Category Archives: Anthropology and Geoarchaeology

Sophisticated Neanderthal art now established

The first detailed description and analysis of the amazing cave paintings of Western Europe that have been attributed to anatomically modern humans (AMH) were made in the early 20th century by the Jesuit priest Abbé Henri Breuil. As well as that those of Lascaux and Altamira, which have been dated, many works in Spanish caves have not. Art ascribed to AMH includes figurative work depicting a wide range of Late Pleistocene animals, abstract and perhaps symbolic designs, and ‘signatures’ of individual people in the form of direct prints or stencils of hands. The earliest known graphic work made by modern humans is a 100 ka-old baton of ochre with a zig-zag set of sharp incisions found with ochre-filled shells possibly for body painting at Blombos Cave in South Africa.

Evidence for pre-AMH work in Europe is sparse and widely  judged to be ambiguous; for instance 50 ka-old ochre-stained and pierced shells associated with Neanderthal remains in Spain.  Hints at even earlier origins for art lie in the geometrically etched bivalve shells excavated by Eugene Dubois at the site in Java where he discovered Homo erectus crania in 1891. They have recently been dated at around half a million years old.  Occasionally, radiometric dating of drawings has revealed quite meagre red dots that are slightly older than the widely accepted date of first entry of AMH into Europe (~40-45 ka) and may have been made by Neanderthals. Of course, there are many European cave paintings associated with dates earlier than the extinction of Neanderthals (around 30 ka) that may have been made by them, but which are generally ascribed to AMH by assuming that only our species has the wit to make them.  Even the sophisticated Châtelperronian stone tools and rough ornaments associated with undeniable Neanderthal remains are considered by many paleoanthropologists to show skills copied from AMH.

This AMH-centric view of art depends on two outlooks: simple prejudice that any beings markedly different in appearance from us were intellectually inferior – generally condemned as racist if applied to different groups of living humans; lack of incontrovertible and unambiguous evidence to the contrary. Both are set to be rigorously challenged by the growing use of sophisticated radiometric U-Th dating of the thin films of chemically precipitated calcite (flowstone or speleothem) that often coat the walls of caves and are at least as old as the art that they cover. A German-Spanish-British team has applied the technique to artwork and painted stalactites on the walls of three caves in Spain known to have been occupied by hominins over the last 100 ka (Hoffmann, D.L and 13 others 2018. U-Th dating of carbonate crusts reveals Neandertal origin of Iberian cave art. Science, v. 359, p. 912-915; doi: 10.1126/science.aap7778. See also: Appenzeller, T. 2018. Europe’s first artists were Neandertals. Science, v. 359, p.852-853; doi: 10.1126/science.359.6378.852). One cave that was analysed is that at La Pasiega in Cantabria whose art was sketched by Abbé Breuil. The team’s results are dramatic: all the dated samples pre-date 40 Ka, the oldest at 79.66±14.90 ka being from La Pasiega. Precisely dated art includes hand stencils, painted stalactites, geometric patterns and line drawings of animals. Many of the caves’ artworks remain to be dated, including some well-executed animals and strange, possibly symbolic designs.

Symbolic Neanderthal art in La Pasiega cave, Spain – left: recent photograph; right: sketch produced Abbé Breuil in 1913. The red, ladder-like symbol has a minimum age of 64 ka but it is unclear if the animals and other symbols were painted later. (credit: Hoffmann et al. 2018, Supplementary Data Figure S4)

The implications of this work are far-reaching. Handprints and stencils are common throughout the archives of European cave art and seem generally to be the oldest at each site. The dating method is yet to applied to the bulk of cave art, much of which is encased in speleothem, so it is quite possible that ‘dual authorship’ may be discovered in some caves. It now seems clear that Neanderthals invented permanent art independently of AMH, and since art is a form of communication that has implications for the ability to speak as well as to think ‘outside-the-box’. The 177 ka corral-like enclosures made of stalactites and associated hearths deep within Bruniquel Cave seem more likely to have ritual significance, far from the light of day, for the Neanderthals that made them. The finds throw doubt on the implausibility of Neanderthal invention of so-called ‘transitional’ technologies, such as the Châtelperronian. Finally, fully modern humans in Africa and Neanderthals in Europe were doing much the same things over roughly the same time period; genetically and physically they parted company about 450 to 400 ka ago; both were capable of artistic symbolism and fulfilled that potential. That implies that their common ancestor may have passed on the proclivity, as might their predecessor H. erectus who created the etched mollusc shells of Trinil half a million years ago.

More on Neanderthals, Denisovans and AMH genetic relatedness

Editorial from the Guardian Newspaper 26 February 2018.


Earliest departure of modern humans from Africa

In June 2017 the likely age of the earliest anatomically modern humans (AMH) was pushed back to almost 300 ka with the dating of their remains found at Jebel Irhoud in Morocco. It seemed only a matter of time before their first departure from Africa would also be shown to be earlier than generally believed at between 90 to 120 ka measured from AMH remains in the Skhul and Qafzeh caves of Israel. Such an exodus may be reflected by dates (80 to 113 ka) from fragmentary and indeterminate human remains in China, but a more definite, far-travelled AMH presence in east Asia is, so far, limited to about 60 ka. Yet there is genetic evidence from Neanderthal DNA from Germany and Siberia for human-Neanderthal interbreeding at some time between 219 and 460 thousand years before present: a very hazy intimation but one that needs accounting for. The main phase of genetic introgression from Neanderthals into Homo sapiens has been estimated to have occurred at between 50 to 60 ka; more easily explained by the known AMH peregrination into Asia in that period.

Misliya Cave on Mount Carmel, Israel has now added to the Levantine AMH record. A partial upper jaw and some teeth provide morphological data that fall within the range of H. sapiens fossils, along with tools ascribed to the Levallois technology. This involved striking flakes from a prepared core – a tortoise-like bulge on the flake that detaches when struck properly to form a pre-sharpened flake, flat on one side and rounded on the other. This method was shared by both AMH and Neanderthals, and examples of the tools extend as far back as 500 ka in Africa and may have been invented by a common ancestor of both human groups. Levallois tools were found with the AMH fossils at Jebel Irhoud and also in the Levant at Tabun, dated at 190 to 260 ka, but with no associated fossil remains of their makers. Those at Mislya Cave yielded a mean age from the use of three different dating methods at least 177 ka ago, making the fossil jaw found with them the earliest direct sign of AMH outside Africa (Hershkovitz, I. and 34 others 2018. The earliest modern humans outside Africa. Science, v. 359, p. 456-459; doi: 10.1126/science.aap8369).

So, Mislya supports the genetic evidence of human-Neanderthal Introgression in Eurasia (see; Stringer, C & Galway-Witham, J. 2018. When did modern humans leave Africa? Science, v. 359, p. 389-390; doi: 10.1126/science.aas8954) and provides a spur to extend work in China and between Arabia and eastern Asia. For decades the anatomically modern human remains in the Levant have been sidelined, that near-Mediterranean area being widely regarded as a ‘boulevard of broken dreams’. That is, until Levalloisian tools dated at up to 125 ka were found in the United Arab Emirates and Arabia as a whole had been shown to have had a monsoonal climate during the glacial period that preceded the last, Eemian interglacial and in several later episodes. Once in the Levant, and provided they continually had a foothold there, AMH had many windows of opportunity to move further east without having to await falls in sea-level to open routes such as that across the Red Sea via Straits of Bab el Mandab.

Sunrise Girl-Child: the first American colonist

Thanks to a variety of archaeological finds of tools and animal bones bearing cut marks, together with precise dating, it now seems clear that the Americas began to be colonised as early as the Last Glacial Maximum from tangible evidence from Bluefish Cave in the Yukon territory of Canada and as early as 15.5 ka close to the southern tip of South America in Chile. Although confirmation remains to be found, there is even a possibility that pre-sapiens people had arrived far earlier. Advances in analysis of ancient genetic material help understand the divergence of early colonisers. Y-chromosome DNA from living indigenous men suggests that all early Americans stemmed from 4 separate colonising populations who may have entered by crossing the Beringia land bridge, exposed as a result of glacial fall in global sea level, to follow different routes, including along the Pacific coast. A possible common ancestor of all native Americans emerged in 2013 from the mitochondrial and Y-chromosome DNA of the skeleton of a young man from near Lake Baikal in Siberia who lived about 24 ka ago. At the very start of 2018 an online paper in Nature took the story even further.

This image was first published in the 1 st (18...

The diversity of Native American people. (credit: Wikipedia from a 19th century Norwegian painting)

The remains of a ~6-week-old girl recovered from a site at Upward Sun River in Alaska – called ‘Xach’itee’aanenh t’eede gay’, or ‘sunrise girl-child’ by indigenous Alaskans – dated at 11.5 ka, has yielded a precise genome (Moreno-Mayar, J. and 17 others 2018. Terminal Pleistocene Alaskan genome reveals first founding population of Native Americans. Nature; doi:10.1038/nature25173).  The baby girl’s DNA shows that the group to which she belonged was ancestral to contemporary and fossilised ancient Native Americans. She was probably a member of a founding population of ‘Beringians’. At the end of the last glacial epoch (11.5 ka) a separate branch of Native Americans was already established in unglaciated North America further south. That group had split into two further groups sometime between 17.5 to 14.6 ka, who became ancestors of most of the indigenous people of the Americas. The ‘Beringian’ people were therefore probably stranded in the far north by the difficulties of crossing the vast North American ice sheet. Probing deeper into time, using demographic modelling, suggests that the founding population of all Native Americans, including the ‘Beringians’, split from East Asians around 36 ka ago. Gene flow among them and with East Asians persisted until about 25 thousand years ago, with some admixture with ancient northern Eurasians up to 20 ka. It seems that the ‘Beringians’, of whom little ‘sunrise girl-child’ was a late member, became isolated genetically between 22-18 ka.

The ancestral mixture of both East Asian and northern Eurasians that led to the founders of the whole panoply of geographically isolated Native Americans is remarkable. It shows just how far human groups moved and mingled during the run-up to the Last Glacial Maximum, which made the far north just about uninhabitable – or so it has been assumed. For a small ethnically mixed group to survive such conditions for so long suggests considerable ingenuity in living off the land.

Early human dispersal through Asia

When first mooted, the Out of Africa model for the spread of anatomically modern humans (AMH) centred on a single exodus from African to Eurasia, which researchers broadly agreed to have occurred about 60 thousand years ago. That was when an advance of continental glaciers and sea level fall narrowed to manageable proportions the obstacle presented by the Red Sea. The only archaeological drawback was that AMH had occupied the Levant at around 110 ka. That was formerly considered to have been a temporary occupation corralled by hyperarid conditions immediately to the east and a mountain barrier to the north, with the Mediterranean Sea to the west. Yet, during humid periods there was every chance that the eastern barrier would occasionally have been permeable. Plumping for the 60 ka exit model was a conservative view stifled by a lack of high-quality dates for scattered suggestions of an Asian AMH presence, such as occurrences of stone tools resembling those of early moderns and even rarer, incomplete and often ambiguous skeletal remains. The ‘modern-looking’ tools that occurred both above and below the 74 ka Toba ash deposit in southern India were disposed of as ‘advanced’ tools of earlier migrants; probably Homo erectus. In retrospect, the established fact of earlier occupation of Eurasia by such ‘primitive’ African migrants, as long ago as ~1.8 Ma in the case of Homo fossils in Georgia, should have encouraged the view that culturally better-endowed AMH would have had less problem in diffusing eastwards once they found an escape route from Africa.

Whatever, the flurry during the last couple of decades of more skeletal and archaeological remains of AMH in Asia, genetic evidence for their interbreeding in the west and east with earlier human groups and, principally, improvements in dating ancient sites suggests a more complex geographic flow. Christopher Bae of the University of Hawaii and colleagues based in the UK, Germany and the US have reviewed this growing wealth of new data to put forward various scenarios for Out of Africa dispersal through Asia (Bae, C.J. et al. 2017. On the origin of modern humans: Asian perspectives. Science, v. 358, p. 1269 (summary); online full paper DOI: 10.1126/science.aai9067). They highlight growing evidence for at least one pre-60 ka dispersal, and probably several, to reach the Levant, Arabia, India, China, Laos, Indonesia, the Philippines and Australia before that date. This tallies with Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA segments within the genomes of living Eurasians that indicate interbreeding before 60 ka.

Bae and colleagues also assemble data that bear on where AMH managed to move out of Africa. They resolve the dispute between routes around the northern shores of the Red Sea and crossing the southern Straits of Bab el Mandab by concluding ‘why not both’. Where the migrations went to is currently suggested by the distribution of sites that reveal either pre- or post-60 ka occupancy. The earlier dispersals may have been dominated by following coastlines along the Mediterranean in North Africa to the Levant and via Bab el Mandab across the Persian Gulf, along the northern Indian Ocean littoral to south-east and east Asia. The later, more ‘adventurous’ movements using both routes led to Europe and deeper into continental Asia and thence to its north east. The review conveniently covers in seven pages much the same geoarchaeological and anthropological ground as Earth-Pages has visited bit-by-bit as it has unfolded since 2000. Clearly, great swathes of Asia have not been explored by palaoanthropologists. As in most geographic sciences there is a tendency to follow up known sites year after year – often decade after decade – to ensure publishable results, and that will consume lots of economic and human resources. It is more risky to try and fill in the gaps, but that basic field work is urgently needed to supply new material.

Neanderthal development

Despite the lingering public image that Neanderthals were not as bright as fully modern humans some had significantly larger brains than we do, albeit with most of the difference being in the rear part of the brain region. So they may have had different powers, such as enhanced vision and awareness of position (proprioception). Because there are few cranial fossils of immature Neanderthals and, for them, little evidence of ages, not much is known about how they developed from birth. A common assumption has been that because their brain was larger post-natal development much have been faster than in modern humans. Set against our slow post-natal development and the faster pace in chimpanzees this assumption has been used in support of limited Neanderthal cognitive abilities.

The El Sidron Neanderthal boy, including a reconstruction of his skull and brain cast. (credit: Antonio Rosas, Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales, Madrid, Spain)

The El Sidron cave in Asturias region of northern Spain has yielded fossil remains of a dozen Neanderthals dated at between 49 and 37 ka, the time when anatomically modern humans were also present in Europe. They are among the best studied examples of this human group. Three were of boys, the best preserved of whom is estimated to have died at 7.7 years old from analysis of his dental development (Rosas, A. and 10 others 2017. The growth pattern of Neandertals, reconstructed from a juvenile skeleton from El Sidrón (Spain). Science, v. 357, p. 1282-1287; doi:10.1126/science.aan6463) Analysis of signs of the maturation stage that he had reached, including that of his brain, show no fundamental difference from modern human juveniles in his overall pace of growth. Other workers have found that a similarly aged Homo erectus boy from Kenya had indeed developed more quickly than modern human juveniles.

It’s not much to go on, but the El Sidron boy supports the view that Neanderthals were not much different from us.

You can find more information on migration of modern humans here.

Ancient footprints

To see traces of where our forebears walked, such as the famous Australopithecus afarensis trackway at Laetoli in Tanzania, the footprints of Neanderthal children in 350 ka old Italian volcanic ash (The first volcanologists? Earth Pages March 2003) or even those of Mesolithic families in estuarine mud is about as heart stopping as it gets for a geologist. But imagine the astonishment of members of a multinational team working on Miocene shore-line sediments on Crete when they came upon a bedding surface covered with what are almost certainly the footprints of another bipedal animal from 5.7 Ma ago (Gierliński, G.D. et al. 2017. Possible hominin footprints from the late Miocene (c. 5.7 Ma) of Crete? Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, online; Trackways preserve a few moments in time, however old they are and the chances of their being preserved are very small, yet they can supply information that is lost from even the best preserved fossil, such as gait, weight, speed and so forth.


Track bearing surface; (b) two footprints in 5.7 Ma old Miocene sediments at Trachilos, Crete (credit: Gierliński, G.D. et al. 2017; Figures 2 and 8)

The tracks clearly indicate that whatever left them was bipedal and lacked claws, and closely resemble those attributed to A. afarensis at Laetoli in a 3.7 Ma old volcanic ash. What they do not resemble closely are those of non-hominin modern primates, such as chimpanzees. They are diminutive compared with adult modern human prints, being about 12.5 cm long (equivalent to a UK child’ shoe size 4 – US size 4.5, EU 20) and about a third to half the size of those at Laetoli. Were they around the age of those at Laetoli or younger there seems little doubt that they would be widely interpreted as being of hominin origin. But being from an island in the Mediterranean as well as far from sites in Africa that have yielded Miocene hominins (Ardipithecus kadabba from Ethiopia, Orrorin from Kenya and Sahelanthropus from Chad),  such an interpretation is bound to create controversy. Somewhat less controversial might be to regard them as having been created by a late-Miocene primate that convergently evolved a hominin-like upright gait and foot. Being preserved in what seem to be coastal marine sediments, there is probably little chance of body fossils being preserved in the exposed horizon. Since foot bones are so fragile, even if a primate fossil is discovered in the late Miocene of Crete the chances of resolving the issue are pretty remote. Yet fossil primate specialists will undoubtedly beat a well-trodden path to the Trachilos site near Kissamos on Crete

Early modern humans in Sumatra before the Toba eruption

In late July 2017 news emerged that modern humans first reached Australia at least 65 thousand years ago. Confirming that the date of departure from Africa to end up in SE Asia and Australasia was  considerable earlier than previously believed, deposits in Sumatra that contain remains of early Home sapiens have yielded even older ages (Westaway, K.E. and 22 others 2017. An early modern human presence in Sumatra 73,000–63,000 years ago. Nature v. 548 online; doi:10.1038/nature23452). This resulted from a re-examination of material from the Padang Caves first excavated more than a century ago by Eugène Dubois, famous for his discovery in Java of the first H. erectus remains. A richly fossiliferous breccia in the Lida Ajer cave yielded a fauna characteristic of a rainforest biome and included two teeth that Dubois considered to be human. Several later palaeontologists confirmed his identification as have hominin specialists in the present Australian-Indonesian-American-British-Dutch-German team. The fossil assemblage has long suggested great antiquity for the site, but only now has it been dated precisely. The dating employed three methods: optically stimulated luminescence dating of quartz grains from the breccia (85±25 to 62±5  ka); uranium-series dating of speleothem including fragments of hollow ‘soda-straw’ stalactites(84±1 to 71±7 ka); uranium-series dating of gibbon and orangutan teeth found together with the human teeth (86±13 to 76±7 ka). Statistical analysis of the age data suggests 73 to 63 ka for the fauna, with a maximum age for deposition of the breccia of 84±1 ka.

Satellite image of Lake Toba, the site of a VE...

Satellite image of Lake Toba in NW Sumatra (at centre), the site of the largest volcanic eruption during the history of human evolution ~71,600 years ago (credit: Wikipedia)

Stone tools which may have been carried by anatomically modern humans into the area have previously been used to suggest a minimum date of the arrival of migrants, though they may have been carried by ­H. erectus. Remarkably, such tools have been found beneath a thick bed of volcanic ash found throughout southern Asia and in Indian Ocean sediment cores. This has been dated at 71.6 ka and represents the explosive collapse of the caldera now containing Lake Toba in NW Sumatra that was the largest volcanic event in the entire history of the genus Homo. The new age data from Lida Ajer suggests that modern humans were present in its vicinty before the eruption, a view also supported by ‘molecular-clock’ dating of the range of mitochondrial DNA carried by living SE Asian people (79 to 75 ka). So, despite the stupendous magnitude of the Toba eruption is seems likely that some of the migrants survived.  Together with the dating of the earliest Australians the Sumatran evidence is at odds with the view, widely held by palaeoanthropologists, that the ‘Out of Africa’ exodus began by crossing the Straits of Bab el Mandab between 74 and 58 ka when global sea-level fell markedly during marine oxygen-isotope Stage 4 (MIS4). A problem with that hypothesis has been that climatic and ecological conditions in southern Asia during MIS4 were unfavourable. But is seems that modern humans were already there and capable of adapting to both the climate shift and to the devastation undoubtedly caused by Toba.

New dates for earliest human occupation of Australia

When modern humans first reached Australia has an importance beyond the starting date for the island continent’s archaeology and confirmation that their ancestors are the oldest known migrants from Africa. The first native Australians carried within their genome important information about the minimum date at which some non-Africans interbred with more archaic Neanderthal and Denisovan humans, traces of whose DNA are are present in that of living Australian aborigines. Most dating of when modern humans first reached different parts of the non-African world has relied on the radiocarbon method, which is suspect from beyond 40 to 45 ka as 14C produced earlier has decayed to levels that are now below the practical limit of detection and measurement. It is therefore no accident that the bulk of ‘first-arrival’ dates for Eurasia and Australasia are around 45 ka. In fact, any accurate age, however old, for the earliest skeletal remains only indicates the minimum date of arrival until other remains are discovered.

Reliable dating of earlier events in the Pleistocene relies on other methods, the most important for settings other than speleothem from caves being optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) applied to soil minerals that estimates their time of burial. Briefly, molecules of soil grains made of a mineral such as quartz are ‘charged-up’ with energy by radiation emitted by unstable isotopes in the soil. Exposure to light releases that stored energy in the form of luminescence. Measuring the amount of luminescence emitted by optically stimulated grains therefore gives a measure of the time since they were buried and ceased to be exposed to sunlight.

Madjedbebe rock shelter

The Madjedbebe rock shelter in Arnhem Land, Northern Territories, Australia. (Credit: Chris Clarkson, University of Queensland)

A re-evaluation of the Madjedbebe site in the Northern Territory, widely accepted as having yielded Australia’s oldest artefacts in 1989, takes back human occupation more than 20 thousand years before previous estimates (Clarkson and 27 others 2017. Human occupation of northern Australia by 65, 000 years ago. Nature, v.  547, p. 306-310; doi:10.1038/nature22968). The soil profile in the Madjedbebe rock shelter turns out to be littered with artefacts – including hearths, tools and blocks of ochre and reflective mica pigments, plus remnants of plant foods – to a depth of ~2.5 m, with three particularly dense accumulations. Carbon-rich remains are also present throughout the profile which provided a means of accurate calibration and confirmation of OSL dates back as far as the radiocarbon method allows, giving confidence in the older OSL dates that extend to 65.0±5.7 ka in the earliest zone of dense artefact finds. Because the modern DNA of Australia’s first native people shows no sign of mixture with other modern humans, this places the timing of modern human interbreeding with archaic people before this time. The age also predates the range when the continent’s megafauna began to decline to eventual extinction, which supports the view that it was anthropogenic.

See also: Marean, C.W. 2017. Early signs of human presence in Australia. Nature, v.  547, p. 285-287; doi:10.1038/547285a.

Origin of anatomically modern humans

How evolution proceeds and species arise are affected by many different processes. But, if members of every generation of the clade that led from the probable common ancestor of ourselves, Neanderthals, Denisovans and other hominins of the last 700 ka or so – widely thought to have been Homo heidelbergensis­ – were found as perfectly preserved fossils they would show gradually shifting anatomical features that from time to time and place to place would diverge to lead to different species. If, also, every specimen was accurately dated then there would be the last part of the human evolutionary bush laid out in a 3-D graphic. That is never going to be possible, of course. Human fossils are rare and there are few of them that are well-preserved. So the field of human origins throws up surprises on a regular basis, and if palaeoanthropologists were more dogmatic than most of them actually are there would be equally regular, public displays of the eating of hats.

As regards early modern H. sapiens, fossils from a couple of sites in Ethiopia have been the oldest known, at between 160 to 195 ka, for the last 15 years. However, in the 1960s quarry workers at Jebel Irhoud in SW Morocco exposed the infill of a cave network in which were found numerous items of the Levallois stone-tool technology, some human bone fragments that included a brain case and many dismembered and cut bones of prey animals. Initially they were thought to date from about 40 ka and to represent an African form of Neanderthals. Subsequently, re-evaluation of the remains revealed a greater likelihood that they were from modern humans, but too young to be of great interest. An upgraded date of ~160 ka caused them to be considered  as peripheral to the core group of Ethiopian early modern humans. DNA analyses then suggested modern humans to have split from Neanderthals about 500 ka ago. Members of the French-Moroccan team that did the original work, accompanied by other scientists, recently re-excavated the site and exhumed a much richer fossil haul that pin-pointed an anatomically modern human (AMH) provenance, albeit with some archaic characteristics (Hublin, J.-J. and 10 others, 2017. New fossils from Jebel Irhoud, Morocco and the pan-African origin of Homo sapiens. Nature, v. 546, p. 289-294; doi:10.1038/nature22336), which can be referred to as ‘pre-modern’ H. sapiens. The bombshell stemming from their work was the precise dating of the fossils and their stratigraphic context by other members of the team (Richter, D. and 11 others. The age of the hominin fossils from Jebel Irhoud, Morocco, and the origins of the Middle Stone Age. Nature, v. 546, p. 293-296; doi:10.1038/nature22335), which yielded 315±34 ka from fire-heated flint fragments and 286±32 ka from a human tooth. Both dates are far older than the previously accepted maximum of 200 ka for AMH.

The early evolution of fully modern humans seems to have spanned the whole of Africa, rather than being set in an Ethiopian heartland, a view partly supported by a fragmentary 260 ka fossil from South Africa bearing close resemblance to the Moroccan individuals. Interestingly, Levallois stone tools, as their name suggests, are widespread in both Africa and Europe at around 300 ka, although that is not proof that AMH migrated out of Africa around 300 ka, for Neanderthals may also have been using a similar flint flaking method (another space to be watched).

See also:  Stringer C. & Galway-Witham, J., 2017. On the origin of our species.  Nature, v. 546, p. 212-215; doi:10.1038/nature 546212a.

You can find more information on migration of modern humans here.

Homo naledi: an anti-climax

In September 2015 a barrage of publicity announced the remarkable unearthing of the remains of 15 diminutive hominins, dubbed Homo nadeli, from the floor sediments of an almost inaccessible South African cave, part of the equally hyped ‘Cradle of Humankind’ UNESCO World Heritage Site near Johannesburg. An international team of lithe women speleo-archaeologists was recruited for the excavation, for which the original discoverers were incapably burly. The remains included numerous examples of still articulated intricate bones, such as those of feet and hands, and none show signs of dismemberment by large scavengers. Indeed the discovery chamber was so far from the cave entrance that such animals probably were unaware of their presence. These features and the sheer complexity of the system strongly suggested that cadavers had been deliberately taken to the chamber; implying that the deep penetration had been accomplished using fire-brand illumination. What seized the headlines was the possibility of ritual burial, although sanitary disposal or panicked refuge from predators seem equally, if not more likely.

Lee Burger and the reconstructed skull of Homo naledi

Now yet more fossils have been reported from a separate chamber at a crawling distance about 150 m away from the original but closer to the system’s main entrance (~85 m). These add at least other 3 individuals to the H. nadeli association, with sufficient similarity to indicate that all 18 belong to H. naledi. This wealth of detail enabled the team of authors (Hawks, J. and 37 others 2017. New fossil remains of Homo naledi from the Lesedi Chamber, South Africa. eLife, v. 6, online; to perform a detailed comparative anatomic analysis of the species. The results are a mosaic, showing some post-cranial affinities with australopithecines, H. habilis, H.floresiensis, H. erectus, Neanderthals and anatomically modern humans, and others, such as the hands and shoulders, that are not well matched with other hominins. Their crania show a similar broad spectrum of resemblances, and as regards dentition they are distinctly primitive. They are also on the small-brained side of the hominin clade. Despite the astonishing abundance of fossil material, not a single artifact was found in the cave system, despite the apparent similarity of its hands to those of ourselves and Neanderthals.

With plenty of scope for speculation, H. nadeli remains enigmatic. The big question looming over the 2015 announcement of the species was its age, the discovers suggesting about 2 Ma, and placing on the direct line of human descent. On the same day as the fossil description there appeared a multi-method dating analysis (Dirks, P.H.G.M. and 19 others 2017. eLife, v. 6, online;, which showed that with little doubt that the H. nadeli association was deposited between 236 ka and 335 ka; around the time when anatomically modern humans first emerged and stone tools had undergone a >2 Ma technological evolution. To me, the only sensible conclusion at present is that H. nadeli is another addition to the 6 species living and in some cases coexisting across the late Pleistocene world, and that expansion of ideas beyond that must await DNA analysis; a definite possibility considering the age of the fossils, their seemingly good preservation in a relatively dry cave system and the new possibility of cave soils as well as bones yielding genetic materials. The leader of the research team, Lee Berger of the University of the Witwatersrand now maintains, together with four other members of the research team, that H. nadeli may be a coelacanth-like survivor of Homo’s earliest diversification and that ‘we cannot exclude that this lineage was responsible for the production of Acheulean or Middle Stone Age tool industries’.

Barras, C. 2017. Homo naledi is only 250,000 years old – here’s why that matters. New Scientist, 6 May 2017 Issue

Sample, I. 2017. New haul of Homo naledi bones sheds surprising light on human evolution. The Guardian, 9 May 2017