The Early Prehistory of Human Social Behaviour: Issues of ...
Human Evolution and PREHISTORY
-
Upload
illiana-horn -
Category
Documents
-
view
28 -
download
1
description
Transcript of Human Evolution and PREHISTORY
![Page 1: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Human Evolution Human Evolution andand PREHISTORYPREHISTORY
PART III: EVOLUTION OF THE GENUS PART III: EVOLUTION OF THE GENUS HOMO AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF EARLY HOMO AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF EARLY
HUMAN CULTUREHUMAN CULTURE
![Page 2: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Human Evolution Human Evolution andand PREHISTORYPREHISTORY
Chapter Seven:Chapter Seven:
HOMO HABILIS HOMO HABILIS AND AND CULTURAL ORIGINSCULTURAL ORIGINS
Link to the Canadian Association for Physical Anthropology
![Page 3: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Chapter PreviewChapter PreviewChapter PreviewChapter Preview
When, Where, And How Did Human When, Where, And How Did Human Culture Develop?Culture Develop?
When Did Reorganization And Expansion When Did Reorganization And Expansion Of The Human Brain Begin?Of The Human Brain Begin?
Why Did The Eating Of More Meat Lead Why Did The Eating Of More Meat Lead To Improved Brains?To Improved Brains?
![Page 4: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
EARLY REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GENUS EARLY REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GENUS HOMOHOMO
Olduvai Homo habilis, 1.8 my
650-690 cc cranial capacity
Modern-looking hands, feet
Little difference from Australopithecus in body size, sexual dimorphism, and tree-climbing abilities
Maturation rate closer to apes
Associated with stone tools
![Page 5: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Olduvai Homo habilis, 1.8 my OH 24
![Page 6: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
EARLY REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GENUS EARLY REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GENUS HOMOHOMO
KNM ER 1470, Lake Turkana, 1.9 my
752 cc cranial capacityCranium is more modern in appearance than in AustralopithecusAssociated with stone tools
![Page 7: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
KNM ER 1470 1470
![Page 8: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
EARLY REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GENUS EARLY REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GENUS HOMOHOMO
KNM ER 1470, Lake Turkana, 1.9 my
Inside of the skull shows a pattern in the left cerebral hemisphere that is associated with the speech area and right hand control of living humans
Wear patterns on tools indicate predominance of right-handedness
Brain was reorganized along human lines
![Page 9: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Relations between Relations between Homo habilisHomo habilis and and AustralopithecusAustralopithecus
There is no agreement on what distinguishes Australopithecus from
Homo
One approach is to use the following characteristics:
Absolute brain size greater than 600 ccUse of language and toolsPrecision grip distinct to Homo
![Page 10: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Relations between Relations between Homo habilisHomo habilis and and AustralopithecusAustralopithecus
Collard and Wood would define Homo by its adaptive zone
AustralopithecusBody mass and shape more suited to
closed environments, e.g. forestApe-like dietApe-like development patternCombined locomotion of bipedalism and
climbing
![Page 11: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Relations between Relations between Homo habilisHomo habilis and and AustralopithecusAustralopithecus
Collard and Wood would define Homo by its adaptive zone
HomoBody mass and shape more like ours,
suited to open habitatsDiet more like ourshuman-like development patternbipedalism
![Page 12: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Relations between Relations between Homo habilisHomo habilis and and AustralopithecusAustralopithecus
Marked increase in brain/body size ratio
Heat-exchange system to keep brain cool (only a rudimentary one in late gracile Australopithecines)
Smaller teeth in relation to skull size
Major brain-size increase and tooth-size reduction are important trends in the evolution of the genus Homo
Earliest fossils to exhibit these features appear by 2.4 mya (Baringo)
![Page 13: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Relations between Relations between Homo habilisHomo habilis and and AustralopithecusAustralopithecusNone of the robust Australopithecines belong in the direct human lineage; they coexisted with Homo habilis from 2.5 to 1 mya, headed in two very different evolutionary directions
The body of Homo habilis had changed little from gracile Australopithecines; hence, they are likely suitable ancestors for Homo
Did Australopithecus afarensis or Australopithecus africanus give rise to Homo habilis?
Or was it Kenyanthropus (Chapter 6), to the exclusion of all Australopithecines (minority view)?
![Page 14: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Relations between Relations between Homo habilisHomo habilis and and AustralopithecusAustralopithecusMost see early East African graciles as generalized enough to have given rise to both Homo habilis and robust Australopithecus
Homo habilis and robust australopithecines appear about the same time in the fossil record
At least a 3-way split was underway by 2.5 mya (see Figures 7.5 and 7.6 on next slides and in text)
![Page 15: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Relations between Relations between Homo habilisHomo habilis and and AustralopithecusAustralopithecus
![Page 16: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Relations between Relations between Homo habilisHomo habilis and and AustralopithecusAustralopithecus
![Page 17: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
LOWER PALEOLITHIC TOOLSLOWER PALEOLITHIC TOOLS
The beginning of the “Old Stone Age” is marked by the appearance of tools 2.6 million years old
![Page 18: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Olduvai GorgeOlduvai Gorge2 million years ago Olduvai was a lake, whose shores were inhabited by robust Australopithecines, Homo habilis and later Homo erectus (chapter 8)
Assemblages of stone tools (2 mya) were found, associated with bones of now-extinct animals and with evidence of butchering
On an occupation surface, 1.8 mya, there was a “stockpile” of basalt stones, forming a circle
![Page 19: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Oldowan Tool TraditionOldowan Tool Tradition Flakes were struck from a
stone either by using a hammerstone, or by striking the stone against a large rock (anvil), using the direct percussion method
It produced tools with sharp edges, effective for cutting and scraping
Microscopic wear patterns show tool use for cutting meat, grasses, wood
![Page 20: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Oldowan ToolsOldowan Tools
Important technological advance for early hominins
Saving of labour and time
Addition of meat to diet on a frequent basis
Since dentition of Australopithecus and Homo is poorly suited for meat eating (e.g. small canines), sharp tools for butchering were needed
![Page 21: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Tool UseTool UseProbably a result of adaptation to an
environment changing from forests to grasslands, 3-2 mya (see Figure 6.11)
![Page 22: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Oldowan Tools and Bone AssemblagesOldowan Tools and Bone Assemblages
H. habilis and large carnivores were active at the same locations, based on combinations of toolmarks and gnaw marks
Whole carcasses of animal skeletons are not represented
Tools were made of materials that were procured at a distance
There was repeated use of sites over periods of 5-15 years
Suggesting that our Oldowan forebears were SCAVENGERS
![Page 23: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Tools, Meat, and BrainsTools, Meat, and Brains
After 2.5 mya meat became an important part of the hominin diet
Early hominins lacked size and strength to compete for kills and to drive off predators, so must have relied on wit and cunning
![Page 24: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
ORIGINAL STUDY
Cat in the Human CradleCat in the Human Cradle
An anatomical analysis has suggested that both Homo habilis and A. afarensisi were better than us at climbing trees and suspending
Archaeological evidence from South Africa and observation of modern-day leopard activity support “tree-caching” as an ancient form of leopard behaviour in Africa
The collection of bones at Olduvai Gorge then could be explained by both ground scavenging and the scavenging of leopard “tree kills” by Homo habilis
![Page 25: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
““Man the Hunter”Man the Hunter”In the 1960s and 1970s the “man the hunter”
model for provisioning of the social group was supported, followed later by documenting the role of “woman the gatherer”
Cooperation in food procurement and division of labour by sex are seen as prime factors in the success of early Homo in this model
Since these factors relate to male-female differences in the distant past, they are generally attributed to biologically determined sex differences rather than gender
![Page 26: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Tools, Meat, and BrainsTools, Meat, and BrainsBehavioural reconstructions from fragments of bone and stone rely on observations of living primates, human (e.g. modern food foragers) and nonhuman
It is likely that the culture of Homo habilis played a role in food-sharing behaviours, rather than strict biological male-female differences
![Page 27: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Hominid Brain and Meat ConsumptionHominid Brain and Meat Consumption
Increase in brain size correlates with appearance of meat in the hominin diet
The human brain consumes more than twice the energy of the brains of nonhuman primates
Meat is more energy-dense than plant food, important for the evolving brain
![Page 28: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Daniel Wolpert...The Real Reason for Brains
“You may reason that we have brains to perceive the world or to think, and that’s completely wrong.”
![Page 29: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Hominid Brain and Meat ConsumptionHominid Brain and Meat Consumption
The most readily accessible plant sources were leaves and legumes, difficult for primates to digest
Chimps search for animal foods on the savanna; why not our ancestors, too?
Increased meat consumption ensured an adequate intake of essential amino acids and more leisure time for exploring the environment
These factors may have stimulated brain development, as indicated by significant increase in brain size in Homo habilis
![Page 30: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
THE EARLIEST SIGNS OF CULTURE THE EARLIEST SIGNS OF CULTURE AND TOOLSAND TOOLS
1. Problem solving, e.g. the use of stone tools to butcher and prepare meat
2. Tool manufacture, emphasizing manual dexterity and fine manipulation, resulting in improved organization of the nervous system
3. Abstract idea of the tool, plus the steps and materials to make it
![Page 31: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Language OriginsLanguage OriginsImportance of cooperation, planning and
foresight for H. habilis raises questions about communication abilities
Humans and apes share a gesture-call system, inherited from the common ancestor
Humans and apes share language potential (apes to the level of a 2-3 year-old)
These shared abilities must have been possessed by the earliest hominins as well
![Page 32: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Language and the Language and the Homo habilis Homo habilis BrainBrain
The speech area is adjacent to that involved in precise hand control
Manufacture of Oldowan tools require manual skills beyond those of chimpanzees using stones and anvils for nut-cracking (chapter 4)
H. habilis exhibited handedness in toolmaking which is associate with lateralization of the brain
Lateralization is associated with language
![Page 33: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Wernicke’s area and Broca’s area are two areas in the brain associated with speech. Both are believed to have been present in the Homo Habilis brain.
![Page 34: Human Evolution and PREHISTORY](https://reader037.fdocuments.in/reader037/viewer/2022110101/568132b1550346895d99686d/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Homo erectusHomo erectus and the and the Emergence of Hunting and Emergence of Hunting and
GatheringGathering