partial skeletons were discovered in a rock shelter in south- western France. They became the prototype of Homo sapiens. A recent discovery of a skull at a site near the village of Buia, Eritrea, East Africa shows a mixture of Homo erectus and Homo sapiens features at around one million years ago. The past century and a half of palaeoanthropological discoveries have provided a general outline of hominid evolution. At around 1.9 million years ago a new grade of hominids, Homo ergaster and Homo erectus begin to appear. Many fossil hominids dating from about one million to 130,000 years ago show more Homo sapiens like characteristics than Homo erectus like, these are placed into the species Homo heidelbergensis. However populations of Parathropus survived until about 900,000 years B.P.; some populations of Homo erectus survived as late as 27,000 years B.P. The Neanderthals existed between 130,000 to about 30,000 years ago. They have been seen as a direct ancestor to modern Europeans and a side branch of humanity that genetically contributed little or nothing to modern populations. Today details of Neanderthal anatomy such as an oval shaped foramen magnum, the distinctive structure of th middle and inner ear, and the unique shape of the nasal region have convinced paleoanthropologists that Neanderthals should be placed in a separate species, Homo sapiens neanderthalensis. The debate on the origin • It has been continuining for long now, that H. erectus, considered to be the precursor to modern humans, evolved in Africa and gradually spread or migrated to Europe and Asia about 1.7 million years ago. The dating considered for the appearance of the anatomical modern humans is considered to be at least 130,000 years ago. • Further, it was commonly agreed upon that, by 100,000 years ago, several species of hominids populated the Earth. The populations of the H. sapiens—us—lived in Africa, whereas the populations of H. erectus in Southeast Asia and China, and Neanderthals in Europe. Then in around 50,000 years ago, there was a sudden explosion of human migration out of Africa and by about 30,000 years ago, only the anatomical modern humans were existing. • The debate arises by differing definitions and views of the archaic and anatomical modern humans. • Anatomical humans were supposed to differ from their counterparts by possessing qualities of the brain which helped them to plan ahead, innovate different technological methods, being 5 Physical/ Biological Anthropology Anthropology Emergence of Man able to adapt themselves to their environmental situations, exhibiting behavior like, cave painting, bead making or burying the dead. Scientists have discovered early modern human fossil remains in the Zhirendong (Zhiren Cave) in south China 6 Physical/ Biological Anthropology Anthropology Emergence of Man Important Early Modern Homo sapiens Sites Date of Fossil (years ago) East Africa: Herto, Middle Awash 160,000-154,000 Omo 1 195,000 Laetoli 120,000 South Africa: Border Cave 115,000-90,000 Klasies River Mouth 90,000 Israel: Skhul and Qafzeh 92,000-90,000 Australia: Lake Mungo 60,000-46,000 Asia: Annamite Mountains (Laos) 63,000 Ordos (Mongolia) 40,000-20,000 ? Liujiang (China) 139,000-111,000 ? Zhirendong (China) 100,000 ? Zhoukoudian upper cave 27,000 (China) Europe: Peştera cu Oase (Romania) 36,000-34,000 Combe Capelle (France) 35,000-30,000 Mladeč and Předmostí 35,000-25,000 (Czech Republic) Cro-Magnon (France) 27,000-23,000 Source:http://www.nature.com/scitable/content/map-of-homo-erectus-fossil-localities-96680469 7 Physical/ Biological Anthropology Anthropology Emergence of Man Who are modern humans? • All over the world people are classified as classified as Homo sapiens. We appeared about 200,000 years ago. Henceforth, our evolution progressed further with the advent of varying technologies. It can be clearly stated modern humans were contemporary with the Neanderthals and did not come after them. Furthermore, the forehead is also relatively higher. Chin is present only in the modern humans. • Compared to the Neanderthals and other late archaic humans, modern humans generally have lighter skeletons. Their skulls are more rounded and their brow ridges generally protrude much less. They rarely have the occipital buns found on the back of Neanderthal skulls. They also have relatively high foreheads, smaller faces, and pointed chins. • The first fossils of early modern humans to be identified were found in 1868 at the 27,000- 23,000 year old Cro-Magnon rock shelter site near the village of Les Eyzies in south western France. They were subsequently named the Cro-Magnon people. They were very similar in appearance to modern Europeans. Males were 5 feet 4 inches to 6 feet tall (1.6- 1.8 m.) and were 4-12 inches (10-31 cm.) taller than Neanderthals. Their skeletons and musculature generally were less massive than the Neanderthals. The Cro-Magnon had broad, small faces with pointed chins and high foreheads. Their cranial capacities were upto 1590 cm3, which is relatively large even for people today. Source: http://anthropology.si.edu/HumanOrigins/ha/weid.html 8 Physical/ Biological Anthropology Anthropology Emergence of Man Three important shifts in human evolutionary history: • the emergence of genus Homo • the transition between non-erectus early Homo and H. erectus, and • The appearance of regional morphological variation in H. erectus (including Homo ergaster). Using this integrated data set, we consider the implications for understanding the changing selective pressures that led to the transition to and evolution of early Homo. Anatomical features Modern humans have a distinctly round head that contains a large brain that averages 1350 cubic centimeters. From front to back, the cranial arch, or vault, is short but high. The occipital bone is delicate. Compared with earlier hominids, the modern human’s face and eye sockets are smaller, the front of the upper jaw and the mandible are also small. The modern human has a strong chin, which is the bony projection of the lower part of the mandible. The modern human skeleton is less robust and the musculature is lighter as compared to the earlier hominid skeletons. Material Culture The archaeological record provides evidence of several key behaviours—including changes in dietary niche, ranging, and cognition—that are often associated with the rise of genus Homo. The manufacture and use of stone tools have long been thought to signal a foraging shift and to be associated with the origin of Homo. The first unambiguous tools appear at 2.6 Ma, with cut-marked animal bone ubiquitous in sites. However, occurrence of one cut-marked bone has been argued to occur before the emergence of Homo. Although the Oldowan is linked to carcass processing, other uses related to plant or food processing are important. This emerging picture is consistent with dental evidence and supports a modest dietary shift to more carnivory in Homo and increased dietary breadth compared with Australopithecus. A second noteworthy change occurs at approximately 1.95 Ma with an increase in stone transport distances that suggests the movement of rock over ∼12 km interval.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Discovery of the Fuyan Teeth: Challenging Or Complementing the Out-Of-Africa Scenario?
    ZOOLOGICAL RESEARCH Discovery of the Fuyan teeth: challenging or complementing the out-of-Africa scenario? Yu-Chun LI, Jiao-Yang TIAN, Qing-Peng KONG Although it is widely accepted that modern humans (Homo route about 40-60 kya (Macaulay et al, 2005; Sun et al, 2006). sapiens sapiens) can trace their African origins to 150-200 kilo The lack of human fossils dating earlier than 70 kya in eastern years ago (kya) (recent African origin model; Henn et al, 2012; Eurasia implies that the out-of-Africa immigrants around 100 Ingman et al, 2000; Poznik et al, 2013; Weaver, 2012), an kya likely failed to expand further east (Shea, 2008). Consistent alternative model suggests that the diverse populations of our with this notion, the Late Pleistocene hominid records species evolved separately on different continents from archaic previously found in eastern Eurasia have been dated to only human forms (multiregional origin model; Wolpoff et al, 2000; 40-70 kya, including the Liujiang man (67 kya; Shen et al, 2002) Wu, 2006). The recent discovery of 47 teeth from a Fuyan cave and Tianyuan man (40 kya; Fu et al, 2013b; Shang et al, 2007) in southern China (Liu et al, 2015) indicated the presence of H. in China, the Mungo Man in Australia (40-60 kya; Bowler et al, s. sapiens in eastern Eurasia during the early Late Pleistocene. 1972), the Niah Cave skull from Borneo (40 kya; Barker et al, Since the age of the Fuyan teeth (80-120 kya) predates the 2007) and the Tam Pa Ling cave man in Laos (46-51 kya; previously assumed out-of-Africa exodus (60 kya) by at least 20 Demeter et al, 2012).
    [Show full text]
  • Course Business Origin of Modern Humans
    5/7/2014 Course Business • Today is the last lecture, an emotional day for us all • Final exam, next week; 6:30-9:00, same room Lecture Lab Text Book Australopiths Australopith Ch. 11 Diet Early Homo & Oldowan Early Homo Ch. 12 H. erectus: anatomy & behavior; Out of Africa 1 Homo erectus Ch. 13 Archaic H. sapiens: anatomy & behavior Late Homo Ch. 14 Neanderthal: anatomy & behavior Ch. 15 Modern H. sapiens: anatomy & behavior; Out of Africa 2 1 Origin of modern humans • Anatomically modern Homo sapiens • Behaviorally modern Homo sapiens • When, where, why? 2 1 5/7/2014 Hominin Date Ranges • Early hominins: 7.0 – 4.4 Ma • Gracile australopiths: 4.2 – 2.0 Ma • Robust australopiths: 2.3 – 1.2 Ma • Early Homo (H. habilis and H. rudolphensis): 2.0 – 1.6 Ma • Homo erectus: 1.8 mya – 50 ka • Archaic Homo sapiens (H. heidelbergensis): 600 – 125 ka • Homo neanderthalensis: 150 – 30 ka • Homo floresiensis: 90-11 ka • Anatomically modern Homo sapiens (AMHs): 195 ka 3 Modern human It’s complete!! Homo neanderthalensis Homo floresiensis Archaic Homo sapiens Paranthropus boisei Paranthropus robustus Homo erectus Homo rudolfensis Homo habilis Paranthropus aethiopicus Australopithecus africanus Australopithecus afarensis Australopithecus anamensis Ardipithecus (?) 4 2 5/7/2014 Cranial features of Homo sapiens: • Gracile skull (and postcranial anatomy) • Limited brow ridges, no superstructures • Rounded cranium with maximum breadth high on the vault • Orthognathic face • Small teeth and jaws • Obvious chin 5 Figure 14.01 6 3 5/7/2014 Diepkloof Rock Shelter
    [Show full text]
  • The Pliocene Hominin Diversity Conundrum: Do More Fossils
    SPECIAL FEATURE: PERSPECTIVE The Pliocene hominin diversity conundrum: Do more fossils mean less clarity? SPECIAL FEATURE: PERSPECTIVE Yohannes Haile-Selassiea,b,1, Stephanie M. Melilloc, and Denise F. Sud Edited by Richard G. Klein, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, and approved January 7, 2016 (received for review November 6, 2015) Recent discoveries of multiple middle Pliocene hominins have raised the possibility that early hominins were as speciose as later hominins. However, debates continue to arise around the validity of most of these new taxa, largely based on poor preservation of holotype specimens, small sample size, or the lack of evidence for ecological diversity. A closer look at the currently available fossil evidence from Ethiopia, Kenya, and Chad indicate that Australopithecus afarensis was not the only hominin species during the middle Pliocene, and that there were other species clearly distinguishable from it by their locomotor adaptation and diet. Although there is no doubt that the presence of multiple species during the middle Pliocene opens new windows into our evolutionary past, it also complicates our understanding of early hominin taxonomy and phylogenetic relationships. hominin diversity | Australopithecus | Kenyanthropus | Pliocene | ecological diversity If one looks back over the controversies of human When Australopithecus bahrelghazali was named evolution, they have one element in common: new in 1995 based on an approximately 3.5-Ma partial discoveries, theories, methods came along which “ ” mandible from Chad (12), it was quickly dismissed as no one in the controversy anticipated. The facts – changed, and consequently people were not right a geographic variant of Au. afarensis (13 15). The or wrong in any simple way.
    [Show full text]
  • Establishing Robust Chronologies for Models of Modern Human
    Establishing robust chronologies for models of modern human dispersal in Southeast Asia; implications for arrival and occupation in Sunda and Sahul A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree Masters of Research from MACQUARIE UNIVERSITY by Lani M. Barnes BSc. Macquarie University Department of Environment and Geography 10 October 2014 1 Table of Contents ABSTRACT I DECLARATION II ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS III LIST OF FIGURES IV LIST OF TABLES VI LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS VII CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES 3 1.2 OUTLINE 3 CHAPTER 2: ESTABLISHING MODERN HUMAN PRESENCE IN MAINLAND SOUTHEAST ASIA; THE NEED FOR ROBUST CHRONOLOGIES 4 SECTION I: CURRENT MODELS OF MODERN HUMAN DISPERSAL AND THE PALEOANTHROPOLOGICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORD 4 2.1 INTRODUCTION 4 2.2 THE START AND END OF OUT OF AFRICA 2 4 2.3 MIS4-3 RAPID COASTAL DISPERSAL 5 2.4 MODERN HUMAN EVIDENCE IN SUNDA AND SAHUL 7 2.5 THE CONTRIBUTION OF MIDDLE PALAEOLITHIC TECHNOLOGIES TO UNDERSTANDING THE COMPLEXITIES REGARDING MODELS OF MODERN HUMAN DISPERSAL 9 SECTION II: CHRONOMETRIC TECHNIQUES AVAILABLE TO ESTABLISH ROBUST CHRONOLOGIES FOR MODERN HUMAN PALEOANTHROPOLOGICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE 12 2.6 INTRODUCTION 12 2.7 URANIUM-THORIUM (U-TH) DATING 12 2.8 LUMINESCENCE DATING 14 2.9 RADIOCARBON DATING 17 2.10 IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH IN MAINLAND SOUTHEAST ASIA 18 CHAPTER 3: BUILDING FROM PREVIOUS RESEARCH AT THE SITES OF TAM PA LING, NAM LOT AND THAM LOD TO ESTABLISH ROBUST CHRONOLOGIES 20 3.1 TAM HANG CAVES LAOS 20 3.1.1
    [Show full text]
  • Implications of Border Cave Skeletal Remains for Later Pleistocene
    CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY Vol. 20, No. 1, March 1979 ? 1979 by The Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research 0011-3204/79/2001-0003$01.45 Implications of Border Cave Skeletal Remains for Later Pleistocene Human Evolution' by G. Philip Rightmire EXCAVATIONS AT BORDER CAVE, situated on the boundary the Cape. The broad frontal, projecting glabella, and rugged between Swaziland and Zululand (South Africa), have yielded superciliary eminences also invited comparison with Florisbad, extensive evidence of prior human occupation. Sediment analy- which was said to show similar if more massive supraorbital ses undertaken by Butzer, Beauimont, and Vogel (1978) development. Later reports (Wells 1969, 1972) have continued suggest that the cave was first inhabited sometime prior to to emphasize similarities between Border Cave and Springbok the Last Interglacial, while the main period of use spans four Flats or even Rhodesian man (Brothwell 1963), while ties with protracted periods of accelerated frost-weathering, all of which living South African populations have been regarded as remote. are older than 35,000 B.P. Quantities of stone artifacts have Application of Mahalanobis's generalized distance (D2) to a been recovered, along with human bones and a moderate small set of cranial measurements has most recently led de sample of faunal material (Klein 1977). The human remains Villiers (1973) to claim that neither Border Cave nor Springbok include a partial adult cranium, the first fragments of which Flats can be related closely to modern Negroes or Bushmen, were found by W. E. Horton in 1940. Horton removed some of though a role of more generalized "protonegriform" ancestor the cave deposit while digging for guano, and more of the is considered.
    [Show full text]
  • An Anthropological Assessment of Neanderthal Behavioural Energetics
    DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY, CLASSICS & EGYPTOLOGY An Anthropological Assessment of Neanderthal Behavioural Energetics. Thesis submitted in accordance with the requirements of the University of Liverpool for the Degree of Doctor in Philosophy by Andrew Shuttleworth. April, 2013. TABLE OF CONTENTS……………………………………………………………………..i LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………………………………v LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………………………………..vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS…………………………………………………………………...vii ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………………viii TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................1 1.1. Introduction..............................................................................................................1 1.2. Aims and Objectives................................................................................................2 1.3. Thesis Format...........................................................................................................3 2. THE NEANDERTHAL AND OXYEGN ISOTOPE STAGE-3.................................6 2.1. Discovery, Geographic Range & Origins..............................................................7 2.1.1. Discovery........................................................................................................7 2.1.2. Neanderthal Chronology................................................................................10 2.2. Morphology.............................................................................................................11
    [Show full text]
  • Les Matières Colorantes Au Début Du Paléolithique Supérieur : Sources, Transformations Et Fonctions Hélène Salomon
    Les matières colorantes au début du Paléolithique supérieur : sources, transformations et fonctions Hélène Salomon To cite this version: Hélène Salomon. Les matières colorantes au début du Paléolithique supérieur : sources, transforma- tions et fonctions. Archéologie et Préhistoire. Université Bordeaux 1, 2009. Français. tel-02430482 HAL Id: tel-02430482 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-02430482 Submitted on 7 Jan 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. N◦ d’ordre : 3971 THÈSE présentée à L’UNIVERSITÉ BORDEAUX 1 ÉCOLE DOCTORALE :SCIENCES ET ENVIRONNEMENTS par Hélène SALOMON POUR OBTENIR LE GRADE DE DOCTEUR Spécialité : Préhistoire LES MATIÈRES COLORANTES AU DÉBUT DU PALÉOLITHIQUE SUPÉRIEUR S OURCES, TRANSFORMATIONS ET FONCTIONS Soutenue publiquement le 22 décembre 2009 Après avis de : M. Pierre Bodu Chargé de Recherche CNRS ArcScAn-Nanterre Rapporteur M. Marcel Otte Professeur de préhistoire Université de Liège Rapporteur Devant la commission d’examen formée de : M. Pierre Bodu Chargé de Recherche, CNRS ArcScAn-Nanterre Rapporteur M. Francesco d’Errico Directeur de Recherche CNRS PACEA, Université Bordeaux 1 Examinateur M. Jean-Michel Geneste Conservateur du Patrimoine, Directeur du CNP Périgueux et PACEA Universiré Bordeaux 1 Directeur de thèse M.
    [Show full text]
  • Supplementary Information For
    Supplementary Information for An Abundance of Developmental Anomalies and Abnormalities in Pleistocene People Erik Trinkaus Department of Anthropology, Washington University, Saint Louis MO 63130 Corresponding author: Erik Trinkaus Email: [email protected] This PDF file includes: Supplementary text Figures S1 to S57 Table S1 References 1 to 421 for SI reference citations Introduction Although they have been considered to be an inconvenience for the morphological analysis of human paleontological remains, it has become appreciated that various pathological lesions and other abnormalities or rare variants in human fossil remains might provide insights into Pleistocene human biology and behavior (following similar trends in Holocene bioarcheology). In this context, even though there were earlier paleopathological assessments in monographic treatments of human remains (e.g., 1-3), it has become common to provide details on abnormalities in primary descriptions of human fossils (e.g., 4-12), as well as assessments of specific lesions on known and novel remains [see references in Wu et al. (13, 14) and below]. These works have been joined by doctoral dissertation assessments of patterns of Pleistocene human lesions (e.g., 15-18). The paleopathological attention has been primarily on the documentation and differential diagnosis of the abnormalities of individual fossil remains, leading to the growing paleopathological literature on Pleistocene specimens and their lesions. There have been some considerations of the overall patterns of the lesions, but those assessments have been concerned primarily with non-specific stress indicators and traumatic lesions (e.g., 13, 15, 19-21), with variable considerations of issues of survival 1 w ww.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1814989115 and especially the inferred social support of the afflicted (e.g., 22-27).
    [Show full text]
  • Ancient DNA and Multimethod Dating Confirm the Late Arrival of Anatomically Modern Humans in Southern China
    Ancient DNA and multimethod dating confirm the late arrival of anatomically modern humans in southern China Xue-feng Suna,1,2, Shao-qing Wenb,1, Cheng-qiu Luc, Bo-yan Zhoub, Darren Curnoed,2, Hua-yu Lua, Hong-chun Lie, Wei Wangf, Hai Chengg, Shuang-wen Yia, Xin Jiah, Pan-xin Dub, Xing-hua Xua, Yi-ming Lua, Ying Lua, Hong-xiang Zheng (郑鸿翔)b, Hong Zhangb, Chang Sunb, Lan-hai Weib, Fei Hani, Juan Huangj, R. Lawrence Edwardsk, Li Jinb, and Hui Li (李辉)b,l,2 aSchool of Geography and Ocean Science, Nanjing University, 210023 Nanjing, China; bSchool of Life Sciences & Institute of Archaeological Science, Fudan University, Shanghai 200438, China; cHubei Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archeology, 430077 Wuhan, China; dAustralian Museum Research Institute, Australian Museum, Sydney, NSW 2010, Australia; eDepartment of Geosciences, National Taiwan University, 106 Taipei, Taiwan; fInstitute of Cultural Heritage, Shandong University, 266237 Qingdao, China; gInstitute of Global Environmental Change, Xi’an Jiaotong University, 710049 Xi’an, China; hSchool of Geography Science, Nanjing Normal University, 210023 Nanjing, China; iResearch Centre for Earth System Science, Yunnan University, 650500 Kunming, China; jCultural Relics Administration of Daoxian County, Daoxian 425300, China; kDepartment of Geology and Geophysics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455; and lFudan-Datong Institute of Chinese Origin, Shanxi Academy of Advanced Research and Innovation, 037006 Datong, China Edited by Richard G. Klein, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, and approved November 13, 2020 (received for review September 10, 2020) The expansion of anatomically modern humans (AMHs) from year before present, i.e., before AD1950) Ust’-Ishim femur Africa around 65,000 to 45,000 y ago (ca.
    [Show full text]
  • Ardipithecus Kadabba the Middle Awash Series Series Editor Tim White, University of California, Berkeley
    Ardipithecus kadabba The Middle Awash Series Series Editor Tim White, University of California, Berkeley University of California Press Editor Charles R. Crumly Homo erectus: Pleistocene Evidence from the Middle Awash, Ethiopia, edited by W. Henry Gilbert and Berhane Asfaw Ardipithecus kadabba: Late Miocene Evidence from the Middle Awash, Ethiopia, edited by Yohannes Haile-Selassie and Giday WoldeGabriel Ardipithecus kadahba Late Miocene Evidence from the Middle Awash, Ethiopia EDITED BY YOHANNES HAILE-SELASS1E AND GIDAY WOLDEGABRIEL UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS 'ey Los Angeles University of California Press, one of the most distinguished university presses in the United States, enriches lives around the world by advancing scholarship in the humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences. Its activities are supported by the UC Press Foundation and by philanthropic contributions from individuals and institutions. For more information, visit www.ucpress.edu. The Middle Awash Series, Volume 2 University of California Press Berkeley and Los Angeles, California University of California Press, Ltd. London, England © 2009 by "The Regents of the University of California Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Ardipithecus kadabba : late miocene evidence from the Middle Awash, Ethiopia / edited by Yohannes Haile-Selassie, Giday WoldeGabriel. p. cm. — (The Middle Awash series) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-520-25440-4 (cloth : alk. paper) 1. Ardipithecus kadabba—Ethiopia—Middle Awash. 2. Fossil hominids—Ethiopia—Middle Awash. 3. Human remains (Archaeology)—Ethiopia—Middle Awash. 4. Paleoanthropology— Ethiopia—Middle Awash. 5. Middle Awash (Ethiopia)—Antiquities. I. Haile-Selassie, Yohannes, 1961- II. WoldeGabriel, Giday. GN282.73.A73 2008 569.90963— 2008004004 Manufactured in the United States 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 10 987654321 The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (R 1997) (Permanence of Paper).
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluación De Las Capacidades Cognitivas De Homo Neanderthalensis E Implicaciones En La Transición Paleolítico Medio-Paleotíco Superior En Eurasia
    UNIVERSIDAD COMPLUTENSE DE MADRID FACULTAD DE GEOGRAFÍA E HISTORIA DEPARTAMENTO DE PREHISTORIA TESIS DOCTORAL Evaluación de las capacidades cognitivas de Homo Neanderthalensis e implicaciones en la transición Paleolítico Medio-Paleotíco Superior en Eurasia MEMORIA PARA OPTAR AL GRADO DE DOCTOR PRESENTADA POR Carlos Burguete Prieto DIRECTOR José Yravedra Sainz de Terreros Madrid Ed. electrónica 2019 © Carlos Burguete Prieto, 2018 UNIVERSIDAD COMPLUTENSE DE MADRID FACULTAD DE GEOGRAFÍA E HISTORIA Departamento de Prehistoria EVALUACIÓN DE LAS CAPACIDADES COGNITIVAS DE HOMO NEANDERTHALENSIS E IMPLICACIONES EN LA TRANSICIÓN PALEOLÍTICO MEDIO – PALEOLÍTICO SUPERIOR EN EURASIA MEMORIA PARA OPTAR AL GRADO DE DOCTOR PRESENTADA POR Carlos Burguete Prieto Bajo la dirección del doctor José Yravedra Sainz de Terreros MADRID, 2018 ©Carlos Burguete Prieto, 2018 UNIVERSIDAD COMPLUTENSE DE MADRID FACULTAD DE GEOGRAFÍA E HISTORIA Departamento de Prehistoria EVALUACIÓN DE LAS CAPACIDADES COGNITIVAS DE HOMO NEANDERTHALENSIS E IMPLICACIONES EN LA TRANSICIÓN PALEOLÍTICO MEDIO – PALEOLÍTICO SUPERIOR EN EURASIA TESIS DOCTORAL Presentada por Carlos Burguete Prieto Dirigida Por Dr. José Yravedra Sainz De Terreros MADRID, 2018 A Álvaro, mi hermano. AGRADECIMIENTOS (en orden alfabético): A Abel Amón por facilitarme documentación gráfica de difícil acceso referente a varios sitios arqueológicos de Rusia y Cáucaso. A Eva Barriocanal (Servicio de depósito del Museo Arqueológico de Bilbao) por su amable atención y disposición a permitirme analizar piezas procedentes del abrigo de Axlor. A Francesco d’Errico (Université de Bordeaux) por compartir sus opiniones y facilitarme información sobre piezas procedentes de la Grotte de Peyrere, Francia. A Luis de Miguel (Director del Museo Arqueológico de Murcia) por facilitarme amablemente el acceso a los restos humanos hallados en la Sima de las Palomas, Murcia.
    [Show full text]
  • What's in a Neanderthal
    WHAT’S IN A NEANDERTHAL: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS Taylorlyn Stephan Oberlin College Dept. of Anthropology Advised by Prof. Amy Margaris TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Abstract – pg. 3 II. Introduction – pg. 3-4 III. Historical Background – pg. 4-5 a. Fig. 1 – pg. 5 IV. Methods – pg. 5-8 a. Figs. 2 and 3 – pg. 6 V. Genomic Definitions – pg. 8-9 VI. Site Introduction – pg. 9-10 a. Fig 4 – pg. 10 VII. El Sidron – pg. 10-14 a. Table – pg. 10-12 b. Figs. 5-7 – pg. 12 c. Figs. 8 and 9 – pg. 13 VIII. Mezmaiskaya – pg. 14-18 a. Table – pg. 14-16 b. Figs. 10 and 11 – pg. 16 IX. Shanidar – pg. 18-22 a. Table – pg. 19-20 b. Figs. 12 and 13 – pg.21 X. Vindija – pg. 22-28 a. Table – pg. 23-25 b. Fig. 14 – pg. 25 c. Figs. 15-18 – pg. 26 XI. The Neanderthal Genome Project – pg. 28-32 a. Table – pg. 29 b. Fig. 19 – pg. 29 c. Figs. 20 and 21 – pg. 30 XII. Discussion – pg. 32- 36 XIII. Conclusion – pg. 36-38 XIV. Bibliography – pg. 38-42 2 ABSTRACT In this analysis, I seek to understand how three separate lines of evidence – skeletal morphology, archaeology, and genomics – are used separately and in tandem to produce taxonomic classifications in Neanderthal and paleoanthropological research more generally. To do so, I have selected four sites as case studies: El Sidrón Cave, Mezmaiskaya Cave, Shanidar Cave, and Vindija Cave. El Sidrón, Mezmaiskaya, and Vindija all have detailed archaeological records and have yielded Neanderthal DNA.
    [Show full text]