Species of the Upper Pleistocene

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco J. Ayala ◽  
Camilo J. Cela-Conde
Keyword(s):  
South African ◽  
Homo Sapiens ◽  
Evolutionary Model ◽  
Adaptive Strategy ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
Upper Pleistocene ◽  
Homo Neanderthalensis ◽  
Morphological Differences ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter analyzes the two taxa of the Upper Pleistocene: Homo neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens. The first one is explored starting with the Feldhofer discovery and the early interpretations of that specimen. The next issue is the evolutionary model of the Neanderthals and their geographic range. The ensuing questions are the Neanderthal morphology, its ontogenetic development, and the relationship between its traits and its adaptive strategy. The morphological differences between Neanderthals and modern humans make it difficult to understand the relationships between the two taxa, which will be settled in Chapter 11 by means of molecular methods. But the present chapter already deals with the origin of modern humans by considering the coalescence of mitochondrial DNA and other factors facilitated by molecular genetics, in order to characterize the origin of our species. Finally, there is consideration of the fossil and archaeological evidence concerning the earliest modern humans from South African sediments.

Neanderthals and modern humans

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco J. Ayala ◽  
Camilo J. Cela-Conde
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Differentiation ◽  
Nuclear Dna ◽  
Homo Sapiens ◽  
Whole Genome ◽  
Upper Palaeolithic ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
Homo Neanderthalensis ◽  
Modern Mind ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Mode 3

This chapter deals with the similarities and differences between Homo neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens, by considering genetic, brain, and cognitive evidence. The genetic differentiation emerges from fossil genetic evidence obtained first from mtDNA and later from nuclear DNA. With high throughput whole genome sequencing, sequences have been obtained from the Denisova Cave (Siberia) fossils. Nuclear DNA of a third species (“Denisovans”) has been obtained from the same cave and used to define the phylogenetic relationships among the three species during the Upper Palaeolithic. Archaeological comparisons make it possible to advance a four-mode model of the evolution of symbolism. Neanderthals and modern humans would share a “modern mind” as defined up to Symbolic Mode 3. Whether the Neanderthals reached symbolic Mode 4 remains unsettled.

scholarly journals Arguments that Prehistorical and Modern Humans Belong to the Same Species

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rainer Kühne
Keyword(s):  
Homo Sapiens ◽  
Single Species ◽  
Homo Erectus ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
Homo Neanderthalensis ◽  
Out Of Africa

I argue that the evidence of the Out-of-Africa hypothesis and the evidence of multiregional evolution of prehistorical humans can be understood if there has been interbreeding between Homo erectus, Homo neanderthalensis, and Homo sapiens at least during the preceding 700,000 years. These interbreedings require descendants who are capable of reproduction and therefore parents who belong to the same species. I suggest that a number of prehistorical humans who are at present regarded as belonging to different species belong in fact to one single species.  

scholarly journals Evolution, revolution or saltation scenario for the emergence of modern cultures?

2011 ◽  
Vol 366 (1567) ◽  
pp. 1060-1069 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco d'Errico ◽  
Chris B. Stringer
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Change ◽  
Cultural Transmission ◽  
Homo Sapiens ◽  
Genetic Mutation ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
The Third ◽  
Anatomically Modern Humans ◽  
Modern Cognition ◽  
New Evidence ◽  
The Relationship

Crucial questions in the debate on the origin of quintessential human behaviours are whether modern cognition and associated innovations are unique to our species and whether they emerged abruptly, gradually or as the result of a discontinuous process. Three scenarios have been proposed to account for the origin of cultural modernity. The first argues that modern cognition is unique to our species and the consequence of a genetic mutation that took place approximately 50 ka in Africa among already evolved anatomically modern humans. The second posits that cultural modernity emerged gradually in Africa starting at least 200 ka in concert with the origin of our species on that continent. The third states that innovations indicative of modern cognition are not restricted to our species and appear and disappear in Africa and Eurasia between 200 and 40 ka before becoming fully consolidated. We evaluate these scenarios in the light of new evidence from Africa, Asia and Europe and explore the mechanisms that may have led to modern cultures. Such reflections will demonstrate the need for further inquiry into the relationship between climate and demographic/cultural change in order to better understand the mechanisms of cultural transmission at work in Neanderthals and early Homo sapiens populations.

scholarly journals The challenge of the abstract mind: symbols, signs and notational systems in European prehistory

2005 ◽  
Vol 32 ◽  
pp. 221-232 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harald Haarmann
Keyword(s):  
Homo Sapiens ◽  
Homo Erectus ◽  
Main Theme ◽  
Writing System ◽  
Southeastern Europe ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
Symbiotic Interaction ◽  
Homo Neanderthalensis ◽  
Cave Paintings ◽  
Naturalistic Pictures

Since the earliest manifestations of symbolic activity in modern humans (Homo sapiens sapiens) in the Upper Palaeolithic, there is evidence for two independent cognitive procedures, for the production of representational images (naturalistic pictures or sculptures) and of abstract signs. The use of signs and symbols is attested for archaic humans (Homo neanderthalensis) and for Homo erectus while art in naturalistic style is an innovation among modern humans. The symbiotic interaction of the two symbolic capacities is illustrated for the visual heritage of Palaeolithic cave paintings in Southwestern Europe, for rock engravings in the Italian Alps (Val Camonica) and for the vivid use of signs and symbols in Southeastern Europe during the Neolithic. Around 5500 BC, sign use in Southeastern Europe reached a sophisticated stage of organization as to produce the earliest writing system of mankind. Since abstractness is the main theme in the visual heritage of the region, this script, not surprisingly, is composed of predominantly abstract signs.

scholarly journals Arguments that Prehistorical and Modern Humans Belong to the Same Species

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rainer Walter Kühne
Keyword(s):  
Homo Sapiens ◽  
Single Species ◽  
Homo Erectus ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
Homo Neanderthalensis ◽  
Out Of Africa

I argue that the evidence of the Out-of-Africa hypothesis and the evidence of multiregional evolution of prehistorical humans can be understood if there has been interbreeding between Homo erectus, Homo neanderthalensis, and Homo sapiens at least during the preceding 700,000 years. These interbreedings require descendants who are capable of reproduction and therefore parents who belong to the same species. I suggest that a number of prehistorical humans who are at present regarded as belonging to different species belong in fact to one single species.

scholarly journals Facial ontogeny in Neanderthals and modern humans

2007 ◽  
Vol 274 (1614) ◽  
pp. 1125-1132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Markus Bastir ◽  
Paul O'Higgins ◽  
Antonio Rosas
Keyword(s):  
Homo Sapiens ◽  
Human Species ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
Spatial Factors ◽  
Ontogenetic Trajectory ◽  
Spatio Temporal ◽  
Morphological Differences

One hundred and fifty years after the discovery of Neanderthals, it is held that this morphologically and genetically distinct human species does not differ from modern Homo sapiens in its craniofacial ontogenetic trajectory after the early post-natal period. This is striking given the evident morphological differences between these species, since it implies that all of the major differences are established by the early post-natal period and carried into adulthood through identical trajectories, despite the extent to which mechanical and spatial factors are thought to influence craniofacial ontogeny. Here, we present statistical and morphological analyses demonstrating that the spatio-temporal processes responsible for craniofacial ontogenetic transformations differ. The findings emphasize that pre-natal as well as post-natal ontogeny are both important in establishing the cranial morphological differences between adult Neanderthals and modern humans.

Co-creating the Psychological “White Picket Fence”: Three Gay Couples’ Relationship Reconfiguration

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Prevan Moodley ◽  
Francois Rabie
Keyword(s):  
Grounded Theory ◽  
South African ◽  
Gay Couples ◽  
Core Category ◽  
Picket Fence ◽  
Open Relationship ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Porous Boundaries

Many gay couples engage in nonmonogamous relationships. Ideas about nonmonogamy have historically been theorised as individual pathology and indicating relational distress. Unlike mixed-sex couples, boundaries for gay couples are often not determined by sexual exclusivity. These relationships are built along a continuum of open and closed, and sexual exclusivity agreements are not restricted to binaries, thus requiring innovation and re-evaluation. Three white South African gay couples were each jointly interviewed about their open relationship, specifically about how this is negotiated. In contrast to research that uses the individual to investigate this topic, this study recruited dyads. The couples recalled the initial endorsement of heteronormative romantic constructions, after which they shifted to psychological restructuring. The dyad, domesticated through the stock image of a white picket fence, moved to a renewed arrangement, protected by “rules” and imperatives. Abbreviated grounded theory strategies led to a core category, “co-creating porous boundaries”, and two themes. First, the couple jointly made heteronormative ideals porous and, second, they reconfigured the relationship through dyadic protection. The overall relationship ideology associated with the white picket fence remained intact despite the micro-innovations through which the original heteronormative patterning was reconfigured.

Hominin transition to Upper Pliocene

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco J. Ayala ◽  
Camilo J. Cela-Conde
Keyword(s):  
Brain Development ◽  
Late Pleistocene ◽  
Technological Progress ◽  
Homo Sapiens ◽  
Middle Pleistocene ◽  
Evolutionary Significance ◽  
Australopithecus Afarensis ◽  
Phylogenetic Significance ◽  
Homo Neanderthalensis ◽  
Surprising Discovery

This chapter analyzes the transition of the hominins from the Middle Pleistocene to the Late Pleistocene. Two alternative models are explored, the “Multiregional Hypothesis” (MH) and the “Replacement Hypothesis,” and how each model evaluates the existing relationships between the taxa Homo neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens. Next is the investigation of the transitional (or “archaic,” if this grade is taken into account) exemplars found in Europe, Africa, and Asia and their evolutionary significance. In particular, the comparison between H. erectus and H. sapiens in China and Java is investigated, as the main foundation of the MH. The chapter ends with the surprising discovery of Homo floresiensis and its description and interpretations concerning its taxonomic and phylogenetic significance. The correlation between brain development and technological progress is at odds with the attribution of perforators, microblades, and fishing hooks to a hominin with a small cranial volume, similar to that of Australopithecus afarensis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document