essay of early humans

Science | February 2, 2021

An Evolutionary Timeline of Homo Sapiens

Scientists share the findings that helped them pinpoint key moments in the rise of our species

Brian Handwerk

Science Correspondent

The long evolutionary journey that created modern humans began with a single step—or more accurately—with the ability to walk on two legs. One of our earliest-known ancestors, Sahelanthropus , began the slow transition from ape-like movement some six million years ago, but Homo sapiens wouldn’t show up for more than five million years. During that long interim, a menagerie of different human species lived, evolved and died out, intermingling and sometimes interbreeding along the way. As time went on, their bodies changed, as did their brains and their ability to think, as seen in their tools and technologies.

To understand how Homo sapiens eventually evolved from these older lineages of hominins, the group including modern humans and our closest extinct relatives and ancestors, scientists are unearthing ancient bones and stone tools, digging into our genes and recreating the changing environments that helped shape our ancestors’ world and guide their evolution.

These lines of evidence increasingly indicate that H. sapiens originated in Africa, although not necessarily in a single time and place. Instead it seems diverse groups of human ancestors lived in habitable regions around Africa, evolving physically and culturally in relative isolation, until climate driven changes to African landscapes spurred them to intermittently mix and swap everything from genes to tool techniques. Eventually, this process gave rise to the unique genetic makeup of modern humans.

“East Africa was a setting in foment—one conducive to migrations across Africa during the period when Homo sapiens arose,” says Rick Potts , director of the Smithsonian’s Human Origins Program. “It seems to have been an ideal setting for the mixing of genes from migrating populations widely spread across the continent. The implication is that the human genome arose in Africa. Everyone is African, and yet not from any one part of Africa.”

New discoveries are always adding key waypoints to the chart of our human journey. This timeline of Homo sapiens features some of the best evidence documenting how we evolved.

550,000 to 750,000 Years Ago: The Beginning of the Homo sapiens Lineage

Genes, rather than fossils, can help us chart the migrations, movements and evolution of our own species—and those we descended from or interbred with over the ages.

The oldest-recovered DNA of an early human relative comes from Sima de los Huesos , the “Pit of Bones.” At the bottom of a cave in Spain’s Atapuerca Mountains scientists found thousands of teeth and bones from 28 different individuals who somehow ended up collected en masse. In 2016, scientists painstakingly teased out the partial genome from these 430,000-year-old remains to reveal that the humans in the pit are the oldest known Neanderthals , our very successful and most familiar close relatives. Scientists used the molecular clock to estimate how long it took to accumulate the differences between this oldest Neanderthal genome and that of modern humans, and the researchers suggest that a common ancestor lived sometime between 550,000 and 750,000 years ago.

Pinpoint dating isn't the strength of genetic analyses, as the 200,000-year margin of error shows. “In general, estimating ages with genetics is imprecise,” says Joshua Akey, who studies evolution of the human genome at Princeton University. “Genetics is really good at telling us qualitative things about the order of events, and relative time frames.” Before genetics, these divergence dates were estimated by the oldest fossils of various lineages scientists found. In the case of H. sapiens, known remains only date back some 300,000 years, so gene studies have located the divergence far more accurately on our evolutionary timeline than bones alone ever could.

Though our genes clearly show that modern humans, Neanderthals and Denisovans —a mysterious hominin species that left behind substantial traces in our DNA but, so far, only a handful of tooth and bone remains—do share a common ancestor, it’s not apparent who it was. Homo heidelbergensis , a species that existed from 200,000 to 700,000 years ago, is a popular candidate. It appears that the African family tree of this species leads to Homo sapiens while a European branch leads to Homo neanderthalensis and the Denisovans.

More ancient DNA could help provide a clearer picture, but finding it is no sure bet. Unfortunately, the cold, dry and stable conditions best for long-term preservation aren’t common in Africa, and few ancient African human genomes have been sequenced that are older than 10,000 years.

“We currently have no ancient DNA from Africa that even comes near the timeframes of our evolution—a process that is likely to have largely taken place between 800,000 and 300,000 years ago,” says Eleanor Scerri, an archaeological scientist at the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History in Germany.

300,000 Years Ago: Fossils Found of Oldest Homo sapiens

As the physical remains of actual ancient people, fossils tell us most about what they were like in life. But bones or teeth are still subject to a significant amount of interpretation. While human remains can survive after hundreds of thousands of years, scientists can’t always make sense of the wide range of morphological features they see to definitively classify the remains as Homo sapiens , or as different species of human relatives.

Fossils often boast a mixture of modern and primitive features, and those don’t evolve uniformly toward our modern anatomy. Instead, certain features seem to change in different places and times, suggesting separate clusters of anatomical evolution would have produced quite different looking people.

No scientists suggest that Homo sapiens first lived in what’s now Morocco, because so much early evidence for our species has been found in both South Africa and East Africa. But fragments of 300,000-year-old skulls, jaws, teeth and other fossils found at Jebel Irhoud , a rich site also home to advanced stone tools, are the oldest Homo sapiens remains yet found.

The remains of five individuals at Jebel Irhoud exhibit traits of a face that looks compellingly modern, mixed with other traits like an elongated brain case reminiscent of more archaic humans. The remains’ presence in the northwestern corner of Africa isn’t evidence of our origin point, but rather of how widely spread humans were across Africa even at this early date.

Other very old fossils often classified as early Homo sapiens come from Florisbad, South Africa (around 260,000 years old), and the Kibish Formation along Ethiopia’s Omo River (around 195,000 years old).

The 160,000-year-old skulls of two adults and a child at Herto, Ethiopia, were classified as the subspecies Homo sapiens idaltu because of slight morphological differences including larger size. But they are otherwise so similar to modern humans that some argue they aren’t a subspecies at all. A skull discovered at Ngaloba, Tanzania, also considered Homo sapiens , represents a 120,000-year-old individual with a mix of archaic traits and more modern aspects like smaller facial features and a further reduced brow.

Debate over the definition of which fossil remains represent modern humans, given these disparities, is common among experts. So much so that some seek to simplify the characterization by considering them part of a single, diverse group.

“The fact of the matter is that all fossils before about 40,000 to 100,000 years ago contain different combinations of so called archaic and modern features. It’s therefore impossible to pick and choose which of the older fossils are members of our lineage or evolutionary dead ends,” Scerri suggests. “The best model is currently one in which they are all early Homo sapiens , as their material culture also indicates.”

As Scerri references, African material culture shows a widespread shift some 300,000 years ago from clunky, handheld stone tools to the more refined blades and projectile points known as Middle Stone Age toolkits.

So when did fossils finally first show fully modern humans with all representative features? It’s not an easy answer. One skull (but only one of several) from Omo Kibish looks much like a modern human at 195,000 years old, while another found in Nigeria’s Iwo Eleru cave, appears very archaic, but is only 13,000 years old . These discrepancies illustrate that the process wasn’t linear, reaching some single point after which all people were modern humans.

300,000 Years Ago: Artifacts Show a Revolution in Tools

Our ancestors used stone tools as long as 3.3 million years ago and by 1.75 million years ago they’d adopted the Acheulean culture , a suite of chunky handaxes and other cutting implements that remained in vogue for nearly 1.5 million years. As recently as 400,000 years ago, thrusting spears used during the hunt of large prey in what is now Germany were state of the art. But they could only be used up close, an obvious and sometimes dangerous limitation.

Even as they acquired the more modern anatomy seen in living humans, the ways our ancestors lived, and the tools they created, changed as well.

Humans took a leap in tool tech with the Middle Stone Age some 300,000 years ago by making those finely crafted tools with flaked points and attaching them to handles and spear shafts to greatly improve hunting prowess. Projectile points like those Potts and colleagues dated to 298,000 to 320,000 years old in southern Kenya were an innovation that suddenly made it possible to kill all manner of elusive or dangerous prey. “It ultimately changed how these earliest sapiens interacted with their ecosystems, and with other people,” says Potts.

Scrapers and awls, which could be used to work animal hides for clothing and to shave wood and other materials, appeared around this time. By at least 90,000 years ago barbed points made of bone— like those discovered at Katanda, Democratic Republic of the Congo —were used to spearfish

As with fossils, tool advancements appear in different places and times, suggesting that distinct groups of people evolved, and possibly later shared, these tool technologies. Those groups may include other humans who are not part of our own lineage.

Last year a collection including sophisticated stone blades was discovered near Chennai, India , and dated to at least 250,000 years ago. The presence of this toolkit in India so soon after modern humans appeared in Africa suggests that other species may have also invented them independently—or that some modern humans spread the technology by leaving Africa earlier than most current thinking suggests.

100,000 to 210,000 Years Ago: Fossils Show Homo sapiens Lived Outside of Africa

Many genetic analyses tracing our roots back to Africa make it clear that Homo sapiens originated on that continent. But it appears that we had a tendency to wander from a much earlier era than scientists had previously suspected.

A jawbone found inside a collapsed cave on the slopes of Mount Carmel, Israel, reveals that modern humans dwelt there, alongside the Mediterranean, some 177,000 to 194,000 years ago. Not only are the jaw and teeth from Misliya Cave unambiguously similar to those seen in modern humans, they were found with sophisticated handaxes and flint tools.

Other finds in the region, including multiple individuals at Qafzeh, Israel, are dated later. They range from 100,000 to 130,000 years ago, suggesting a long presence for humans in the region. At Qafzeh, human remains were found with pieces of red ocher and ocher-stained tools in a site that has been interpreted as the oldest intentional human burial .

Among the limestone cave systems of southern China, more evidence has turned up from between 80,000 and 120,000 years ago. A 100,000-year-old jawbone, complete with a pair of teeth, from Zhirendong retains some archaic traits like a less prominent chin, but otherwise appears so modern that it may represent Homo sapiens . A cave at Daoxian yielded a surprising array of ancient teeth , barely distinguishable from our own, which suggest that Homo sapiens groups were already living very far from Africa from 80,000 to 120,000 years ago.

Even earlier migrations are possible; some believe evidence exists of humans reaching Europe as long as 210,000 years ago. While most early human finds spark some scholarly debate, few reach the level of the Apidima skull fragment, in southern Greece, which may be more than 200,000 years old and might possibly represent the earliest modern human fossil discovered outside of Africa. The site is steeped in controversy , however, with some scholars believing that the badly preserved remains look less those of our own species and more like Neanderthals, whose remains are found just a few feet away in the same cave. Others question the accuracy of the dating analysis undertaken at the site, which is tricky because the fossils have long since fallen out of the geological layers in which they were deposited.

While various groups of humans lived outside of Africa during this era, ultimately, they aren’t part of our own evolutionary story. Genetics can reveal which groups of people were our distant ancestors and which had descendants who eventually died out.

“Of course, there could be multiple out of Africa dispersals,” says Akey. “The question is whether they contributed ancestry to present day individuals and we can say pretty definitely now that they did not.”

50,000 to 60,000 Years Ago: Genes and Climate Reconstructions Show a Migration Out of Africa

All living non-Africans, from Europeans to Australia’s aboriginal people, can trace most of their ancestry to humans who were part of a landmark migration out of Africa beginning some 50,000 to 60,000 years ago , according to numerous genetic studies published in recent years. Reconstructions of climate suggest that lower sea levels created several advantageous periods for humans to leave Africa for the Arabian Peninsula and the Middle East, including one about 55,000 years ago.

“Just by looking at DNA from present day individuals we’ve been able to infer a pretty good outline of human history,” Akey says. “A group dispersed out of Africa maybe 50 to 60 thousand years ago, and then that group traveled around the world and eventually made it to all habitable places of the world.”

While earlier African emigres to the Middle East or China may have interbred with some of the more archaic hominids still living at that time, their lineage appears to have faded out or been overwhelmed by the later migration.

15,000 to 40,000 Years Ago: Genetics and Fossils Show Homo sapiens Became the Only Surviving Human Species

For most of our history on this planet, Homo sapiens have not been the only humans. We coexisted, and as our genes make clear frequently interbred with various hominin species, including some we haven’t yet identified. But they dropped off, one by one, leaving our own species to represent all humanity. On an evolutionary timescale, some of these species vanished only recently.

On the Indonesian island of Flores, fossils evidence a curious and diminutive early human species nicknamed “hobbit.” Homo floresiensis appear to have been living until perhaps 50,000 years ago, but what happened to them is a mystery. They don’t appear to have any close relation to modern humans including the Rampasasa pygmy group, which lives in the same region today.

Neanderthals once stretched across Eurasia from Portugal and the British Isles to Siberia. As Homo sapiens became more prevalent across these areas the Neanderthals faded in their turn, being generally consigned to history by some 40,000 years ago. Some evidence suggests that a few die-hards might have held on in enclaves, like Gibraltar, until perhaps 29,000 years ago. Even today traces of them remain because modern humans carry Neanderthal DNA in their genome .

Our more mysterious cousins, the Denisovans, left behind so few identifiable fossils that scientists aren’t exactly sure what they looked like, or if they might have been more than one species. A recent study of human genomes in Papua New Guinea suggests that humans may have lived with and interbred with Denisovans there as recently as 15,000 years ago, though the claims are controversial. Their genetic legacy is more certain. Many living Asian people inherited perhaps 3 to 5 percent of their DNA from the Denisovans.

Despite the bits of genetic ancestry they contributed to living people, all of our close relatives eventually died out, leaving Homo sapiens as the only human species. Their extinctions add one more intriguing, perhaps unanswerable question to the story of our evolution—why were we the only humans to survive?

Get the latest Science stories in your inbox.

Brian Handwerk | READ MORE

Brian Handwerk is a science correspondent based in Amherst, New Hampshire.

Introductory essay

Written by the educator who created What Makes Us Human?, a brief look at the key facts, tough questions and big ideas in his field. Begin this TED Study with a fascinating read that gives context and clarity to the material.

As a biological anthropologist, I never liked drawing sharp distinctions between human and non-human. Such boundaries make little evolutionary sense, as they ignore or grossly underestimate what we humans have in common with our ancestors and other primates. What's more, it's impossible to make sharp distinctions between human and non-human in the paleoanthropological record. Even with a time machine, we couldn't go back to identify one generation of humans and say that the previous generation contained none: one's biological parents, by definition, must be in the same species as their offspring. This notion of continuity is inherent to most evolutionary perspectives and it's reflected in the similarities (homologies) shared among very different species. As a result, I've always been more interested in what makes us similar to, not different from, non-humans.

Evolutionary research has clearly revealed that we share great biological continuity with others in the animal kingdom. Yet humans are truly unique in ways that have not only shaped our own evolution, but have altered the entire planet. Despite great continuity and similarity with our fellow primates, our biocultural evolution has produced significant, profound discontinuities in how we interact with each other and in our environment, where no precedent exists in other animals. Although we share similar underlying evolved traits with other species, we also display uses of those traits that are so novel and extraordinary that they often make us forget about our commonalities. Preparing a twig to fish for termites may seem comparable to preparing a stone to produce a sharp flake—but landing on the moon and being able to return to tell the story is truly out of this non-human world.

Humans are the sole hominin species in existence today. Thus, it's easier than it would have been in the ancient past to distinguish ourselves from our closest living relatives in the animal kingdom. Primatologists such as Jane Goodall and Frans de Waal, however, continue to clarify why the lines dividing human from non-human aren't as distinct as we might think. Goodall's classic observations of chimpanzee behaviors like tool use, warfare and even cannibalism demolished once-cherished views of what separates us from other primates. de Waal has done exceptional work illustrating some continuity in reciprocity and fairness, and in empathy and compassion, with other species. With evolution, it seems, we are always standing on the shoulders of others, our common ancestors.

Primatology—the study of living primates—is only one of several approaches that biological anthropologists use to understand what makes us human. Two others, paleoanthropology (which studies human origins through the fossil record) and molecular anthropology (which studies human origins through genetic analysis), also yield some surprising insights about our hominin relatives. For example, Zeresenay Alemsegad's painstaking field work and analysis of Selam, a 3.3 million-year old fossil of a 3-year-old australopithecine infant from Ethiopia, exemplifies how paleoanthropologists can blur boundaries between living humans and apes.

Selam, if alive today, would not be confused with a three-year-old human—but neither would we mistake her for a living ape. Selam's chimpanzee-like hyoid bone suggests a more ape-like form of vocal communication, rather than human language capability. Overall, she would look chimp-like in many respects—until she walked past you on two feet. In addition, based on Selam's brain development, Alemseged theorizes that Selam and her contemporaries experienced a human-like extended childhood with a complex social organization.

Fast-forward to the time when Neanderthals lived, about 130,000 – 30,000 years ago, and most paleoanthropologists would agree that language capacity among the Neanderthals was far more human-like than ape-like; in the Neanderthal fossil record, hyoids and other possible evidence of language can be found. Moreover, paleogeneticist Svante Pääbo's groundbreaking research in molecular anthropology strongly suggests that Neanderthals interbred with modern humans. Paabo's work informs our genetic understanding of relationships to ancient hominins in ways that one could hardly imagine not long ago—by extracting and comparing DNA from fossils comprised largely of rock in the shape of bones and teeth—and emphasizes the great biological continuity we see, not only within our own species, but with other hominins sometimes classified as different species.

Though genetics has made truly astounding and vital contributions toward biological anthropology by this work, it's important to acknowledge the equally pivotal role paleoanthropology continues to play in its tandem effort to flesh out humanity's roots. Paleoanthropologists like Alemsegad draw on every available source of information to both physically reconstruct hominin bodies and, perhaps more importantly, develop our understanding of how they may have lived, communicated, sustained themselves, and interacted with their environment and with each other. The work of Pääbo and others in his field offers powerful affirmations of paleoanthropological studies that have long investigated the contributions of Neanderthals and other hominins to the lineage of modern humans. Importantly, without paleoanthropology, the continued discovery and recovery of fossil specimens to later undergo genetic analysis would be greatly diminished.

Molecular anthropology and paleoanthropology, though often at odds with each other in the past regarding modern human evolution, now seem to be working together to chip away at theories that portray Neanderthals as inferior offshoots of humanity. Molecular anthropologists and paleoanthropologists also concur that that human evolution did not occur in ladder-like form, with one species leading to the next. Instead, the fossil evidence clearly reveals an evolutionary bush, with numerous hominin species existing at the same time and interacting through migration, some leading to modern humans and others going extinct.

Molecular anthropologist Spencer Wells uses DNA analysis to understand how our biological diversity correlates with ancient migration patterns from Africa into other continents. The study of our genetic evolution reveals that as humans migrated from Africa to all continents of the globe, they developed biological and cultural adaptations that allowed for survival in a variety of new environments. One example is skin color. Biological anthropologist Nina Jablonski uses satellite data to investigate the evolution of skin color, an aspect of human biological variation carrying tremendous social consequences. Jablonski underscores the importance of trying to understand skin color as a single trait affected by natural selection with its own evolutionary history and pressures, not as a tool to grouping humans into artificial races.

For Pääbo, Wells, Jablonski and others, technology affords the chance to investigate our origins in exciting new ways, adding pieces into the human puzzle at a record pace. At the same time, our technologies may well be changing who we are as a species and propelling us into an era of "neo-evolution."

Increasingly over time, human adaptations have been less related to predators, resources, or natural disasters, and more related to environmental and social pressures produced by other humans. Indeed, biological anthropologists have no choice but to consider the cultural components related to human evolutionary changes over time. Hominins have been constructing their own niches for a very long time, and when we make significant changes (such as agricultural subsistence), we must adapt to those changes. Classic examples of this include increases in sickle-cell anemia in new malarial environments, and greater lactose tolerance in regions with a long history of dairy farming.

Today we can, in some ways, evolve ourselves. We can enact biological change through genetic engineering, which operates at an astonishing pace in comparison to natural selection. Medical ethicist Harvey Fineberg calls this "neo-evolution". Fineberg goes beyond asking who we are as a species, to ask who we want to become and what genes we want our offspring to inherit. Depending on one's point of view, the future he envisions is both tantalizing and frightening: to some, it shows the promise of science to eradicate genetic abnormalities, while for others it raises the specter of eugenics. It's also worth remembering that while we may have the potential to influence certain genetic predispositions, changes in genotypes do not guarantee the desired results. Environmental and social pressures like pollution, nutrition or discrimination can trigger "epigenetic" changes which can turn genes on or off, or make them less or more active. This is important to factor in as we consider possible medical benefits from efforts in self-directed evolution. We must also ask: In an era of human-engineered, rapid-rate neo-evolution, who decides what the new human blueprints should be?

Technology figures in our evolutionary future in other ways as well. According to anthropologist Amber Case, many of our modern technologies are changing us into cyborgs: our smart phones, tablets and other tools are "exogenous components" that afford us astonishing and unsettling capabilities. They allow us to travel instantly through time and space and to create second, "digital selves" that represent our "analog selves" and interact with others in virtual environments. This has psychological implications for our analog selves that worry Case: a loss of mental reflection, the "ambient intimacy" of knowing that we can connect to anyone we want to at any time, and the "panic architecture" of managing endless information across multiple devices in virtual and real-world environments.

Despite her concerns, Case believes that our technological future is essentially positive. She suggests that at a fundamental level, much of this technology is focused on the basic concerns all humans share: who am I, where and how do I fit in, what do others think of me, who can I trust, who should I fear? Indeed, I would argue that we've evolved to be obsessed with what other humans are thinking—to be mind-readers in a sense—in a way that most would agree is uniquely human. For even though a baboon can assess those baboons it fears and those it can dominate, it cannot say something to a second baboon about a third baboon in order to trick that baboon into telling a fourth baboon to gang up on a fifth baboon. I think Facebook is a brilliant example of tapping into our evolved human psychology. We can have friends we've never met and let them know who we think we are—while we hope they like us and we try to assess what they're actually thinking and if they can be trusted. It's as if technology has provided an online supply of an addictive drug for a social mind evolved to crave that specific stimulant!

Yet our heightened concern for fairness in reciprocal relationships, in combination with our elevated sense of empathy and compassion, have led to something far greater than online chats: humanism itself. As Jane Goodall notes, chimps and baboons cannot rally together to save themselves from extinction; instead, they must rely on what she references as the "indomitable human spirit" to lessen harm done to the planet and all the living things that share it. As Goodall and other TED speakers in this course ask: will we use our highly evolved capabilities to secure a better future for ourselves and other species?

I hope those reading this essay, watching the TED Talks, and further exploring evolutionary perspectives on what makes us human, will view the continuities and discontinuities of our species as cause for celebration and less discrimination. Our social dependency and our prosocial need to identify ourselves, our friends, and our foes make us human. As a species, we clearly have major relationship problems, ranging from personal to global scales. Yet whenever we expand our levels of compassion and understanding, whenever we increase our feelings of empathy across cultural and even species boundaries, we benefit individually and as a species.

Get started

Zeresenay Alemseged

The search for humanity's roots, relevant talks.

Spencer Wells

A family tree for humanity.

Svante Pääbo

Dna clues to our inner neanderthal.

Nina Jablonski

Skin color is an illusion.

We are all cyborgs now

Harvey Fineberg

Are we ready for neo-evolution.

Frans de Waal

Moral behavior in animals.

Jane Goodall

What separates us from chimpanzees.

If you're seeing this message, it means we're having trouble loading external resources on our website.

If you're behind a web filter, please make sure that the domains *.kastatic.org and *.kasandbox.org are unblocked.

To log in and use all the features of Khan Academy, please enable JavaScript in your browser.

World History Project - Origins to the Present

Course: world history project - origins to the present   >   unit 2.

• BEFORE YOU WATCH: Era 2 Overview
• WATCH: Era 2 Overview

READ: Era 2 Overview - The Earliest Humans

• BEFORE YOU WATCH: Frames in Era 2
• WATCH: Frames in Era 2
• READ: Project X - A Guide to Reading Charts
• READ: Data Exploration - Population
• Era 2 Overview

First read: preview and skimming for gist

Second read: key ideas and understanding content.

• What does the author of this article argue about “most” of human history? How would you respond to this argument?
• What types of evidence do scientists use to understand how and when humans migrated to new regions of the world?
• What was the cultivation revolution, and why was it important?
• The author does not give an opinion on whether or not the shift to farming in some places was a good idea. What is some evidence used to show both the positives and the negatives of the shift to farming?

Third read: evaluating and corroborating

• At the end of this introduction, what do you think will be the most exciting or important thing you learn about in this Era?

Era 2 Overview - The Earliest Humans

The cognitive revolution, the peopling of the world, the cultivation revolution, want to join the conversation.

• Upvote Button navigates to signup page
• Downvote Button navigates to signup page
• Flag Button navigates to signup page

This page has been archived and is no longer updated

Overview of Hominin Evolution

Introduction

Darwin's great insight, and the unifying principle of biology today, is that all species are related to one another like sisters, cousins, and distant kin in a vast family tree of life. The implications are breathtaking; if we could travel back far enough in time, we would find common ancestors between ourselves and every other living organism, from porcupines to flamingoes to cactuses. Our immediate evolutionary family is comprised of the hominoids , the group of primates that includes the "lesser apes" (siamangs and gibbons) as well as the "great apes" (chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas, and orangutans). Among the great apes, our closest relatives are the chimpanzees and bonobos (Figure 1). The fossil record, along with studies of human and ape DNA, indicate that humans shared a common ancestor with chimpanzees and bonobos sometime around 6 million years ago (mya). We begin this discussion of our species' evolution in Africa, near the end of the geological time period known as the Miocene, just before our lineage diverged from that of chimpanzees and bonobos.

Miocene Origins of the Hominin Lineage

In order to understand the evolution of any species, we must first establish its ancestral state: what sort of animal did it evolve from ? For our lineage, this requires that we try and reconstruct the Last Common Ancestor of humans and chimpanzees (marked "A" in Figure 1). The Human-Chimpanzee Last Common Ancestor (HC-LCA) is the species from which the hominin lineage and the chimpanzee & bonobo lineage diverged. Hominins are species on our branch of the hominoid tree after the split with the chimpanzee & bonobo line, including all of the extinct species and evolutionary side branches (Figure 1).

There was a great diversity of ape species in the Miocene, with dozens of species known from the fossil record across Africa, Europe, and Asia. These species varied in their anatomy and ecology, and it is not clear which, if any, of the fossil species discovered thus far represent the HC-LCA (Kunimatsu et al . 2007; Young and MacLatchy, 2004). Nonetheless, we know from fossil and comparative evidence that it was much more similar to living apes than to living humans. The HC-LCA would have had an ape-sized brain and body, with relatively long arms and fingers and a grasping foot that allowed it to forage in the trees. The canine teeth were probably large and sharp, as seen in several Miocene hominoids. Moreover, the canines were probably sexually dimorphic , with males having much larger canines than females, as seen among the living great apes and Miocene fossils. Like living apes it would have walked quadrupedally (on all fours) when on the ground, and its diet would have consisted almost entirely of plant foods, primarily fruit and leaves.

Early Hominins

Changes from an ape-like anatomy are discernible in hominoid fossils from the late Miocene in Africa. Some hominoid species from this period exhibit traits that are typical of humans but are not seen in the other living apes, leading paleoanthropologists to infer that these fossils represent early members of the hominin lineage. The first human-like traits to appear in the hominin fossil record are bipedal walking and smaller, blunt canines .

The oldest hominins currently known are Sahelanthropus tchadensis from Chad (Brunet et al . 2005) and Orrorin tugenensis from Kenya (Senut et al . 2001). Sahelanthropus , dated to between 6 and 7 mya, is known from a largely complete skull and some other fragmentary remains. Its brain size, 360cc, is within the range seen in chimpanzees, and the skull has a massive brow ridge, similar in thickness to male gorillas (Brunet et al . 2005). However, the position and orientation of the foramen magnum , the hole in the base of the skull through which the spinal cord passes, suggests that Sahelanthropus stood and walked bipedally, with its spinal column held vertically as in modern humans rather than horizontally as in apes and other quadrupeds (Zollikofer et al . 2005). Orrorin is known primarily from postcranial fossils, including a partial femur . The proximal portion of the femur shows similarities to those of modern humans, suggesting the species was bipedal (Pickford et al . 2002). No skulls of Orrorin have been recovered, and so its cranial morphology and brain size are uncertain. In both Orrorin and Sahelanthropus the canine teeth of males are larger and more pointed than in modern humans, but are small and blunt compared to the canines of male apes. This suggests that canine sexual dimorphism — and by extension, competition among males for mating access to females — was diminished in these early hominins compared to the great apes.

By far the best known early hominin is Ardipithecus ramidus , a 4.4 million year old species from Ethiopia, which is known from a nearly complete skeleton as well as numerous other dental and skeletal remains (White et al . 2009). Ar. ramidus and an older, related species known from fragmentary remains, Ar. kadabba (5.8–5.2 mya), have reduced canines similar to those of Orrorin and Sahelanthropus . The skull of Ar. ramidus is rather ape-like and broadly similar to that of Sahelanthropus , with a small chimpanzee-sized brain of 300–350cc (Figure 2). The Ardipithecus postcranial skeleton is intriguing. Although badly fragmented, the pelvis recovered reveals a morphology quite different from that of living apes, with a shorter, more bowl-like shape that strongly suggests Ardipithecus walked bipedally; this is consistent with the foramen magnum position, which suggests an upright posture. However, its long forelimbs and fingers and its divergent, grasping first toe (hallux) suggest Ardipithecus spent much of its time in the trees. The overall impression is of a largely arboreal species that walked bipedally whenever it ventured to the ground.

Australopithecus

Around 4mya we find the earliest members of the genus Australopithecus , hominins which were adept terrestrial bipeds but continued to use the trees for food and protection. The first specimens of Australopithecus were discovered in South Africa in 1924 (Dart, 1925), and research efforts over the subsequent eight decades have produced hundreds of fossils from several species at sites all across East and Southern Africa. We now know that Australopithecus was a highly successful genus that persisted for nearly three million years (Figure 1).

The best-known Australopithecus species are A. afarensis (3.6–2.9 mya) from East Africa and A. africanus (3.2–2.0mya) from South Africa. The pelvis and lower limb of these species clearly indicates that they were fully bipedal: the pelvis is short and bowl-shaped, bringing the gluteal muscles around to the side of the body, as in modern humans, for trunk stabilization during bipedalism, and the first toe is in line with the other toes (Ward, 2002; Harcourt-Smith and Aiello, 2004). The Australopithecus foot may even have had a human-like arch, based on analysis of the metatarsals and the fossilized Laetoli footprints (Ward et al. 2011). Nonetheless, compared to modern humans, the forearms were long and the fingers and toes were long and somewhat curved, suggesting that Australopithecus regularly used the trees to forage and perhaps as a refuge from predators at night. This mixed terrestrial & arboreal strategy would have served these species well in the mixed woodland and savannah environments they inhabited.

Brain size in Australopithecus ranged between 390 and 515cc, similar to chimpanzees and gorillas (Falk et al. 2000), suggesting cognitive abilities were broadly similar to living apes (Figure 2). Body size in Australopithecus was rather small and sexually dimorphic, about 30kg for females and 40kg for males (McHenry, 1992). This level of dimorphism is not reflected in the canines, which were small, blunt, and monomorphic as in earlier hominins.

Unlike the canines, molar teeth in Australopithecus were much larger than those of earlier hominins, and had thicker enamel. This suggests their diet included hard, low quality plant foods that required powerful chewing to process. A subgroup of Australopithecus , known as the "robust" australopiths (often labeled by a separate genus Paranthropus ) because of their enormous teeth and chewing muscles, took this adaptation to the extreme. Most Australopithecus species were extinct by 2 mya, but some robust forms persisted until about 1.2 mya in East and South Africa.

The Genus Homo

The earliest fossils of our own genus, Homo , are found in East Africa and dated to 2.3 mya (Kimbel et al. 1997). These early specimens are similar in brain and body size to Australopithecus , but show differences in their molar teeth, suggesting a change in diet. Indeed, by at least 1.8 mya, early members of our genus were using primitive stone tools to butcher animal carcasses, adding energy-rich meat and bone marrow to their plant-based diet.

The oldest member of the genus Homo , H. habilis (2.3–1.4 mya) is found in East Africa and is associated with butchered animal bones and simple stone tools (Blumenschine et al . 2003). Its more formidable and widespread descendant, H. erectus , is found throughout Africa and Eurasia and persisted from 1.9 mya to 100 kya, and perhaps even later (Anton, 2003). Like modern humans, H. erectus lacked the forelimb adaptations for climbing seen in Australopithecus (Figure 2). Its global expansion suggests H. erectus was ecologically flexible, with the cognitive capacity to adapt and thrive in vastly different environments. Not surprisingly, it is with H. erectus that we begin to see a major increase in brain size, up to 1,250cc for later Asian specimens (Anton, 2003). Molar size is reduced in H. erectus relative to Australopithecus , reflecting its softer, richer diet.

Around 700 kya, and perhaps earlier, H. erectus in Africa gave rise to H. heidelbergensis , a species very much like us in terms of body proportions, dental adaptations, and cognitive ability (Rightmire, 2009). H. heidelbergensis , often referred to as an "archaic" Homo sapiens, was an active big-game hunter, produced sophisticated Levallois style tools, and by at least 400 kya had learned to control fire (Roebroeks and Villa, 2011). Neanderthals ( H. neanderthalensis ), cold-adapted hominins with stout physiques, complex behaviors, and brains similar in size to ours, are thought to have evolved from H. heidelbergensis populations in Europe by at least 250 kya (Rightmire, 2008; Hublin, 2009).

Fossil and DNA evidence suggest our own species, H. sapiens , evolved in Africa 200 kya (Relethford, 2008; Rightmire, 2009), probably from H. heidelbergensis . The increased behavioral sophistication of H. sapiens , as indicated by our large brains (1,400cc) and archeological evidence of a broader tool set and clever hunting techniques, allowed our species to flourish and grow on the African continent. By 100kya, our species spilled into Eurasia, eventually expanding across the entire globe into Australia and the Americas (DiGiorgio et al . 2009). Along the way our species displaced other hominins they encountered, including Neanderthals in Europe and similar forms in Asia. (Note that not all agree with this interpretation of the data, see Tryon and Bailey). Studies of ancient DNA extracted from Neanderthal fossils suggest our species may have occasionally interbred with them (Green et al ., 2010). Our increasing global impact continues today, as cultural innovations such as agriculture and urbanization shape the landscape and species around us.

References and Recommended Reading

Anton, S. C. Natural history of Homo erectus . American Journal of Physical Anthropology S37 , 126-70 (2003)

Blumenschine, R. J. et al . Late Pliocene Homo and hominid land use from Western Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania. Science 299 , 1217-12121 (2003)

Brunet, M. et al. New material of the earliest hominid from the Upper Miocene of Chad. Nature 434 , 752-755 (2005)

Dart, R.A. Australopithecus africanus : the southern ape-man of Africa. Nature 115 , 195-199 (1925)

DeGiorgio, M. et al . Out of Africa: modern human origins special feature: explaining worldwide patterns of human genetic variation using a coalescent-based serial founder model of migration outward from Africa. PNAS USA 106 , 16057-16062 (2009)

Falk, D. et al . Early hominid brain evolution: a new look at old endocasts. Journal of Human Evolution 38 , 695-717 (2000)

Green, R.E. A draft sequence of the Neandertal genome. Science 328 , 710-722

Harcourt-Smith, W. E. & L.C. Aiello. Fossils, feet and the evolution of human bipedal locomotion. Journal of Anatomy 204 , 403-416 (2004)

Hublin, J.J. The origin of Neanderthals. PNAS 45 , 169-177 (2009)

Kimbel, W. H. et al . Systematic assessment of a maxilla of Homo from Hadar, Ethiopia. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 103 , 235-262 (1997)

Kunimatsu, Y. et al . A new Late Miocene great ape from Kenya and its implications for the origins of African great apes and humans. PNAS USA 104 , 19661-19662. (2007)

McHenry, H. M. Body size and proportions in early hominids. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 87 , 407-431 (1992)

Pickford, M. et al . Bipedalism in Orrorin tugenensis revealed by its femora. Comptes Rendus Palevol 1 , 1-13 (2002)

Relethford, J. H. Genetic evidence and the modern human origins debate. Heredity 100 , 555-563 (2008)

Rightmire, G. P. Out of Africa: modern human origins special feature: middle and later Pleistocene hominins in Africa and Southwest Asia. PNAS USA 106 , 16046-16050 (2009)

Rightmire, G.P. Homo in the Middle Pleistocene: Hypodigms, variation, and species recognition. Evolutionary Anthropology 17 , 8-21 (2008)

Roebroeks, W. & P. Villa. On the earliest evidence for habitual use of fire in Europe. PNAS USA Epub ahead of print (2011)

Senut, B. et al. First hominid from the Miocene (Lukeino Formation, Kenya). C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, Sciences de la Terre et des planètes / Earth and Planetary Sciences 332 , 137-144 (2001)

Ward, C. V. et al . Complete fourth metatarsal and arches in the foot of Australopithecus afarensis. Science 331 , 750-753 (2011)

Ward, C. V. Interpreting the posture and locomotion of Australopithecus afarensis : where do we stand? American Journal of Physical Anthropology S35 , 185-215 (2002)

White, T. D. et al . Ardipithecus ramidus and the paleobiology of early hominids . Science 326 , 75-86 (2009)

Young, N. M. et al . The phylogenetic position of Morotopithecus . Journal of Human Evolution 46 , 163-184 (2004)

Flag Inappropriate

Email your Friend

Our bodies are records of our evolution. Look at an unfolding embryo, a genome, or a skeleton and you will see our inner fishes, our inner mammals, our inner apes. We carry within us physical evidence of the developmental processes and biological traits that humans share with all — yes, all — other organisms.

What, if anything, unites primates as a single group, and how do primate adaptations reflects our evolutionary past? What did the earliest primates look like and how are they related to modern forms? How has climate change influenced the diversification of different primate groups? How do primates navigate arboreal and terrestrial habitats? What processes are involved in fossilization and in dating fossils from the distant past?

Why do many primates live in groups? Why do some male primates commit infanticide? Why do some females form strong bonds? What do primates eat and how do they live in ecological communities with other animals? How do primates communicate? Do primates deceive each other? Unraveling the sociality and ecology of our closest living relatives, the non-human primates, can help us shed light on the selective pressures that shaped humans through evolutionary time.

Topic rooms within Biological Anthropology

•  |  Lead Editor:  Jessica Rothman, Katy Gonder, Holly Dunsworth, Kieran McNulty

Other Topic Rooms

• Ecosystem Ecology
• Physiological Ecology
• Population Ecology
• Community Ecology
• Global and Regional Ecology
• Conservation and Restoration
• Animal Behavior
• Teach Ecology
• Earth's Climate: Past, Present, and Future
• Terrestrial Geosystems
• Marine Geosystems
• Scientific Underpinnings
• Paleontology and Primate Evolution
• Human Fossil Record
• The Living Primates

© 2014 Nature Education

• Press Room |
• Terms of Use |
• Privacy Notice |

Visual Browse

Frontiers for Young Minds

• Download PDF

A Brief Account of Human Evolution for Young Minds

Most of what we know about the origin of humans comes from the research of paleoanthropologists, scientists who study human fossils. Paleoanthropologists identify the sites where fossils can be found. They determine the age of fossils and describe the features of the bones and teeth discovered. Recently, paleoanthropologists have added genetic technology to test their hypotheses. In this article, we will tell you a little about prehistory, a period of time including pre-humans and humans and lasting about 10 million years. During the Prehistoric Period, events were not reported in writing. Most information on prehistory is obtained through studying fossils. Ten to twelve million years ago, primates divided into two branches, one included species leading to modern (current) humans and the other branch to the great apes that include gorillas, chimpanzees, bonobos, and orangutans. The branch leading to modern humans included several different species. When one of these species—known as the Neanderthals—inhabited Eurasia, they were not alone; Homo sapiens and other Homo species were also present in this region. All the other species of Homo have gone extinct, with the exception of Homo sapiens , our species, which gradually colonized the entire planet. About 12,000 years ago, during the Neolithic Period, some (but not all) populations of H. sapiens passed from a wandering lifestyle of hunting and gathering to one of sedentary farming, building villages and towns. They developed more complex social organizations and invented writing. This was the end of prehistory and the beginning of history.

What Is Evolution?

Evolution is the process by which living organisms evolve from earlier, more simple organisms. According to the scientist Charles Darwin (1809–1882), evolution depends on a process called natural selection. Natural selection results in the increased reproductive capacities of organisms that are best suited for the conditions in which they are living. Darwin’s theory was that organisms evolve as a result of many slight changes over the course of time. In this article, we will discuss evolution during pre-human times and human prehistory. During prehistory, writing was not yet developed. But much important information on prehistory is obtained through studies of the fossil record [ 1 ].

How Did Humans Evolve?

Primates, like humans, are mammals. Around ten to twelve million years ago, the ancestral primate lineage split through speciation from one common ancestor into two major groups. These two lineages evolved separately to become the variety of species we see today. Members of one group were the early version of what we know today as the great apes (gorillas, chimpanzees, and bonobos in Africa, orangutans in Asia) ( Figures 1 , 2 ); that is, the modern great apes evolved from this ancestral group. They mostly remained in forest with an arboreal lifestyle, meaning they live in trees. Great apes are also quadrupeds which means they move around with four legs on the ground (see Figure 2 ). The other group evolved in a different way. They became terrestrial, meaning they live on land and not in trees. From being quadrupeds they evolved to bipeds, meaning they move around on their two back legs. In addition the size of their brain increased. This is the group that, through evolution, gave rise to the modern current humans. Many fossils found in Africa are from the Australopithecus afarensis, Homo sapiens ."> genus named Australopithecus (which means southern ape). This genus is extinct, but fossil studies revealed interesting features about their adaptation toward a terrestrial lifestyle.

• Figure 1 - Evolutionary scheme, showing that great apes and humans all evolved from a common ancestor.
• The Neanderthal picture is a statue designed from a fossil skeleton.

• Figure 2 - Great Apes in nature.
• (above) Arboreal (in trees) locomotion of orangutans and (under) the quadrupedal (four-foot) locomotion of gorillas and chimpanzees.

Australopithecus afarensis and Lucy

In Ethiopia (East Africa) there is a site called Hadar, where several fossils of different animal species were found. Among those fossils was Australopithecus afarensis . In 1974, paleoanthropologists found an almost complete skeleton of one specimen of this species and named it Lucy, from The Beatles song “Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds.” The whole world found out about Lucy and she was in every newspaper: she became a global celebrity. This small female—only about 1.1 m tall—lived 3.2 million years ago. Analysis of her femurs (thigh bones) showed that she used terrestrial locomotion. Lucy could have used arboreal and bipedal locomotion as well, as foot bones of another A. afarensis individual had a curve similar to that found in the feet of modern humans [ 2 ]. Authors of this finding suggested accordingly that A. afarensis was exclusively bipedal and could have been a hunter-gatherer.

Homo habilis , Homo erectus , and Homo neanderthalensis

Homo is the genus (group of species) that includes modern humans, like us, and our most closely related extinct ancestors. Organisms that belong to the same species produce viable offspring. The famous paleoanthropologist named Louis Leakey, along with his team, discovered Homo habilis (meaning handy man) in 1964. Homo habilis was the most ancient species of Homo ever found [ 2 ]. Homo habilis appeared in Tanzania (East Africa) over 2.8 million years ago, and 1.5 million years ago became exinct. They were estimated to be about 1.40 meter tall and were terrestrial. They were different from Australopithecus because of the form of the skull. The shape was not piriform (pear-shaped), but spheroid (round), like the head of a modern human. Homo habilis made stone tools, a sign of creativity [ 3 ].

In Asia, in 1891, Eugene Dubois (also a paleoanthropologist) discovered the first fossil of Homo erectus (meaning upright man), which appeared 1.8 million years ago. This fossil received several names. The best known are Pithecanthropus (ape-man) and Sinanthropus (Chinese-man). Homo erectus appeared in East Africa and migrated to Asia, where they carved refined tools from stone [ 4 ]. Dubois also brought some shells of the time of H erectus from Java to Europe. Contemporary scientists studied these shells and found engravings that dated from 430,000 and 540,000 years ago. They concluded that H. erectus individuals were able to express themselves using symbols [ 5 ].

Several Homo species emerged following H. erectus and quite a few coexisted for some time. The best known one is Homo neanderthalensis ( Figure 3 ), usually called Neanderthals and they were known as the European branch originating from two lineages that diverged around 400,000 years ago, with the second branch (lineage) Homo sapiens known as the African branch. The first Neanderthal fossil, dated from around 430,000 years ago, was found in La Sima de los Huesos in Spain and is considered to originate from the common ancestor called Homo heidelbergensis [ 6 ]. Neanderthals used many of the natural resources in their environment: animals, plants, and minerals. Homo neanderthalensis hunted terrestrial and marine (ocean) animals, requiring a variety of weapons. Tens of thousands of stone tools from Neanderthal sites are exhibited in many museums. Neanderthals created paintings in the La Pasiega cave in the South of Spain and decorated their bodies with jewels and colored paint. Graves were found, which meant they held burial ceremonies.

• Figure 3 - A comparison of the skulls of Homo sapiens (Human) (left) vs. Homo neanderthalensis (Neanderthal) (right).
• You can see a shape difference. From Scientific American Vol. 25, No. 4, Autumn 2016 (modified).

Denisovans are a recent addition to the human tree. In 2010, the first specimen was discovered in the Denisova cave in south-western Siberia. Very little information is known on their behavior. They deserve further studies due to their interactions with Neandertals and other Homo species (see below) [ 7 ].

Homo sapiens

Fossils recently discovered in Morocco (North Africa) have added to the intense debate on the spread of H. sapiens after they originated 315,000 years ago [ 8 ]. The location of these fossils could mean that Homo sapiens had visited the whole of Africa. In the same way, the scattering of fossils out of Africa indicated their migrations to various continents [ 9 ]. While intensely debated, hypotheses focus on either a single dispersal or multiple dispersals out of the African continent [ 10 , 11 ]. Nevertheless, even if the origin of the migration to Europe is still a matter of debate [ 12 ], it appears that H. sapiens was present in Israel [ 13 ] 180,000 years ago. Therefore, it could be that migration to Europe was not directly from Africa but indirectly through a stay in Israel-Asia. They arrived about 45,000 years ago into Europe [ 14 ] where the Neanderthals were already present (see above). Studies of ancient DNA show that H. sapiens had babies with Neanderthals and Denisovans. Nowadays people living in Europe and Asia share between 1 and 4% of their DNA with either Neanderthals or Denisovans [ 15 ].

Several thousand years ago H. sapiens already made art, like for example the wall painting in the Chauvet cave (36,000 years ago) ( Figure 4 ) and the Lascaux cave (19,000 years ago), both in France. The quality of the paintings shows great artistic ability and intellectual development. Homo sapiens continued to prospect the Earth. They crossed the Bering Land Bridge, connecting Siberia and Alaska and moved south 12,500 years ago, to what is now called Chile. Homo sapiens gradually colonized our entire planet ( Figure 5 ).

• Figure 4 - The lions in the Chauvet cave (−36,000 years).
• In this period wild lions were present in Eurasia . Photo: Bradshaw foundation.com. Note the lively character of the picture.

• Figure 5 - Homo sapiens traveled in the world at various periods as shown on the map.
• They had only their legs to move!

The Neolithic Revolution

Neolithic Period means New Stone Age, due to the new stone technology that was developed during that time. The Neolithic Period started at the end of the glacial period 11,700 years ago. There was a change in the way humans lived during the Neolithic Period. Ruins found in Mesopotamia tell us early humans lived in populated villages. Due to the start of agriculture, most wandering hunter-gatherers became sedentary farmers. Instead of hunting dogs familiar with hunter-gatherers, farmers preferred sheepdogs [ 16 ]. In the Neolithic age, humans were farming and herding, keeping goats and sheep. Aurochs (extinct wild cattle), shown in the paintings from the Lascaux cave, are early ancestors of the domesticated cows we have today [ 17 ]. The first produce which early humans began to grow in Mesopotamia (a historical region in West Asia, situated between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers) was peas and wheat [ 18 ]. Animals and crops were traded and written records were kept of these trades. Clay tokens were the first money for these transactions. The Neolithic Period saw the creation of commerce, money, mathematics, and writing ( Figure 6 ) in Sumer, a region of Mesopotamia. The birth of writing started the period that we call “history,” in which events are written down and details of big events as well as daily life can easily be passed on. This tremendous change in human lifestyle can be called the Neolithic Revolution .

• Figure 6 - From the beginning to final evolution of cuneiform writing.
• Writing on argil support showed changes from pictograms to abstract design. Picture modified from British Museum. Dates in year BC.

From the time of Homo erectus , Homo species migrated out of Africa. Homo sapiens extended this migration over the whole planet. In the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, Europeans explored the world. On the various continents, explorers met unknown populations. The Europeans were wondering if those beings were humans or not. But actually, those populations were also descendants of the men and women who colonized the earth at the dawn of mankind. In much earlier times, there was a theory that there were several races of humans, based mostly on skin color, but this theory was not supported by science. Current studies of DNA show that more than seven billion people who live on earth today are not of different races. There is only one human species on earth today, named Homo sapiens .

Suggested Reading

Species and Speciation. What defines a species? How new species can arise from existing species. https://www.khanacademy.org/science/biology/her/tree-of-life/a/species-speciation

Speciation : ↑ The formation of new and distinct species in the course of evolution.

Genus : ↑ In the classification of biology, a genus is a subdivision of a family. This subdivision is a grouping of living organisms having one or more related similarities. In the binomial nomenclature, the universally used scientific name of each organism is composed of its genus (capitalized) and a species identifier (lower case), for example Australopithecus afarensis, Homo sapiens.

Eurasia : ↑ A term used to describe the combined continental landmass of Europe and Asia.

Clay : ↑ Fine-grained earth that can be molded when wet and that is dried and baked to make pottery.

Revolution : ↑ Fundamental change occurring relatively quickly in human society.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Emma Clayton (Frontiers) for her advice and careful reading. Photo of Neanderthal statue was from Stephane Louryan, one of the designers of Neanderthal’s statue project [Faculty of Medicine, Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Brussels, Belgium].

[1] ↑ Godfraind, T. 2016. Hominisation et Transhumanisme . Bruxelles: Académie Royale de Belgique.

[2] ↑ Ward, C. V., Kimbel, W. H., and Johanson, D. C. 2011. Complete fourth metatarsal and arches in the foot of Australopithecus afarensis. Science 331:750–3. doi: 10.1126/science.1201463

[3] ↑ Harmand, S., Lewis, J. E., Feibel, C. S., Lepre, C. J., Prat, S., Lenoble, A., et al. 2015. 3.3-million-year-old stone tools from Lomekwi 3, West Turkana, Kenya. Nature 521:310–5. doi: 10.1038/nature14464

[4] ↑ Carotenuto, F., Tsikaridze, N., Rook, L., Lordkipanidze, D., Longo, L., Condemi, S., et al. 2016. Venturing out safely: the biogeography of Homo erectus dispersal out of Africa. J. Hum. Evol. 95:1–12. doi: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2016.02.005

[5] ↑ Joordens, J. C., d’Errico, F., Wesselingh, F. P., Munro, S., de Vos, J., Wallinga, J., et al. 2015. Homo erectus at Trinil on Java used shells for tool production and engraving. Nature 518:228–31. doi: 10.1038/nature13962

[6] ↑ Arsuaga, J. L., Martinez, I., Arnold, L. J., Aranburu, A., Gracia-Tellez, A., Sharp, W. D., et al. 2014. Neandertal roots: cranial and chronological evidence from Sima de los Huesos. Science 344:1358–63. doi: 10.1126/science.1253958

[7] ↑ Vernot, B., Tucci, S., Kelso, J., Schraiber, J. G., Wolf, A. B., Gittelman, R. M., et al. 2016. Excavating Neandertal and Denisovan DNA from the genomes of Melanesian individuals. Science 352:235–9. doi: 10.1126/science.aad9416

[8] ↑ Richter, D., Grun, R., Joannes-Boyau, R., Steele, T. E., Amani, F., Rue, M., et al. 2017. The age of the hominin fossils from Jebel Irhoud, Morocco, and the origins of the Middle Stone Age. Nature 546:293–6. doi: 10.1038/nature22335

[9] ↑ Vyas, D. N., Al-Meeri, A., and Mulligan, C. J. 2017. Testing support for the northern and southern dispersal routes out of Africa: an analysis of Levantine and southern Arabian populations. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol . 164:736–49. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.23312

[10] ↑ Reyes-Centeno, H., Hubbe, M., Hanihara, T., Stringer, C., and Harvati, K. 2015. Testing modern human out-of-Africa dispersal models and implications for modern human origins. J. Hum. Evol . 87:95–106. doi: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2015.06.008

[11] ↑ Templeton, A. 2002. Out of Africa again and again. Nature 416:45–51. doi: 10.1038/416045a

[12] ↑ Arnason, U. 2017. A phylogenetic view of the Out of Asia/Eurasia and Out of Africa hypotheses in the light of recent molecular and palaeontological finds. Gene 627:473–6. doi: 10.1016/j.gene.2017.07.006

[13] ↑ Callaway, E. 2018. Israeli fossils are the oldest modern humans ever found outside of Africa. Nature 554:15–6. doi: 10.1038/d41586-018-01261-5

[14] ↑ Benazzi, S., Douka, K., Fornai, C., Bauer, C. C., Kullmer, O., Svoboda, J., et al. 2011. Early dispersal of modern humans in Europe and implications for Neanderthal behaviour. Nature 479:525–8. doi: 10.1038/nature10617

[15] ↑ Vernot, B., and Akey, J. M. 2014. Resurrecting surviving Neandertal lineages from modern human genomes. Science 343:1017–21. doi: 10.1126/science.1245938

[16] ↑ Ollivier, M., Tresset, A., Frantz, L. A. F., Brehard, S., Balasescu, A., Mashkour, M., et al. 2018. Dogs accompanied humans during the Neolithic expansion into Europe. Biol. Lett. 14:20180286. doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2018.0286

[17] ↑ Gerling, C., Doppler, T., Heyd, V., Knipper, C., Kuhn, T., Lehmann, M. F., et al. 2017. High-resolution isotopic evidence of specialised cattle herding in the European Neolithic. PLoS ONE 12:e0180164. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0180164

[18] ↑ Revedin, A., Aranguren, B., Becattini, R., Longo, L., Marconi, E., Lippi, M. M., et al. 2010. Thirty thousand-year-old evidence of plant food processing. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A . 107:18815–9. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1006993107

• History Classics
• Your Profile
• Find History on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on YouTube (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Instagram (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on TikTok (Opens in a new window)
• This Day In History
• History Podcasts
• History Vault

The Prehistoric Ages: How Humans Lived Before Written Records

By: Lesley Kennedy

Updated: June 9, 2023 | Original: September 27, 2019

Earth’s beginnings can be traced back 4.5 billion years, but human evolution only counts for a tiny speck of its history. The Prehistoric Period—or when there was human life before records documented human activity—roughly dates from 2.5 million years ago to 1,200 B.C. It is generally categorized in three archaeological periods: the Stone Age , Bronze Age and Iron Age .

From the invention of tools made for hunting to advances in food production and agriculture to early examples of art and religion, this enormous time span—ending roughly 3,200 years ago (dates vary upon region)—was a period of great transformation. Here’s a closer look:

The Stone Age

Divided into three periods: Paleolithic (or Old Stone Age), Mesolithic (or Middle Stone Age), and Neolithic (or New Stone Age), this era is marked by the use of tools by our early human ancestors (who evolved around 300,000 B.C.) and the eventual transformation from a culture of hunting and gathering to farming and food production. During this era, early humans shared the planet with a number of now-extinct hominin relatives, including Neanderthals and Denisovans.

In the Paleolithic period (roughly 2.5 million years ago to 10,000 B.C.), early humans lived in caves or simple huts or tepees and were hunters and gatherers. They used basic stone and bone tools, as well as crude stone axes, for hunting birds and wild animals. They cooked their prey, including woolly mammoths, deer and bison, using controlled fire. They also fished and collected berries, fruit and nuts.

Ancient humans in the Paleolithic period were also the first to leave behind art. They used combinations of minerals, ochres, burnt bone meal and charcoal mixed into water, blood, animal fats and tree saps to etch humans, animals and signs. They also carved small figurines from stones, clay, bones and antlers.

The end of this period marked the end of the last Ice Age , which resulted in the extinction of many large mammals and rising sea levels and climate change that eventually caused man to migrate.

During the Mesolithic period (about 10,000 B.C. to 8,000 B.C.), humans used small stone tools, now also polished and sometimes crafted with points and attached to antlers, bone or wood to serve as spears and arrows. They often lived nomadically in camps near rivers and other bodies of water. Agriculture was introduced during this time, which led to more permanent settlements in villages.

Finally, during the Neolithic period (roughly 8,000 B.C. to 3,000 B.C.), ancient humans switched from hunter/gatherer mode to agriculture and food production. They domesticated animals and cultivated cereal grains. They used polished hand axes, adzes for plowing and tilling the land and started to settle in the plains. Advancements were made not only in tools but also in farming, home construction and art, including pottery, sewing and weaving.

The Bronze Age

During the Bronze Age (about 3,000 B.C. to 1,300 B.C.), metalworking advances were made, as bronze, a copper and tin alloy, was discovered. Now used for weapons and tools, the harder metal replaced its stone predecessors, and helped spark innovations including the ox-drawn plow and the wheel.

This time period also brought advances in architecture and art, including the invention of the potter’s wheel, and textiles—clothing consisted of mostly wool items such as skirts, kilts, tunics and cloaks. Home dwellings morphed to so-called roundhouses, consisting of a circular stone wall with a thatched or turf roof, complete with a fireplace or hearth, and more villages and cities began to form.

Organized government, law and warfare, as well as the beginnings of religion, also came into play during the Bronze Age, perhaps most notably relating to the ancient Egyptians who built the pyramids during this time. The earliest written accounts, including Egyptian hieroglyphs and petroglyphs (rock engravings), are also dated to this era.

The Iron Age

The discovery of ways to heat and forge iron kicked off the Iron Age (roughly 1,300 B.C. to 900 B.C.). At the time, metal was seen as more precious than gold, and wrought iron (which would be replaced by steel with the advent of smelting iron) was easier to manufacture than bronze.

Along with mass production of iron tools and weapons, the age saw even further advances in architecture, with four-room homes, some complete with stables for animals, joining more rudimentary hill forts, as well as royal palaces, temples and other religious structures. Early city planning also took place, with blocks of homes being erected along paved or cobblestone streets and water systems put into place.

Agriculture, art and religion all became more sophisticated, and writing systems and written documentation, including alphabets, began to emerge, ushering in the Early Historical Period.

Sign up for Inside History

Get HISTORY’s most fascinating stories delivered to your inbox three times a week.

By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.

More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us

Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History Essays

Introduction to prehistoric art, 20,000–8000 b.c..

Laura Anne Tedesco Independent Scholar

August 2007

To describe the global origins of humans’ artistic achievement, upon which the succeeding history of art may be laid, is an encyclopedic enterprise. The Metropolitan Museum’s Timeline of Art History , covering the period roughly from 20,000 to 8000 B.C., provides a series of introductory essays about particular archaeological sites and artworks that illustrate some of the earliest endeavors in human creativity. The account of the origins of art is a very long one marked less by change than consistency. The first human artistic representations, markings with ground red ocher, seem to have occurred about 100,000 B.C. in African rock art . This chronology may be more an artifact of the limitations of archaeological evidence than a true picture of when humans first created art. However, with new technologies, research methods, and archaeological discoveries, we are able to view the history of human artistic achievement in a greater focus than ever before.

Art, as the product of human creativity and imagination, includes poetry, music, dance, and the material arts such as painting, sculpture, drawing, pottery, and bodily adornment. The objects and archaeological sites presented in the Museum’s Timeline of Art History for the time period 20,000–8000 B.C. illustrate diverse examples of prehistoric art from across the globe. All were created in the period before the invention of formal writing, and when human populations were migrating and expanding across the world. By 20,000 B.C., humans had settled on every continent except Antarctica. The earliest human occupation occurs in Africa, and it is there that we assume art to have originated. African rock art from the  Apollo 11 and Wonderwerk Caves contain examples of geometric and animal representations engraved and painted on stone. In Europe, the record of Paleolithic art is beautifully illustrated with the magnificent painted caves of Lascaux and Chauvet , both in France. Scores of painted caves exist in western Europe, mostly in France and Spain, and hundreds of sculptures and engravings depicting humans, animals, and fantastic creatures have been found across Europe and Asia alike. Rock art in Australia represents the longest continuously practiced artistic tradition in the world. The site of Ubirr in northern Australia contains exceptional examples of Aboriginal rock art repainted for millennia beginning perhaps as early as 40,000 B.C. The earliest known rock art in Australia predates European painted caves by as much as 10,000 years.

In Egypt, millennia before the advent of powerful dynasties and wealth-laden tombs, early settlements are known from modest scatters of stone tools and animal bones at such sites as Wadi Kubbaniya . In western Asia after 8,000 B.C., the earliest known writing , monumental art, cities , and complex social systems emerged. Prior to these far-reaching developments of civilization, this area was inhabited by early hunters and farmers. Eynan/Ain Mallaha , a settlement in the Levant along the Mediterranean, was occupied around 10,000–8000 B.C. by a culture named Natufian. This group of settled hunters and gatherers created a rich artistic record of sculpture made from stone and bodily adornment made from shell and bone.

The earliest art of the continent of South Asia is less well documented than that of Europe and western Asia, and some of the extant examples come from painted and engraved cave sites such as Pachmari Hills in India. The caves depict the region’s fauna and hunting practices of the Mesolithic period. In Central and East Asia, a territory almost twice the size of North America, there are outstanding examples of early artistic achievements, such as the expertly and delicately carved female figurine sculpture from Mal’ta . The superbly preserved bone flutes from the site of Jiahu in China, while dated to slightly later than 8000 B.C., are still playable. The tradition of music making may be among the earliest forms of human artistic endeavor. Because many musical instruments were crafted from easily degradable materials like leather, wood, and sinew, they are often lost to archaeologists, but flutes made of bone dating to the Paleolithic period in Europe (ca. 35,000–10,000 B.C.) are richly documented.

North and South America are the most recent continents to be explored and occupied by humans, who likely arrived from Asia. Blackwater Draw in North America and Fell’s Cave in Patagonia, the southernmost area of South America, are two contemporaneous sites where elegant stone tools that helped sustain the hunters who occupied these regions have been found.

Whether the prehistoric artworks illustrated here constitute demonstrations of a unified artistic idiom shared by humankind or, alternatively, are unique to the environments, cultures, and individuals who created them is a question open for consideration. Nonetheless, each work or site superbly characterizes some of the earliest examples of humans’ creative and artistic capacity.

Tedesco, Laura Anne. “Introduction to Prehistoric Art, 20,000–8000 B.C.” In Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History . New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2000–. http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/preh/hd_preh.htm (August 2007)

Further Reading

Price, T. Douglas. and Gary M. Feinman. Images of the Past . 5th ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2006.

Scarre, Chris, ed. The Human Past: World Prehistory & the Development of Human Societies . London: Thames & Hudson, 2005.

Additional Essays by Laura Anne Tedesco

• Tedesco, Laura Anne. “ Blackwater Draw (ca. 9500–3000 B.C.) .” (originally published October 2000, last revised September 2007)
• Tedesco, Laura Anne. “ Wadi Kubbaniya (ca. 17,000–15,000 B.C.) .” (October 2000)
• Tedesco, Laura Anne. “ Fell’s Cave (9000–8000 B.C.) .” (originally published October 2000, last revised September 2007)
• Tedesco, Laura Anne. “ Jiahu (ca. 7000–5700 B.C.) .” (October 2000)
• Tedesco, Laura Anne. “ Lascaux (ca. 15,000 B.C.) .” (October 2000)
• Tedesco, Laura Anne. “ Mal’ta (ca. 20,000 B.C.) .” (October 2000)
• Tedesco, Laura Anne. “ Pachmari Hills (ca. 9000–3000 B.C.) .” (October 2000)
• Tedesco, Laura Anne. “ Hasanlu in the Iron Age .” (October 2004)
• Tedesco, Laura Anne. “ Eynan/Ain Mallaha (12,500–10,000 B.C.) .” (October 2000; updated February 2024)

Related Essays

• African Rock Art
• Chauvet Cave (ca. 30,000 B.C.)
• Lascaux (ca. 15,000 B.C.)
• Neolithic Period in China
• Prehistoric Stone Sculpture from New Guinea
• African Rock Art: Game Pass
• African Rock Art: Tassili-n-Ajjer (?8000 B.C.–?)
• African Rock Art: The Coldstream Stone
• Apollo 11 (ca. 25,500–23,500 B.C.) and Wonderwerk (ca. 8000 B.C.) Cave Stones
• Blackwater Draw (ca. 9500–3000 B.C.)
• Cerro Sechín
• Cerro Sechín: Stone Sculpture
• Eynan/Ain Mallaha (12,500–10,000 B.C.)
• Fell’s Cave (9000–8000 B.C.)
• Indian Knoll (3000–2000 B.C.)
• Jiahu (ca. 7000–5700 B.C.)
• Jōmon Culture (ca. 10,500–ca. 300 B.C.)
• Mal’ta (ca. 20,000 B.C.)
• Pachmari Hills (ca. 9000–3000 B.C.)
• Ubirr (ca. 40,000?–present)
• Valdivia Figurines
• Wadi Kubbaniya (ca. 17,000–15,000 B.C.)
• X-ray Style in Arnhem Land Rock Art
• 8th Millennium B.C.
• Agriculture
• Archaeology
• Central and North Asia
• Eastern Mediterranean
• Iberian Peninsula
• Literature / Poetry
• Musical Instrument
• Mythical Creature
• North Africa
• North America
• Painted Object
• Personal Ornament
• Prehistoric Art
• Relief Sculpture
• Sculpture in the Round
• South America
• Wall Painting
• Wind Instrument

Hominids and Stages of Human Evolution Essay

Evolution theory explains the change in the human species’ characteristics over generations based on archeological evidence. The cultural behaviors of early hominids are altered with the changes in physical features. Ardipithecus ramidus, Australopithecines, Homo habilis, Homo erectus, and Homo Neanderthal are stages of human evolution with distinct physical appearances and behavior. Earlier, man’s biological and cultural characteristics evolved gradually in response to different environmental factors.

Ardipithecus ramidus is the initial genus of Hominidae that possesses ape-like biological and cultural features. Ardipithecus had rigid pelvis and hind and front limbs implying full bipedal characteristics (Bala, 2020). Ardipithecus displayed a small endocrinal brain capacity (300 to 350 cm3) relative to the body size. These primates were most likely omnivores, suggesting they were hunters and gatherers with a generalized diet of plants, fruits, and meat (Haviland et al., 2015). Similar to other early hominids, Ardipithecus lived in groups in the woods, signified by the tree-climbing skills displayed by their strong limbs.

Australopithecines or Australopithecus had close physical and cultural characteristics with Ardipithecus ramidus. Australopithecus had ape-like physical appearance but bipedal features and small cerebrums (Haviland et al., 2015). At the same time, Australopithecines had smaller canine teeth and massive check jaws, suggesting they were omnivores (Anderson & Tornberg, 2019). The pelvis, limbs, jaws, and teeth of Australopithecus closely resemble humans, but their brain capacity is relatively small (430 cubic centimeters). Australopithecus used tools similar to modern apes, such as sticks and twigs that could effortlessly be redesigned.

Homo habilis was a more advanced human genus than the primitive Australopithecus, exhibited by physical and cultural characteristics. According to Galway-Witham (2019), Homo habilis had a relatively high cranial capacity (500 to 800 cubic centimeters). The foot and hand bones were more human-like, with the ability to manipulate objects hence the name “handy man” (Bala, 2020). The molars and premolars of Homo habilis were comparatively smaller than Ardipithecus and Australopithecus . Homo habilis predominantly lived in grassland environments and could make stone tools such as choppers, scrapers, and flakes, often called Oldowan stone tools.

Homo erectus, identified as “upright man,” exhibited close biological and cultural characteristics to humans. Their body size and shape were identical to humans, although their hips were much broader and more muscular. They had shorter arms with longer legs and could stand upright (Anderson & Tornberg, 2019). Homo erectus skull and teeth were smaller than earlier hominids, although omnivores. The upright man mastered the use of fire and stone to make tools such as knives and scrappers (Galway-Witham, 2019). Homo erectus had a larger brain size than Homo habilis (about 950 cubic centimeters) and could use perishable wood materials and grass to make ropes and strings. Homo erectus were active hunters that did not grow crops but could feed on wild fruits.

Homo Neanderthal is the most recent species of evolution that had analogous features with humans. Neanderthals had an extended lower skull with an enormous nose and a protruded facial shape. With large bones, they were stronger and more muscular than modern humans (Galway-Witham, 2019). Neanderthals made complex tools from stones that they used in scavenging plantations and hunting. They had a significantly higher brain volume of 11,000 low temperatures by using fire to cook, warm their bodies, and protect themselves from wild animals. (Haviland et al., 2015). Culturally, Homo Neanderthals buried the dead and knew how to use fire to make advanced stone technology.

Andersson, C., & Törnberg, P. (2019). Toward a macroevolutionary theory of human evolution: The social protocell. Biological Theory , 14 (2), 86-102.

Bala, S. (2020). Human evolution: insignificant ape to an intelligent designer. International Journal of Advanced Research in Biological Sciences , 7 (12), 6-14. Web.

Galway‐Witham, J., Cole, J., & Stringer, C. (2019). Aspects of human physical and behavioral evolution during the last 1 million years . Journal of Quaternary Science , 34 (6), 355-378.

Haviland, W. A., Prins, H. E., & McBride, B. (2015). The essence of anthropology . Cengage Learning.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, February 18). Hominids and Stages of Human Evolution. https://ivypanda.com/essays/hominids-and-stages-of-human-evolution/

"Hominids and Stages of Human Evolution." IvyPanda , 18 Feb. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/hominids-and-stages-of-human-evolution/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'Hominids and Stages of Human Evolution'. 18 February.

IvyPanda . 2023. "Hominids and Stages of Human Evolution." February 18, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/hominids-and-stages-of-human-evolution/.

1. IvyPanda . "Hominids and Stages of Human Evolution." February 18, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/hominids-and-stages-of-human-evolution/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Hominids and Stages of Human Evolution." February 18, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/hominids-and-stages-of-human-evolution/.

• Ardipithecus Ramidus in Language Evolution
• Australopithecus Africanus Characteristics and Facts
• Pre-Darwinian Theories and Hominids in Africa
• Is Cannibalism the Reason for Neanderthal’s Extinction?
• Anthropological Concepts: Key Points
• Biological Anthropology: Hominid Evolution
• Archaeology of Ancient People
• The Origin of Man by Richard Leakey
• Neanderthal Genes and Severity of COVID-19
• Neanderthals Tools, Materials and Behavior
• Aggression in Nonhuman Primates and Human Evolution
• History: Evolution of Humans
• Neanderthals: Debates Regarding the History of Neanderthals
• Aspects of Evolution and Creationism
• Medical Breakthrough: The Bionic Eye

• Skip to main content
• Skip to secondary menu
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer

Study Today

Largest Compilation of Structured Essays and Exams

Early Human Essay for Children | Early Man Lifestyle | History

December 2, 2017 by Study Mentor Leave a Comment

Man has developed from prehistoric ages from an ape like creature to what he is now. From fours he started walking on twos. From stooping on the ground he started to stand up on his legs. He learnt to walk run hunt and cook.

Man’s evolution came about in certain phases. It wasn’t done in a jiffy. But it came about in a very slow and gradual phase.

Before, man used to live on trees like apes. They had a huge head and a smaller brain. His senses weren’t that developed that time. His only means of survive was to eat the wild berries and fruits that grew on trees. He was a prey that time and not a predator, since he did not know any hunting skills. He was preyed on like other monkeys and apes. His body was full of hair and he had a tail also.

As time passed man came down from the trees to the land. He started residing in caves and niches in mountains. The hair quantity in his body reduced.

Then man developed tools. This brought a major change in his life. He learnt the art of hunting. He learnt how to make sharp object by rubbing two objects with each other. With tools now he could build temporary sheds and hunt animals at close proximity.

Another change that came with tools was that he started walking on twos instead of all fours. Yes! Man started using his lower limbs. But his walk wasn’t this upright and straight as it is now. It was more like how gorillas look when they walk on their feet; slightly humped in front and the movement is from side to side.

While rubbing two stones to sharpen them man made another accidental discovery that is fire. Till then fire was a matter of mystery, something fearful, and something unknown. Something, that cannot be under control. It was an act of nature. But when man learnt this new trick he could produce fire at his will by rubbing two stones or two twigs together. He became the master of fire.

The size of his brain increased considerably. He stood more upright. With fire at control there came many advantages. He could now have cooked food (before man used to devour raw flesh) hence it enhanced his taste buds. He can now light up dark caves and stay up late in the night. Also now they have this instrument to protect themselves from wild animals. They can also keep themselves warm in winters. From a herbivore he became an omnivore.

By this time he had learnt to tame animals. He started taming animals of domestic behavior. Man started living in groups. From a nomadic nature he started having a family. From a collection of different families it soon turned into a prehistoric village.

Man shifted from the caves to the open land. He built himself huts. Separate huts for separate families. Man learnt that the soil near the river is most fertile and there is also an easy availability of water. Villages started coming up along the banks of the water sources.

Man started producing food instead of just eating the wild fruits. The very first grains to be cultivated are still unknown because at that time trees also hadn’t undergone much evolution and there were a lot more different species of trees. So the main diet of man comprised of wild fruits, berries, meat, milk from the animals he domesticated and the grains that he grew.

He started practicing shifting agriculture that is suppose they settled in an area and cleared the forest cover there and started their agriculture there. But after some years the soil will lose its fertility, then again the people will shift to a new area, make a new clearing and start cultivating again, and leave the earlier patch to regenerate itself.

The third breakthrough came with the discovery of wheels. Man saw wooden logs of trees to roll down easily from a hill top. This gave him the idea of making wheels. He tied his domesticated animals to the wheels and used them to pull the wheels. This gave him the basic idea of making a cart. Early carts were very different from us though.

Nothing much is known about the language of early man at those times. Scientists say they didn’t have a proper context or verbal sentences. Instead they had calls like animals. He used to communicate or call each other through specific set of music, shrieks, cries or calls. They had separate calls for expressing joy , sorrow or giving signals for any danger lurking nearby.

Man started using different materials for building his home- like straw, wood, mud, bamboo and wood. With the advent of fire and wood man made another discovery that changed the pace of time. He discovered metals. He discovered ores from which metals can be formed. The very first metal to be discovered was copper.

Man can now store food. Before he used to store milk in earthen pots or skins of animals hence the food got easily wasted. But with copper utensils now he can store food easily for days. Food production became super functional. Man started producing food more than he needed. This gave him the idea of trade. He traded his grains for cattle or new weapons and utensils.

Such is the journey of man. This by and by gave rise to huge and renowned civilizations which shaped our future-like the Mayans, the Egyptians, the Greeks, the Romans, the Indus valley and many more. What we are now is because of them

“ For men may come, and men may go, but I go on forever ” -the river

Reader Interactions

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Top Trending Essays in March 2021

• Essay on Pollution
• Essay on my School
• Summer Season
• My favourite teacher
• World heritage day quotes
• my family speech
• importance of trees essay
• autobiography of a pen
• honesty is the best policy essay
• essay on building a great india
• my favourite book essay
• essay on caa
• my favourite player
• autobiography of a river
• farewell speech for class 10 by class 9
• essay my favourite teacher 200 words
• internet influence on kids essay
• my favourite cartoon character

Brilliantly

Content & links.

Verified by Sur.ly

Essay for Students

• Essay for Class 1 to 5 Students

Scholarships for Students

• Class 1 Students Scholarship
• Class 2 Students Scholarship
• Class 3 Students Scholarship
• Class 4 Students Scholarship
• Class 5 students Scholarship
• Class 6 Students Scholarship
• Class 7 students Scholarship
• Class 8 Students Scholarship
• Class 9 Students Scholarship
• Class 10 Students Scholarship
• Class 11 Students Scholarship
• Class 12 Students Scholarship

STAY CONNECTED

• About Study Today
• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions

Scholarships

• Apj Abdul Kalam Scholarship
• Ashirwad Scholarship
• Bihar Scholarship
• Canara Bank Scholarship
• Colgate Scholarship
• Dr Ambedkar Scholarship
• E District Scholarship
• Epass Karnataka Scholarship
• Fair And Lovely Scholarship
• Floridas John Mckay Scholarship
• Inspire Scholarship
• Jio Scholarship
• Karnataka Minority Scholarship
• Lic Scholarship
• Maulana Azad Scholarship
• Medhavi Scholarship
• Minority Scholarship
• Moma Scholarship
• Mp Scholarship
• Muslim Minority Scholarship
• Nsp Scholarship
• Oasis Scholarship
• Obc Scholarship
• Odisha Scholarship
• Pfms Scholarship
• Post Matric Scholarship
• Pre Matric Scholarship
• Prerana Scholarship
• Prime Minister Scholarship
• Rajasthan Scholarship
• Santoor Scholarship
• Sitaram Jindal Scholarship
• Ssp Scholarship
• Swami Vivekananda Scholarship
• Ts Epass Scholarship
• Up Scholarship
• Vidhyasaarathi Scholarship
• Wbmdfc Scholarship
• West Bengal Minority Scholarship
• Click Here Now!!

Mobile Number

Have you Burn Crackers this Diwali ? Yes No

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Savages! Innocents! Sages! What Do We Really Know About Early Humans?

In “The Invention of Prehistory,” the historian Stefanos Geroulanos argues that many of our theories about our remote ancestors tell us more about us than them.

By Jennifer Szalai

• Barnes and Noble
• Books-A-Million

When you purchase an independently reviewed book through our site, we earn an affiliate commission.

THE INVENTION OF PREHISTORY: Empire, Violence, and Our Obsession With Human Origins , by Stefanos Geroulanos

History may not be bunk, but prehistory is: So argues Stefanos Geroulanos in his spirited new book, “The Invention of Prehistory: Empire, Violence, and Our Obsession With Human Origins.” Best-selling authors like Yuval Harari , Jared Diamond and Steven Pinker have all distilled (or cherry-picked) research about early humanity in order to make grand claims about the near inevitability (or impossibility) of human progress. Even “The Dawn of Everything” (2021), by David Graeber and David Wengrow, which took issue with the simplistic narratives offered by the Big Thinkers with their Big Books, provided an alternative narrative of its own — that of early human communities experimenting and making do without resorting to structures of hierarchy and domination.

Geroulanos expends few words addressing his contemporaries, preferring instead to guide us through several centuries of research into (and consequent conjecture about) human origins. “The Invention of Prehistory” begins around the mid-18th century, moving through various concepts of early humanity to conclude that even as our knowledge of specifics becomes undeniably richer and more detailed, our sense of the bigger picture remains tenuous and subject to change.

I already anticipate some grumbling from fans of Harari & Co. that Geroulanos, a professor of European intellectual history at New York University, is advancing an anti-science argument. He is not. He has plenty of praise for geneticists and paleontologists who have enlarged our understanding of various areas of inquiry, including human migration, food intake and the Neanderthal genome. What both fascinates and troubles him is our seemingly irrepressible urge to look to the lives of early humans — to that mysterious time before recorded history — to tell us who, essentially, we are. Not to mention that such interpretations can condition how we relate to others: Prehistoric “findings” have been used to shore up a prejudice, justify an injustice or expand an empire.

“Human origins are not mere abstractions,” Geroulanos writes. “Nor are they simple prompts for thought experiments and pure scientific inquiry. Promises and violence have regularly been unleashed in their name.”

Geroulanos dates the invention of prehistory, at least as we understand it, to sometime around 1750, when Enlightenment imperatives meant that religious tales of creation would no longer do. In 1651, Thomas Hobbes had already declared that “man is wolf to man” in the state of nature, and so it was in everyone’s interest to submit to a sovereign for protection from fellow humans. A century later, Jean-Jacques Rousseau argued something different. Disgusted by the extreme inequality in French society, Rousseau proposed that the “noble savage” had instead been corrupted by civilization. He assumed an analogous notion of childhood: innocent and pure. “Man is born free,” he wrote, “yet everywhere he is in chains.”

The more you want to upend the status quo, the more likely you’ll be to venerate an idyllic past. The reverse is also true: The more you want to preserve the status quo, the more likely you’ll be to scorn the past as horrific — or, at least, unsustainable. Geroulanos traces the long history of Europeans depicting Indigenous and colonized peoples as “savage” — thereby rationalizing every violent measure used against them, from brutality to annihilation. One trope that came up again and again was that of “the disappearing native,” which Geroulanos deems a “convenient euphemism,” because of how it couched colonial destruction in terms of biological inevitability. “Natives don’t die of diseases introduced by settlers,” he writes, in an acerbic aside. “They’re not murdered in asymmetrical warfare; really, they disappear.”

“The Invention of Prehistory” mostly follows a rough chronology, though the chapters are arranged conceptually. Geroulanos, who started his research for this project more than a decade ago, includes so many thinkers and theories that it can be hard to keep track of the mounting contradictions. But the tumbling cadence of conflicting ideas also serves to illustrate his point. He is dismantling, not synthesizing. He devotes an entire chapter to the French Jesuit priest and paleontologist Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, who tried to reconcile evolution with Christian theology. Another chapter starts with Stanley Kubrick’s “2001: A Space Odyssey”; turns to the “Out of Africa” thesis of the Australian-born anthropologist Raymond Dart; discusses the work of the German anthropologist Leo Frobenius and its influence on the Negritude movement; brings in the racism promulgated by the Hollywood screenwriter turned-nonfiction naturalist Robert Ardrey; and ends with a mention of Wakanda.

Most readers will already be familiar with the pejorative uses of “savage” and the positive uses of “civilization”; they will also recognize reversals like Rousseau’s. Less familiar to me were the distinctions that 19th-century Europeans made between “good barbarians” (Germanic tribes) and “bad barbarians” (Mongols, Huns and other “Asiatic” invaders). And Geroulanos reminded me that depictions of Neanderthals have undergone a transformation during my own lifetime. No longer the hunched and hairy creatures of the 1980s and ’90s, they are now blond and blue-eyed tool users.

Given the racialized stereotypes embedded in these iterations, it’s perhaps no surprise that the current, lighter-skinned version has figured in grotesque, far-right talking points about “white genocide” and a “great replacement.” Geroulanos quotes an anthropology paper describing the Neanderthals as “the Indigenous European race” that was “demographically and genetically swamped by the African biological race of Homo sapiens.” Over on the dark web, Geroulanos finds white supremacists portraying Neanderthals as victims of “diversity.” He doesn’t dispute the science that has added to our store of knowledge, but he does dispute the meanings we project onto it. “The Neanderthals themselves say nothing,” he writes. “We arrange them into whatever position we need them to take.”

“The Invention of Prehistory” isn’t simply critique for critique’s sake. “When early humanity is presented as violent or weak, we pronounce ourselves triumphant,” Geroulanos writes. “When it is presented as strong or complex, we empathize with it.” Meanwhile, we “make excuses for the real humanity that burns forests and oil and cares little for the poverty right outside our door or on the other side of the planet.”

It’s a thought that’s both undeniably unsettling and surprisingly hopeful: Why cling to speculations of what our forebears may or may not have done, way back when, in order to make sense of what we actually do, right now?

THE INVENTION OF PREHISTORY : Empire, Violence, and Our Obsession With Human Origins | By Stefanos Geroulanos | Liveright | 498 pp. | $29.99

Jennifer Szalai is the nonfiction book critic for The Times. More about Jennifer Szalai

• Practice Tests
• Competitive Exams
• Art & Craft
• Animal Coloring
• Birds Coloring
• Cartoon Coloring
• Letters & Numbers Coloring
• Christmas Coloring
• Special Day Coloring
• Story Coloring
• Parenting Tips
• Teacher Resources
• Word Search Puzzles
• Crossword Puzzles
• Word Scramble/Jumbled Puzzles
• Dot to Dot Puzzles
• Counting Puzzles
• Find the Difference Puzzles
• Sudoku Puzzles
• Mathematics
• Social Science

Early Human's Life

In early days, human life was very hard. They spent their life in caves, wrap animal skin and tree leaves over their body and hunt animals for food. With time, they discovered many good things like fire, tools, farming etc. that made their life better than earlier. But these changes in early human's life had taken a very long time. Through 'Early Human's Life' educational series, we are trying to take some snapshots of efforts made by early humans to become civilized.

Life style and food of early humans:

Discovery of tools:

Discovery of fire:.

• Early Human's life-2
• Early Human's Life Part -3
• Importance of water in life
• Food chain - A flow of life within living species
• Republic day essay
• Importance Of Helpers Around Us
• Importance of Means of Communication
• Diwali the Festival of Lights (Essay)
• Do not include your name, "with regards" etc in the comment. Write detailed comment, relevant to the topic.
• No HTML formatting and links to other web sites are allowed.
• This is a strictly moderated site. Absolutely no spam allowed.

Top Contributors

About StudyVillage.com

We believe in providing quality content to our readers. If you have any questions or concerns regarding any content published here, feel free to contact us using the Contact link below.

Quick Links

• Kids Network
• Paper Games
• Drawing Worksheets
• Coloring Pages

Kids Projects

• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Use

Digital Marketing by SpiderWorks Technologies, Kochi - India. ©

First evidence of human occupation in lava tube cave in Saudi Arabia

Recent strides in interdisciplinary archaeological research in Arabia have unveiled new insights into the evolution and historical development of regional human populations, as well as the dynamic patterns of cultural change, migration, and adaptation to environmental fluctuations.

Despite the challenges posed by limited preservation of archaeological assemblages and organic remains in arid environments, these discoveries are reshaping our understanding of the region's rich cultural heritage.

One such breakthrough led by Griffith University's Australian Research Centre for Human Evolution (ARCHE), in collaboration with international partners, comes from the exploration of underground settings, including caves and lava tubes, which have remained largely untapped reservoirs of archaeological abundance in Arabia.

Through meticulous excavation and analysis, researchers have uncovered a wealth of evidence at Umm Jirsan, spanning from the Neolithic to the Chalcolithic/Bronze Age periods (~10,000-3,500 years ago).

"Our findings at Umm Jirsan provide a rare glimpse into the lives of ancient peoples in Arabia, revealing repeated phases of human occupation and shedding light on the pastoralist activities that once thrived in this landscape," said Dr Mathew Stewart, the lead researcher and a Research Fellow at ARCHE.

"This site likely served as a crucial waypoint along pastoral routes, linking key oases and facilitating cultural exchange and trade."

Rock art and faunal records attest to the pastoralist use of the lava tube and surrounding areas, painting a vivid picture of ancient lifeways.

Depictions of cattle, sheep, goat and dogs corroborate the prehistoric livestock practices and herd composition of the region.

Isotopic analysis of animal remains indicates that livestock primarily grazed on wild grasses and shrubs, while humans maintained a diet rich in protein, with a notable increase in the consumption of C3 plants over time, suggesting the emergence of oasis agriculture.

"While underground localities are globally significant in archaeology and Quaternary science, our research represents the first comprehensive study of its kind in Saudi Arabia," added Professor Michael Petraglia, Director of ARCHE.

"These findings underscore the immense potential for interdisciplinary investigations in caves and lava tubes, offering a unique window into Arabia's ancient past."

The research at Umm Jirsan underscores the importance of collaborative, multidisciplinary approaches to archaeological inquiry and highlights the significance of Arabia's archaeological heritage on the global stage.

Researchers involved in this study work in close partnership with the Heritage Commission, Saudi Ministry of Culture, and the Saudi Geological Survey. Additional partners include King Saud University and key institutions in the UK, the USA, and Germany.

• Ancient Civilizations
• Anthropology
• Lost Treasures
• Early Humans
• Archaeology
• Human Evolution
• Mesopotamia
• Homo (genus)
• Neandertal interaction with Cro-Magnons

Story Source:

Materials provided by Griffith University . Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Journal Reference :

• Mathew Stewart, Eric Andrieux, James Blinkhorn, Maria Guagnin, Ricardo Fernandes, Nils Vanwezer, Amy Hatton, Mesfer Alqahtani, Iyad Zalmout, Richard Clark-Wilson, Yahya S. A. Al-Mufarreh, Mahmoud Al-Shanti, Badr Zahrani, Abdulaziz Al Omari, Faisal Al-Jibreen, Abdullah M. Alsharekh, Eleanor M. L. Scerri, Nicole Boivin, Michael D. Petraglia, Huw S. Groucutt. First evidence for human occupation of a lava tube in Arabia: The archaeology of Umm Jirsan Cave and its surroundings, northern Saudi Arabia . PLOS ONE , 2024; 19 (4): e0299292 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0299292

Cite This Page :

Explore More

• Drain On Economy Due to Climate Change
• 'Tube Map' Around Planets and Moons
• 'Bizarre' Evolutionary Pattern: Homo Lineage
• Largest Known Marine Reptile
• Neolithic Humans Lived in Lava Tube Caves
• Imminent Carbon Release from the Tundra
• How Working Memory Reallly Works
• Substantial Global Cost of Climate Inaction
• Paradox of Extreme Cold Events in Warming World
• Plastic Pollution Kills Ocean Embryos

Trending Topics

Strange & offbeat.

Early humans used lava cave to shelter from elements 7,000 years ago

By Stephen Beech via SWNS

Early herdsmen were using a volcanic lava cave to shelter from the fierce desert sun at least 7,000 years ago, reveals new research.

Bones, etchings and other artifacts discovered in what is now Saudi Arabia are among the first evidence of herding and agriculture in the region, say scientists.

The finds made inside a large lava tube called Umm Jirsan located in the volcanic field of Harrat Khaybar, around 80 miles north of Medina, show it provided "valuable shelter" for humans herding sheep, goats and cattle for at least the past 7,000 years.

It has been difficult to establish the timing of early human occupations in the region and their connections with the nearby Levant remain poorly understood, mainly due to poor preservation of organic remains in such arid conditions.

To get around the problem an international research team focused their investigations on caves and other underground settings where ancient materials are sheltered from the sun, wind and huge temperature variations.

Study leader Doctor Mathew Stewart said: "Exploring Arabia’s hidden past, our study uncovers millennia of human occupation within and around the Umm Jirsan lava tube, shedding light on ancient lifestyles and adaptations to environmental change in this harsh desert environment.

”Within the lava tube are artifacts, rock art, and skeletal remains that document repeated human occupation over at least the past 7,000 years.

"The lava tube seems to have been an important resource for pastoralists keeping and herding livestock, as evidenced by rock art and animal bones representing domesticated sheep and goats.

"Isotopic analysis of human remains reveals an increase over time in C3 plants such as cereal and fruit in the diet, possibly linked to a rise in oasis agriculture in the Bronze Age."

The team concluded that Umm Jirsan was likely not a permanent home, but instead a valuable "stopping point" for people traveling between oasis settlements.

Dr Stewart, of Griffith University, Australia, added: "Lava tubes and other natural shelters were valuable resources for communities surviving in a challenging environment, and with further investigation, they present a key source of archaeological information about the history of human occupation in Arabia."

The findings were published in the journal PLoS One .

The post Early humans used lava cave to shelter from elements 7,000 years ago appeared first on Talker .

• Support Our Work

The Smithsonian Institution's Human Origins Program

The age of humans: evolutionary perspectives on the anthropocene.

What is the Anthropocene?

Human activity has fundamentally changed our planet. We live on every continent and have directly affected at least 83% of the planet’s viable land surface. Our influence has impacted everything from the makeup of ecosystems to the geochemistry of Earth, from the atmosphere to the ocean. Many scientists define this time in the planet’s history by the scale of human influence, and label it as a new geological epoch called the Anthropocene.

Geological epochs are one of the definable units that geologists and paleontologists use to break down the broad concept of deep time. These units of time are defined by stratigraphic layers that are chemically or biologically distinct. Epochs are defined on a global level, and their beginning and end are dated to specific points in time. Hominins first appear by around 6 million years ago, in the Miocene epoch, which ended about 5.3 million years ago. Our evolutionary path takes us through the Pliocene, the Pleistocene, and finally into the Holocene, starting about 12,000 years ago. The Anthropocene would follow the Holocene.

When did it begin?

The beginning of the Anthropocene is a subject of heated debate among geologists, anthropologists, and others in the scientific community. In order for the Anthropocene to become officially recognized as a geological epoch by the International Commission on Stratigraphy, a start date must be recognized that is global and can be defined stratigraphically by biological, chemical, or other types of markers. Some geologists argue that this is impossible to identify because we are still within the range of variation of any signal that might distinguish recent strata from earlier ones, or because human activity is diverse enough that no single moment universally distinguishes a period of time separating the Anthropocene from the Holocene. But even among those who believe that this beginning date can be pinpointed, there is still considerable disagreement.

Some argue that the Anthropocene began with the advent of agriculture, because certain agriculture-related activities such as rice paddy irrigation and deforestation may have led to sharp rises in concentrations of CO2 and methane as early as 8,000 years ago[fn value="i"]Ruddiman, William F. "How Did Humans First Alter Global Climate?" Scientific American 292 (2005): 46-53.[/fn] . Many believe that it was not until the Industrial Revolution that our exploitation of fossil fuels and monumental increases of energy use and population started to push us far enough to “show a discernible human influence beyond natural [Holocene] variability."[fn value="ii"]Steffen, W., J. Grinevald, P. Crutzen, and J. Mcneill. "The Anthropocene: Conceptual and Historical Perspectives." Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 369, no. 1938 (2011): 842-67.[/fn] A third proposed start date is the Great Acceleration, or the beginning of the nuclear age in the mid-1940s. In this period, not only did our testing and use of atomic weaponry leave a distinctive radioactive signature in the sediments of Earth, but almost all human activities from water use to fertilizer consumption to globalization saw a dramatic intensification[fn value="iii"]Ibid.[/fn].

Why does the Anthropocene matter?

No matter when it began, the concept of the Anthropocene is significant. It highlights the scale of our impact on Earth. By defining a new geological epoch, we are declaring that the impact of our activities is global and irreversible. It allows us to unite many different discussions regarding the state of the planet, from climate change to loss of biodiversity to environmental degradation, by identifying the one thing they have in common: they have all been affected by human influence.

The Anthropocene also allows us to reexamine the relationship between humans and the rest of the natural world. There has been a long-standing narrative of humanity and nature being separate; some believe that we should be the caretakers or stewards of the natural world, while others urge us to leave the environment alone and let nature run its course. But human activity is intrinsically linked to nature, and is part of it. From the land we live on to the resources we use to the trash we throw away, everything we do is tied into and impacts our surroundings. The concept of the Anthropocene underlines this fact by defining the environment based on the interactive effects of our influence. The only question now becomes how we can shape our activities so our impact on the environment is intentional and leads to meaningful outcomes.

State of the Planet

We all know that humans have unmistakably influenced the planet, but what does that influence look like? The most familiar parts of this story are where we have most physically altered the planet. Greenhouse gasses such as CO 2 (carbon dioxide), CH 4 (methane), and N 2 O (nitrous oxide) caused by fossil fuel combustion and industrial processes are increasingly concentrated in our atmosphere, causing heat to become trapped on Earth and resulting in rising global temperatures[fn value="iv"]IPCC. “Summary for Policymakers.” Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2014).[/fn]. The projected estimate for mean surface temperature increase by 2100 is 6.7° F to 8.6° F (3.7° C to 4.8° C)[fn value="v"]Ibid.[/fn], which would make Earth hotter than it’s been in 14 million years[fn value="vi"]Millennium Alliance for Humanity and Biosphere. Scientific Consensus on Maintaining Humanity's Life Support Systems in the 21st Century Information for Policy Makers. (May 2013).[/fn]. On our current path, ice cap melt will cause sea levels to rise to levels where many major cities will be at very high risk of flooding, and natural disasters will cause damage to our communities at catastrophic levels on a much more regular basis[fn value="vii"]Melillo, Jerry M., Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and Gary W. Yohe, Eds. Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third National Climate Assessment . U.S. Global Change Research Program, (2014).[/fn]. Forests are shrinking at a startling pace – every year, we lose a swath of forest the size of Massachusetts[fn value="viii"]Millennium Alliance for Humanity and Biosphere. Scientific Consensus on Maintaining Humanity's Life Support Systems in the 21st Century Information for Policy Makers . (May 2013).[/fn]. If temperatures rise by only the most conservative estimates, at least 20-40% of Earth’s animal diversity will be at increased risk of extinction, and pollution and poaching will lead to the extinction of dozens more species[fn value="ix"]Ibid.[/fn]. All of these problems are exacerbated by an ever-growing human population, which has more than doubled in the last fifty years. But while climate change is one of the most visible parts of the Anthropocene, it does not paint the whole picture of our influence. Everything from damming rivers to paving roads to illuminating public spaces has changed the physical makeup of the planet in some aspect, creating a world that has truly been shaped by humans.

Human creativity has produced some incredible achievements. We have created the technology to produce high-yielding food crops with the capacity to support more human life than ever before. We can plant crops far from water sources, control the temperature inside our living spaces, enjoy leisure time and luxuries, and walk on the moon. We have invented cures for diseases that were once catastrophic. We can travel anywhere on Earth at incredible speeds in cars, ships, and airplanes. Three-quarters of the world’s population has cell phone access[fn value="x"] World Bank. Mobile Phone Access Reaches Three Quarters Of Planet's Population. (July 12 2012). [/fn], and as of 2020, an estimate of more than 60% of individuals globally had access to the Internet[fn value="xi"] Broadband Search: Key Internet Statistics to Know in 202 (Including Mobile). (2020). [/fn], allowing people to communicate and access knowledge that was once much more restricted. These innovations in transportation and communication have given us the means to connect with our fellow human beings, learn about new cultures, and maintain relationships all around the globe.

Perhaps most importantly, we have self-awareness of the impact of our activities. Scientific methods can help us comprehend how emissions from our vehicles and factories are causing Earth to warm, and how that warming will affect everything from sea levels to biodiversity. We can study how the use of certain fertilizers on land will destroy marine ecosystems thousands of miles away. We are aware of the finiteness of Earth's natural resources and can use this knowledge to analyze the short- and long-term effects of their gradual depletion. And we have the capacity to create innovative solutions, like solar panels that convert the sun’s energy into usable power, recycling systems that allow us to reuse plastics instead of polluting Earth with them, and vehicles designed to run on renewable, non-polluting energy sources instead of fossil fuels. Having this self-awareness along with our creative problem-solving will be critical to helping repair some of the negative effects of the Anthropocene, and will help us to be conscious of those effects into the future.

Human Evolution and the Anthropocene

Changing climate is not a unique feature of the Anthropocene. Earth’s environments have been in a constant state of creation, destruction, and change for the planet’s entire history. The last six million years (when hominins began to appear in the fossil record) were particularly volatile and saw many different shifts in environments. The key to human survival in these settings was an extraordinary ability of our ancestors to alter their behavior and the world around them. Our success in these times was largely due to the evolution over time of a number of traits that allowed us to be more adaptable to a large variety of environmental conditions.

The first bipedal hominins were able to live both on the ground and in trees, which gave them an advantage as the habitat oscillated between forests and grasslands. The ability of early humans to make and use tools, including the control of fire, allowed them to more easily access food by scraping meat off of bones more efficiently, crushing bones for the marrow inside, and obtaining new plant foods such as nutritious tubers and roots from underground. Tool use also enabled early hominins to diversify their diet, so they had plenty of options when certain plants and animals went extinct. And with a larger and more complex brain, early humans gained the capacity for everything from language to creative problem-solving. When humans began to expand out of Africa and into the rest of the world, they moved everywhere from mountains thousands of feet above sea level to blazing hot and extremely arid deserts, displaying an astonishing ability to adapt to the wide diversity of Earth’s environments.

Other species in our evolutionary tree had features that were more specialized to one particular environment, and they were very successful for long periods of time in those environments. Yet these localized features restricted their ability to live in new conditions, limiting how effectively they could inhabit new geographic zones or could adjust to unusual climatic shifts. If they were unable to adapt to new conditions or change their location significantly, they died out. A good example of that are the Neanderthals, or Homo neanderthalensis . Members of this species had bodies that were well suited for cold climates; their short, stocky bodies, large noses, and their ability to make clothing were all specialized features for successful living in the cold. In contrast, Homo sapiens had an extremely enhanced ability to adapt their behavior to new surroundings, despite having physical features more suited for an African climate. It became particularly difficult for Neanderthals to compete with the innovative Homo sapiens , and with a geographic range limited by their specialization to cold, they eventually went extinct. While Neanderthals and all other early human species exhibited some of the human characteristics of adaptability, Homo sapiens distinguish themselves with an extreme reliance on altering their landscapes and themselves for survival.

The volatility of past climates does not diminish the effects of human activity in the Anthropocene. The types of changes that we have seen in the last two hundred years are far outside the range of variability we see in the past. Examining the Anthropocene through the lens of our evolutionary history shows us that the themes of resilience and adaptability are critical to the history of our species in the past and in the Anthropocene. These distinctive traits of our lineage have created a human species that is defined by its ability to alter its behavior and environment as a mode of survival. These themes are critical to understanding how the Anthropocene has come to be, and how we will survive into the future.

No Turning Back: The Future of the Anthropocene

We can never return the environment to how it was in the past. The conditions of the past have been so varied that there is no stable baseline on which to base what "the past" looked like. So if we can’t reverse the clock, how do we move forward in this altered world we’ve created?

The present climate change dialogue has mostly been centered on the apocalyptic consequences of continuing down our current path, and for good reason: almost a quarter of Americans don’t believe that human-induced climate change is happening[fn value="xii"]Leiserowitz, A., Maibach, E., Roser-Renouf, C., Feinberg, G., Rosenthal, S., & Marlon, J. Climate change in the American mind: Americans’ global warming beliefs and attitudes in November, 2013 . Yale University and George Mason University. New Haven, CT: Yale Project on Climate Change Communication. (2014).[/fn]. Stories of mass extinctions and the destruction of our major cities are useful tools to put the urgency of our situation in perspective. None of this is inaccurate, and it is critical that the public, and especially those in positions of power, understand the scope of influence our species has had on the planet.

But oftentimes this dialogue leaves out a critical perspective: what we can do to change our behavior and environment to create a positive future. The story of human evolution features a unique ability to adapt in the face of changing climates, and this will be no different for human-shaped climates of today and the future. With our own growing awareness of how our actions impact the natural world, the question is how best we can shape our actions so that the consequences of our activities are purposeful and positive.

Altering our surroundings is fundamental to human survival. In this light, how may we come to alter the world that we've created in a conscious and productive way? Community and global collaboration, along with innovation, will be the keys to creating a new path for the future of our species and our environment. By looking at the Anthropocene from a human origins viewpoint, the narrative of our collective humanity and the qualities that unite us as a species with a common origin can give us a sense of communal purpose in developing solutions for the problems of the Anthropocene.

These are some of the many questions that we must answer as we begin to craft the future of the Anthropocene:

• Whose responsibility is it to make important decisions?
• How do we shape a global social project?
• How do we accommodate cultural diversity while making changes at a global level?
• How do we make long term changes (toward a sustainable future) appealing, feasible, and accessible for individuals, countries, etc., on a short-term scale?
• What do we want the future to look like?
• What do we want life on this planet to be like?
• What can we do as individuals, countries, and organizations to create a future with purposeful intentions?
• How can we act as individuals to get the ball rolling?
• Which issues are the most critical to address first?
• How do we begin?

Contemplating these questions will help us begin to determine the future of the Anthropocene. The themes of self-determination, community, and action will all be parts of the human-driven innovation for the future of the planet. As we look to the future, we will see not only the planet change, but we may even see changes in ourselves as a species. We invite you to contemplate: What will it mean to be human in the future of the Anthropocene?

Further Reading

Smithsonian Statement on Climate Change

The Moral Dilemma We Face in the Age of Humans, Rick Potts, Smithsonian Magazine).

What is the Anthropocene and Are We in It?, Joseph Stromberg, Smithsonian Magazine.

Living in the Anthropocene: The Age of Humans

About the Image of Earth at Night

Images of the Present-Day Anthropocene

• Climate Effects on Human Evolution
• Survival of the Adaptable
• Human Evolution Timeline Interactive
• 2011 Olorgesailie Dispatches
• 2004 Olorgesailie Dispatches
• 1999 Olorgesailie Dispatches
• Olorgesailie Drilling Project
• Kanam, Kenya
• Kanjera, Kenya
• Ol Pejeta, Kenya
• Olorgesailie, Kenya
• Evolution of Human Innovation
• Adventures in the Rift Valley: Interactive
• 'Hobbits' on Flores, Indonesia
• Earliest Humans in China
• Bose, China
• Anthropocene: The Age of Humans
• Fossil Forensics: Interactive
• What's Hot in Human Origins?
• Instructions
• Carnivore Dentition
• Ungulate Dentition
• Primate Behavior
• Footprints from Koobi Fora, Kenya
• Laetoli Footprint Trails
• Footprints from Engare Sero, Tanzania
• Hammerstone from Majuangou, China
• Handaxe and Tektites from Bose, China
• Handaxe from Europe
• Handaxe from India
• Oldowan Tools from Lokalalei, Kenya
• Olduvai Chopper
• Stone Tools from Majuangou, China
• Middle Stone Age Tools
• Burin from Laugerie Haute & Basse, Dordogne, France
• La Madeleine, Dordogne, France
• Butchered Animal Bones from Gona, Ethiopia
• Katanda Bone Harpoon Point
• Oldest Wooden Spear
• Punctured Horse Shoulder Blade
• Stone Sickle Blades
• Projectile Point
• Oldest Pottery
• Pottery Fragment
• Fire-Altered Stone Tools
• Terra Amata Shelter
• Qafzeh: Oldest Intentional Burial
• Assyrian Cylinder Seal
• Blombos Ocher Plaque
• Ishango Bone
• Bone and Ivory Needles
• Carved Ivory Running Lion
• Female torso in ivory
• Ivory Horse Figurine
• Ivory Horse Sculpture
• Lady of Brassempouy
• Lion-Man Figurine
• Willendorf Venus
• Ancient Shell Beads
• Carved Bone Disc
• Cro-Magnon Shell Bead Necklace
• Oldest Known Shell Beads
• Ancient Flute
• Ancient Pigments
• Apollo 11 Plaque
• Carved antler baton with horses
• Geometric incised bone rectangle
• Tata Plaque
• Mystery Skull Interactive
• Shanidar 3 - Neanderthal Skeleton
• One Species, Living Worldwide
• Human Skin Color Variation
• Ancient DNA and Neanderthals
• Human Family Tree
• Swartkrans, South Africa
• Shanidar, Iraq
• Walking Upright
• Tools & Food
• Social Life
• Language & Symbols
• Humans Change the World
• Introduction to Human Evolution
• Nuts and bolts classification: Arbitrary or not? (Grades 6-8)
• Comparison of Human and Chimp Chromosomes (Grades 9-12)
• Hominid Cranial Comparison: The "Skulls" Lab (Grades 9-12)
• Investigating Common Descent: Formulating Explanations and Models (Grades 9-12)
• Fossil and Migration Patterns in Early Hominids (Grades 9-12)
• For College Students
• Why do we get goose bumps?
• Chickens, chimpanzees, and you - what do they have in common?
• Grandparents are unique to humans
• How strong are we?
• Humans are handy!
• Humans: the running ape
• Our big hungry brain!
• Our eyes say it!
• The early human tool kit
• The short-haired human!
• The “Nutcracker”
• What can lice tell us about human evolution?
• What does gut got to do with it?
• Why do paleoanthropologists love Lucy?
• Why do we have wisdom teeth?
• Human Origins Glossary
• Teaching Evolution through Human Examples
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Recommended Books
• Exhibit Floorplan Interactive
• Print Floorplan PDF
• Reconstructions of Early Humans
• Chesterfield County Public Library
• Orange County Library
• Andover Public Library
• Ephrata Public Library
• Oelwein Public Library
• Cedar City Public Library
• Milpitas Library
• Spokane County Library
• Cottage Grove Public Library
• Pueblo City-County Library
• Springfield-Greene County Library
• Peoria Public Library
• Orion Township Public Library
• Skokie Public Library
• Wyckoff Free Public Library
• Tompkins County Public Library
• Otis Library
• Fletcher Free Library
• Bangor Public Library
• Human Origins Do it Yourself Exhibit
• Exhibit Field Trip Guide
• Acknowledgments
• Human Origins Program Team
• Connie Bertka
• Betty Holley
• Nancy Howell
• Lee Meadows
• Jamie L. Jensen
• David Orenstein
• Michael Tenneson
• Leonisa Ardizzone
• David Haberman
• Fred Edwords (Emeritus)
• Elliot Dorff (Emeritus)
• Francisca Cho (Emeritus)
• Peter F. Ryan (Emeritus)
• Mustansir Mir (Emeritus)
• Randy Isaac (Emeritus)
• Mary Evelyn Tucker (Emeritus)
• Wentzel van Huyssteen (Emeritus)
• Joe Watkins (Emeritus)
• Tom Weinandy (Emeritus)
• Members Thoughts on Science, Religion & Human Origins (video)
• Science, Religion, Evolution and Creationism: Primer
• The Evolution of Religious Belief: Seeking Deep Evolutionary Roots
• Laboring for Science, Laboring for Souls:  Obstacles and Approaches to Teaching and Learning Evolution in the Southeastern United States
• Public Event : Religious Audiences and the Topic of Evolution: Lessons from the Classroom (video)
• Evolution and the Anthropocene: Science, Religion, and the Human Future
• Imagining the Human Future: Ethics for the Anthropocene
• Human Evolution and Religion: Questions and Conversations from the Hall of Human Origins
• I Came from Where? Approaching the Science of Human Origins from Religious Perspectives
• Religious Perspectives on the Science of Human Origins
• Submit Your Response to "What Does It Mean To Be Human?"
• Volunteer Opportunities
• Submit Question
• "Shaping Humanity: How Science, Art, and Imagination Help Us Understand Our Origins" (book by John Gurche)
• What Does It Mean To Be Human? (book by Richard Potts and Chris Sloan)
• Bronze Statues
• Reconstructed Faces

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

NPR defends its journalism after senior editor says it has lost the public's trust

David Folkenflik

NPR is defending its journalism and integrity after a senior editor wrote an essay accusing it of losing the public's trust. Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images hide caption

NPR is defending its journalism and integrity after a senior editor wrote an essay accusing it of losing the public's trust.

NPR's top news executive defended its journalism and its commitment to reflecting a diverse array of views on Tuesday after a senior NPR editor wrote a broad critique of how the network has covered some of the most important stories of the age.

"An open-minded spirit no longer exists within NPR, and now, predictably, we don't have an audience that reflects America," writes Uri Berliner.

A strategic emphasis on diversity and inclusion on the basis of race, ethnicity and sexual orientation, promoted by NPR's former CEO, John Lansing, has fed "the absence of viewpoint diversity," Berliner writes.

NPR's chief news executive, Edith Chapin, wrote in a memo to staff Tuesday afternoon that she and the news leadership team strongly reject Berliner's assessment.

"We're proud to stand behind the exceptional work that our desks and shows do to cover a wide range of challenging stories," she wrote. "We believe that inclusion — among our staff, with our sourcing, and in our overall coverage — is critical to telling the nuanced stories of this country and our world."

NPR names tech executive Katherine Maher to lead in turbulent era

She added, "None of our work is above scrutiny or critique. We must have vigorous discussions in the newsroom about how we serve the public as a whole."

A spokesperson for NPR said Chapin, who also serves as the network's chief content officer, would have no further comment.

Praised by NPR's critics

Berliner is a senior editor on NPR's Business Desk. (Disclosure: I, too, am part of the Business Desk, and Berliner has edited many of my past stories. He did not see any version of this article or participate in its preparation before it was posted publicly.)

Berliner's essay , titled "I've Been at NPR for 25 years. Here's How We Lost America's Trust," was published by The Free Press, a website that has welcomed journalists who have concluded that mainstream news outlets have become reflexively liberal.

Berliner writes that as a Subaru-driving, Sarah Lawrence College graduate who "was raised by a lesbian peace activist mother ," he fits the mold of a loyal NPR fan.

Yet Berliner says NPR's news coverage has fallen short on some of the most controversial stories of recent years, from the question of whether former President Donald Trump colluded with Russia in the 2016 election, to the origins of the virus that causes COVID-19, to the significance and provenance of emails leaked from a laptop owned by Hunter Biden weeks before the 2020 election. In addition, he blasted NPR's coverage of the Israel-Hamas conflict.

On each of these stories, Berliner asserts, NPR has suffered from groupthink due to too little diversity of viewpoints in the newsroom.

The essay ricocheted Tuesday around conservative media , with some labeling Berliner a whistleblower . Others picked it up on social media, including Elon Musk, who has lambasted NPR for leaving his social media site, X. (Musk emailed another NPR reporter a link to Berliner's article with a gibe that the reporter was a "quisling" — a World War II reference to someone who collaborates with the enemy.)

When asked for further comment late Tuesday, Berliner declined, saying the essay spoke for itself.

The arguments he raises — and counters — have percolated across U.S. newsrooms in recent years. The #MeToo sexual harassment scandals of 2016 and 2017 forced newsrooms to listen to and heed more junior colleagues. The social justice movement prompted by the killing of George Floyd in 2020 inspired a reckoning in many places. Newsroom leaders often appeared to stand on shaky ground.

Leaders at many newsrooms, including top editors at The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times , lost their jobs. Legendary Washington Post Executive Editor Martin Baron wrote in his memoir that he feared his bonds with the staff were "frayed beyond repair," especially over the degree of self-expression his journalists expected to exert on social media, before he decided to step down in early 2021.

Since then, Baron and others — including leaders of some of these newsrooms — have suggested that the pendulum has swung too far.

Author Interviews

Legendary editor marty baron describes his 'collision of power' with trump and bezos.

New York Times publisher A.G. Sulzberger warned last year against journalists embracing a stance of what he calls "one-side-ism": "where journalists are demonstrating that they're on the side of the righteous."

"I really think that that can create blind spots and echo chambers," he said.

Internal arguments at The Times over the strength of its reporting on accusations that Hamas engaged in sexual assaults as part of a strategy for its Oct. 7 attack on Israel erupted publicly . The paper conducted an investigation to determine the source of a leak over a planned episode of the paper's podcast The Daily on the subject, which months later has not been released. The newsroom guild accused the paper of "targeted interrogation" of journalists of Middle Eastern descent.

Heated pushback in NPR's newsroom

Given Berliner's account of private conversations, several NPR journalists question whether they can now trust him with unguarded assessments about stories in real time. Others express frustration that he had not sought out comment in advance of publication. Berliner acknowledged to me that for this story, he did not seek NPR's approval to publish the piece, nor did he give the network advance notice.

Some of Berliner's NPR colleagues are responding heatedly. Fernando Alfonso, a senior supervising editor for digital news, wrote that he wholeheartedly rejected Berliner's critique of the coverage of the Israel-Hamas conflict, for which NPR's journalists, like their peers, periodically put themselves at risk.

Alfonso also took issue with Berliner's concern over the focus on diversity at NPR.

"As a person of color who has often worked in newsrooms with little to no people who look like me, the efforts NPR has made to diversify its workforce and its sources are unique and appropriate given the news industry's long-standing lack of diversity," Alfonso says. "These efforts should be celebrated and not denigrated as Uri has done."

After this story was first published, Berliner contested Alfonso's characterization, saying his criticism of NPR is about the lack of diversity of viewpoints, not its diversity itself.

"I never criticized NPR's priority of achieving a more diverse workforce in terms of race, ethnicity and sexual orientation. I have not 'denigrated' NPR's newsroom diversity goals," Berliner said. "That's wrong."

Questions of diversity

Under former CEO John Lansing, NPR made increasing diversity, both of its staff and its audience, its "North Star" mission. Berliner says in the essay that NPR failed to consider broader diversity of viewpoint, noting, "In D.C., where NPR is headquartered and many of us live, I found 87 registered Democrats working in editorial positions and zero Republicans."

Berliner cited audience estimates that suggested a concurrent falloff in listening by Republicans. (The number of people listening to NPR broadcasts and terrestrial radio broadly has declined since the start of the pandemic.)

Former NPR vice president for news and ombudsman Jeffrey Dvorkin tweeted , "I know Uri. He's not wrong."

Others questioned Berliner's logic. "This probably gets causality somewhat backward," tweeted Semafor Washington editor Jordan Weissmann . "I'd guess that a lot of NPR listeners who voted for [Mitt] Romney have changed how they identify politically."

Similarly, Nieman Lab founder Joshua Benton suggested the rise of Trump alienated many NPR-appreciating Republicans from the GOP.

In recent years, NPR has greatly enhanced the percentage of people of color in its workforce and its executive ranks. Four out of 10 staffers are people of color; nearly half of NPR's leadership team identifies as Black, Asian or Latino.

"The philosophy is: Do you want to serve all of America and make sure it sounds like all of America, or not?" Lansing, who stepped down last month, says in response to Berliner's piece. "I'd welcome the argument against that."

"On radio, we were really lagging in our representation of an audience that makes us look like what America looks like today," Lansing says. The U.S. looks and sounds a lot different than it did in 1971, when NPR's first show was broadcast, Lansing says.

A network spokesperson says new NPR CEO Katherine Maher supports Chapin and her response to Berliner's critique.

The spokesperson says that Maher "believes that it's a healthy thing for a public service newsroom to engage in rigorous consideration of the needs of our audiences, including where we serve our mission well and where we can serve it better."

Disclosure: This story was reported and written by NPR Media Correspondent David Folkenflik and edited by Deputy Business Editor Emily Kopp and Managing Editor Gerry Holmes. Under NPR's protocol for reporting on itself, no NPR corporate official or news executive reviewed this story before it was posted publicly.

Late night fire destroys barn in North Salem

A fire destroyed a barn in North Salem early Wednesday morning.

Croton Falls Fire Department Chief Jeffrey Daday said the fire broke out just after midnight at a property on Titicus Road. No animals or people were injured but two cars that were parked nearby were also destroyed.

Part of Route 116 that makes up Titicus Road was closed for several hours while several fire departments from northern Westchester and Putnam counties put out the blaze.

No fire hydrants were in the area, so water had to be brought in by tanker trucks.

Daday said the cause of the fire was deemed accidental.