CHAPTER

Evolution of Humans:
Palaeolithic and
1 Mesolithic Cultures

Chapter Contents
Evolution of Humans
Palaeolithic Cultures
Mesolithic Cultures
Summary

EVOLUTIONOF HUMANS
uman evolution and its related aspects have been a topic of much debate among histo
H rians, archaeologists, and anthropologists as well as palaeontologists. Among the earli
Lest of these debates is the issue whether humans were a part of God's readymade
creation or they evolved from earlier species over a long period of time. The notion that humans
were a part of God's creation just like other species and the earth itself emanated from genea
logical calculations based on Biblical sources such as the Old Testament. In the mid-17th cen
tury, relying on this methodology, an Irish Archbishop (James Usser) supported by a leading
Cambridge scientist (Dr John Lightfoot), even provided a definite date and year of Earth's cre
ation, that is, 23 October 4004 BCE. However, the growth of geology and archaeology from the
mid-18th century raised serious doubts over the Biblical chronologies as their research and
findings presented evidence of changes in earth and animal species, including humans, much
before 4004 BCE. By the mid-19th century, the moral binding of accepting Biblical explanation of
human creation was loosened in the light of several findings of tools and bones (of both humans
and animals) which put human existence tens of thousands of years in distant past. Findings of
the fossils of Neanderthal man (the first archaic human ancestor) from Dusseldorf in Germany
(1856) and stone tools from the gravels of the Somme River in Northern France (1859) further
strengthened the arguments in the favour of evolution of humans. The publication of Charles
Darwin's On the Origin of Species (1859) and later The Descent of Man (1871) dealt a severe
blow to the conservative scientists (the creationists) by providing a theory of natural selection
 Ancient and Medieval World

of species and human evolution. By the end of the 19th century, a series of events related to new
findings not only provided a scientific basis for human evolution but also scientific tools to
study the evolutionary process of humans.
Humans are considered a part of the group of organisms that have evolved on the planet
earth since about 3,500 million years ago (mya). But unlike other organisms, humans have dis
played better adaptability in the face of several climatic changes that the earth has been wit
nessing since its formation about 4,500 mya. Better adaptability of the human species has been
attributed to certain physiological features but more importantly acquisition of culture or adap
tive strategies unavailable to other species. This effectively means that both biological and
cultural aspects are closely associated with the human evolutionary process. Bipedalism (abil
ity to walk erect on two feet) and a large brain size are considered as the two fundamental
physiological changes in the course of human evolution. Whereas ability to make tools, social
interactions and acquisition of language fall in the category of prominent cultural traits dis
played by the early humans. However, we must keep in mind that biological and cultural
aspects of human evolution were not isolated but interrelated processes, each influencing the
other at crucial stages of this process. Another crucial determinant in the evolutionary process
of humans was the climatic factor that had a bearing on both biological and cultural aspects
and so needs to be analysed first.

Environment and Human Evolution

The environmental changes that occurred in different periods of earth's history had a profound
impact on the emergence and extinction of several organisms. These climatic changes, particu
larly long cycles of cold and warm climates, that occurred on a millennial scale while on the
one hand allowed migration from one continent to the other, it also forced these organisms to
adjust constantly to unusual weather conditions as well as drought and floods. Only organisms
with better adaptability could survive these climatic changes that became more frequent
around the time of the origin of human species.
The geologists, on the basis of environmental conditions prevailing during the course of the
evolution of earth, have divided the history of earth into several 'eons', 'eras' and its smaller
divisions periods' and 'epochs' in a chronological sequence (see Table 1.1). From the point of
view of human evolution, the Cenozoic era (also known as the age of mammals) is of prime
concern to us. The Cenozoic era began about 65 mya when the landmasses of the earth assumed
its present form and primates began to emerge. The ternm 'primate' has been used to classify
certain mammals having special physiological characteristics such as vertebrae (backbone in
the column of discs) and females possessing mammary glands to feed milk to their off springs.
The Cenozoic era has been further divided into 'tertiary' and 'quaternary' periods each repre
senting several epochs. The tertiary period includes ive epochsPaleocene, Eocene,
Oligocene, Miocene and Pliocene. The quaternary has been divided into two epochs
Pleistocene and Holocene.

The lce Age

For any study related to the emergence of humans, the Pleistocene epoch (1.6 mya until 11,000
years ago) is regarded as of supreme importance. The Pleistocene period has been termed as the
 Evolution of Humans

TABLE 1.1 Geological Divisions of the Earth from the Evolution of Species
EON ERA Period Epoch Developments
Holocene Growth of human civilisation until
11,000 years ago present day
Quaternary
(The age of until today
humanity) Pleistocene Evolution of human species
1.6 mya until (Last Ice Age) (Homo Erectus, Homo sapiens,
today 1.6 mya until Homo sapiens sapiens)
11,000 years ago Extinction of large mammals
Pliocene Emergence of early hominid
P Cenozoie 5-1.6 mya (Australopithecines)
(The age of And first homo species (Homno
A mammals) habilis)
65 mya " Emergence of moderm forms of
whales
until today
R Miocene Emergence of horses, dogs and
Tertiary
65-1.6 mya 23 5 mya,. bears; emergence of apes
Oligocene Extinction of old and emergence of
I
35-23 mya new mammals

C
Eocene Mammals expand, emergence of
(540 mya until 56-35 mnya rodents and primitive whales
present day) Paleocene Emergence of large Mammals and
65-56 mya primitive primates (Prosimii)
Upper Continents assume modern day
98-65 mnya form, extinction of dinosaurs
Cretaceous
Lower Dinosaurs flourish, first crocodiles
Mesozoic 146-65 mya
(The age of
146-98 mya and earliest known butterflies,
snakes, ant, bees emerge
reptiles)
248 65 mya Jurassie Age of giant dinosaurs, evolution of
208-146 mya birds and flowering plants
Triassic Emergence of dinosaurs and
248-208 mya mammals, extinction of amphibians
Paleozoic Age of amphibians and reptiles,
540-248 emergence of winged insects,
mya formation of coral reefs
 Ancient and Medieval World

"age of humanity' because it was during this geological time that the process of humarn evolution
not only gathered momentum but the humans also populated most of the areas of the world.
From the point of view of the environment, this period marked the climax of the glacial phase
of earth's history that began about 35 mya. Prior to the Pleistocene phase, the world climate had
become much cooler, bringing down the sea level and leading to formation of glaciers. The
period after 2.5 mya was the phase of intense glaciation until about 1.64 mya when the earth
entered into a phase of frequent climatic changes. These changes (from 1.64 mya onwards)
varied between warm (interglacial) to extremely cold (glacial) phases in frequent intervals. It
has been estimated that in the last 800,000 years there have been nine glacial periods, each last
ing about 90,000-100,000 years with brief phases (lasting between 20,000-40,000 years) of inter
glacial. This is the reason why the Pleistocene epoch is also called as the Great Ice Age'.
This constant fluctuation between warmer and extremely cold conditions had profound
impact on the plant and animal life on the earth. The period of glaciation was marked by lower
ing of the sea levels and the interglacial by their corresponding rise. These climatic variations
besides affecting the shape of landmasses also brought about significant changes in flora and
fauna. For example, in the temperate zones, the glacial phase resulted in the decline of forests
and growth of open grasslands, and in the animal world, this resulted in the replacement of
forest species (sylvan species) with those who were more suited to tundra (areas with no veg
etation) or steppe (grasslands). Alternatively, during the interglacial period, the spread of rain
forests brought about converse floral and faunal changes. Prior to the Pleistocene period
(between 4 mya and 2 mnya), the climate was more stable and the African savanna region,
where humans are supposed to have emerged, was the homeland of substantial number of
mammals both large and small. But the frequent climatic changes starting from the Pleistocene
period, bringing with it resultant floral and faunal changes, meant that human species had to
continuously adapt themselves while competing with other animal species for the same
reserve of food resources for his subsistence. Palaeontologists (those who study fossils)
inform us that as many as 113 mammal species appeared on earth during the last 3 million
years. In the face of such a competition, the adaptive strategy of early humans constitutes what
is knowm as 'culture'.
The adaptive strategy of the humans was not sufficient in itself to compete with other animal
species. The climatic changes went parallel with anatomical changes in various organisms,
including humans, to bring it in balance with the environment. Variations among the species,
caused by continuous and consistent mutation, was a part of the process of natural selection.
These mutations sonmetimes provide advantage to certain species, particularly during ecological
transitions. Among the humans, these physiological changes relate to bipedalism, an increased
brain size and related changes that facilitated toolmaking which in turn enabled humans to
broaden their diet (including meat eating), putting them in an advantageous position over other
terrestrial (those who exploit resources on land) primates. Thus, it can be argued that environ
ment not only facilitated natural selection of the human species but also shaped their adaptive
strategy, which had a decisive impact on the human evolutionary process.

Origin of Human-like Species

As mentioned earlier, humans belonged to the order of primates that emerged around 69 mya.
Primates have been divided into two subordersProsimii, which include lemurs, tarsiers,
 Evolution of Humans

lorises and tree shrews, as well as species that fall in the category of 'pre-monkey' and
Anthropoidea/Anthropoids, which include monkeys, apes and humans. While prosimians are
called primitive primates, Anthropoids are considered as advanced primates. The Prosimii spe
cies emerged around 69 mya, and in present times are restricted to parts of Africa, Southeast
Asia and Madagascar. Prosimians are mainly suited to arboreal habitat (tree living) which has
been made possible due to features such as their prehensile hands and feet, extensive use of
forelimbs and stereoscopic vision (ability to see three-dimensionally due to binocular dispari
ties). On the other hand, except monkeys, anatomical features of all other Anthropoids make
them suitable for terrestrial habitat (living on land).
Anthropoidea or advanced primates are said to have separated from Prosimii around 40 mya
with the evolution of monkeys. The suborder Anthropoidea is further divided into
Cercopithecoidea (Old World monkeys), Ceboidea (New World monkeys) and Hominoidea
(apes and humans). Hominoidea separated from monkeys around 30 mya and further branched
into Pongidae (apes including chimpanzees, gorillas, gibbon and orangutans) and Hominidae
(modern humans and all extinct earlier human subspecies and their ancestors). It is the
Hominoidea group with which we shall be principally concerned in the process of our analysis
of human evolution. However, a brief description of the point of divergence between monkeys
and apes and that between non-human primates (apes) and human-like species is necessary to
understarnd the crucial stages in the evolution of genus homo.
It is generally believed that apes diverged from monkeys in the Miocene epoch (about
23 mya) and also that the place of divergence was Africa. But the earliest evidence of this diver
gence goes back to Oligocene period (about 30 mya) with the emergence of a small ape called
Aegyptopithecus in the Nile valley in Egypt which had a small brain but its visual capabilities
were better than earlier primates, and its bones resembled those primates that emerged in East
Africa from about 23 mya. A large number of primates emerged in Africa from 23 mya to 20 mya,
and it is believed that the number of ape species in Africa was larger than that of the monkeys.
It would be worthwhile to mention here that while monkeys are exclusively adapted to tree
living due to their small size, long and highly developed forelimbs, better vision and ability to
jump with precision from one tree to the other, the modern apes are adapted to living on the
ground due to their large size, longer hind limbs in comparison to forelimbs, large canine teeth
and powerful body structure, though they can exploit food resources of the trees as well.
However, the earliest known ape that emerged in Africa around 20 mya, called Proconsul had
ape-like teeth but had body like monkeys and could easily move from the branch of one tree to
the other.
It is largely accepted by the geologists that around 17 mya world climates became cooler,
mountain ranges, such as the Alps, were formed and a continental drift linked Africa and Arabia
with Europe and Asia, which were earlier separated by sea. This enabled animal species of
these regions to come into contact with each other through the land bridges. This not only cre
ated new habitats for these species but the intermixing of species opened up new path of evolu
tion too. It is believed that an ape named Dryopithecus, dating about 20 mya, moved to Asia and
around l4 mya, separated into several species, one of them having evolved into Ramapithecus,
known as the Asian ape. Around the same timne, a semi-terrestrial, hard fruit and grass-seed
eating and knuckle-walking ape nanmed Kenyapithecus flourished in Eastern Africa. For some
time, it was believed that hominids have evolved from Asian apes around 14 mya. But new
dating methods (for different dating methods, see Box 1) involving molecular biology from the
1960s onwards completely changed this belief. The DNA analysis of the albumin protein
 6 Ancient and Medieval World

substances found in primate blood revealed a different path of human evolution. The analysis
is based on the scientific assumption that albumin protein in the primates changes at a constant
rate. Thus, the time of separation of two primates (the existing ones) can be calculated on the
basis of difference between the albumins of a pair of primates. This analysis has suggested that
humans are closer to apes than monkeys. A further refining of this analysis led to further sug
gestions that monkeys and apes separated around 25 mya, the bigger apes from smaller apes
around 17 mya, gorillas from chimpanzees around 8 mya and chimpanzees from humans around
7 mya. The molecular evidence thus shows that Chimpanzees are closest to our human ances
tors. Another significant revelation was that humans are much closer to African apes than to
Asian apes. Since this chronology put forward by the molecular biologists is largely accepted,
it is now a firm belief that hominids emerged first in Africa.
One of the most important aspects of divergence between apes and hominids is the latter's
ability to walk straight on two feet, that is, bipedalism. It is generally believed that bipedalism
developed over a long period of time possibly as a result of spending more time exploiting food
resources on the ground in a savanna type of climate, which was marked by reduction of forests
and emergence of open grasslands interspersed with trees. But exactly at what point hominids
developed bipedalism is a matter of intense debate. This divergence of opinion is largely due to
complete lack of fossil (imprints of plants and animals on rocks formed during the process of
hardening of rocks) records between 8 and 4 mya. However, the later fossil evidences and inputs
from molecular biological studies have led scholars to reach the conclusion that bipedalism
among early hominids started around7 mya. It was around this time that the Hominidae group
split into two further divisions forming two different lineages, that is, ancestors of modern chim
panzees and modern humans. The ancestors of modern humans have been further divided into
two categories: (a) Australopithecus/Australopithecines (Southern Ape) and (b) Homo.
The process of evolution of hominid species is now considered as more complex than hith
erto believed. A number of bipedal ape-like hominids evolved between 7 and 4 mya. One of the
earliest among these, according to the available fossil evidence, was Ardipithecus ramidus
(named so as to distinguish them from the later Australopithecus species). The fossils of this
species have been found from the Awash region in Ethiopia (East Africa) and are dated 4.5 mya.
Although it stood upright, it had ape-like skull resembling that of the chimpanzees.
Australopithecus anamensis specie, fossils of which have been found in the Anam Lake in
Turkana (East Africa) and is dated 4.2 mya, had a mix of ape and human-like anatomy. Although
it was fully bipedal, it had short legs and was not as efficient a walker as later hominids. With
the fossil findings of several bipedal Australopithecus species from East and South Africa dated
between 3.75 mya and 1 mya, it was firmly established that Australopithecus represented the
final stage of bipedalism. One of the lines of Australopithecus evolved into Homo species
around 2.5 mya.
Based on the fossil evidence of fully bipedal Australopithecus species, which have been
discovered so far, Australopithecus afarensis ("Southern Ape of Afar') is considered as the
oldest of this order. Fossils of this species have been found from Hadar in the Afar region of
Ethiopia (East Africa) and Laetoliin Northern Tanzania (South Africa). These fossils, based on
potassium-argon dating method (for various fossil dating methods, see Box 1.1), have been
dated between 3.75 mya and3 mya. Acomplete skeleton of female qfarensis specie, nicknamed
'Lucy' was found at Hadar. While Lucy' was a small size (1 to 1.2meters) specie, other fossils
of the same species found from this region are much larger in size. All of them were bipedal
which are confirmed by fossils and fossil footprints found at Laetoli. The brain size of afarensis
 Evolution of Humans

BOX 1.1 Dating Methods for Prehistoric Findings

1. Potassium-argon dating: It is a radiometric method applied on volcanic rocks, which is used to
date early prehistory. It is based on the theory that volcanic rocks contain radioactive potassium-40,
which constantly decays and tums into an inert gas, argon-40. For every l00 potassium atoms that
decay, 11 per cent tum into argon gas that escapes from the rock when it is in a molten state. As
volcanic rocks cool down and become hard, the argon40 concentration drops zero and gets
trapped in the rocks but potassium decay continues. With the help of a spectrometer, it is possible
to measure the concentration of argon-40 trapped since the formation of volcanic rocks. Human
tools found along with lava ash in volcanically active areas can thus be dated. Using this method,
fossil existing between 2.6 billion years ago to about 100,000 years ago can be dated. Findings at
Olduvai Gorge and other sites in Eastern Turkana in Kenya have been dated using this method.
2. Radiocarbon dating: Among the radioisotopic dating methods, radiocarbon dating technique
is the most well-known. It is based on the theory that sun's radiation converts a small amount
of atmospheric nitrogen into radioactive carbon-14 (C-14) that is absorbed by the living organ
isms at a constant rate so that the percentage of radioactive C-14 in them equals that in the
atmosphere. Upon the death of an organism, the C-14 present in the cells of these organisms
disintegrates back as nitrogen at a known rate. Thus, the date of the death of the living organism
can be established by measuring the amount of C-14 left in the sample discovered. Since the
dates arrived at through this method is prone to eror due to alterations in the solar activity
affecting the concentration of radiocarbon, scientists have recalibrated them to get correct
dates using radiocarbon dated tree rings. Antiquity of organic materials such as charcoal, shell,
wood, hair, and so on can be established through this method. But using this method, one can
get the reliable dates only up until 50,000 years ago as, beyond this period, the radioactive
carbon left in the organisms is too little to be measured.
3. Dendrochronology (tree-ring dating): This method is used to date prehistoric sites where
woods of trees such as pines and oaks were used by humans as beams of their dwellings and for
other purposes. These trees have rings that are fomed during the early growth of the trees and are
a common site. The concentric rings keep on increasing with each passing year and maintain almost
similar structure, depending upon temperature, humidity and age of the trees. For the purpose of
dating, each of these ring structures is plotted against the year of their formation calculated from
the outermost ring dated to the year of its cutting. The pre-historic sample is compared for its ring
structures with already identified structure to estimate its date. This method has proved to be quite
effective in dating the sites of the Mediterranean region and Westem Europe. As mentioned earlier,
this technique has also proved quite efficient in recalibrating radiocarbon dates. Using this method,
sites existing between 10,000 years ago and present times can be dated with some accuracy.
4. Obsidian hydration: It is a geochemical method of determining the age of an artefact made of
obsidian. Obsidian is a glassy rock, also sometimes referred to as volcanic glass. This was used
by humans in early prehistory as raw materials to make variety of sharp tools such as projectile
points, knives and cutting tools. When obsidian glass is broken, it absorbs water from the envi
ronment forming a hydration layer on the exposed parts. The rate of hydration formation can
be measured in the laboratory. The thickness of hydration layer on the available sample can be
converted into years, using the data on rate of hydration. The principle behind this method
longer the artefact surface has been exposed, thicker the hydration band will be. Through this
method, dates of artefacts in existence between 1,000,000 years ago until about just the begin
ning of Christian era can be established. Though an inexpensive method, it has limited applica
bility as its efficacy is limited to artefacts made of obsidian.
Besides the dating methods mentioned in this box, there are several others such as uranium
thorium, thermoluminescence, archaeomagnetic dating, and so on, but they do not have univer
sal application.
 Ancient and Medieval World

approximated that of a chimnpanzee, that is, 410 cc (cubic centimetre). Its lower limbs, though
showing bipedalism, were smaller than their upper limbs. also had ape-like face, forward
thrusting jaws, brow ridges, and although it might have foraged for plant foods including hard
and fibrous fruits, it spent larger time on the trees. The fossil evidence also suggests that
females, like humans, had narrower birth canal (a direct result of bipedalism) indicating early
birth of the newborm. Australopithecus afarensis was thus, to use Brian Fagan's (2010) termi
nology, an 'anatomic mosaic' of apes and humans. It became extinct around 3 mya.
It is generally believed that around 3 mya the descendants of afarensis split into two lines,
one of which led to the evolution of Homo. One line of descent led to the evolution of
Australopithecus africanus ("Southern Ape of Africa'), the fossils of which were found by
Raymond Dart in 1924 mostly from South Africa. A. africanus, supposed to have lived between
3-1 mya, was a small gracile (slender) creature that walked upright. It had strong neck muscles
and its brain size (450 cc) was not much different from the apes but had a delicate skull and a
different brain structure than that of the apes. Its gracile bones (like humans which ensures
easy movability) and existence of what has been identified as 'area 10' in the brain, which plays
a major role in decision-making, advance planning and initiative, brings them closer to the line
of Homo than other later Australopithecines species.
Another line of descent from A. afarensis led to the evolution of robust Australopithecines
species in the form of Australopithecus robustus and Australopithecus boisei. A. obustus
('Robust Southern Ape') also known as paranthropus ('beside man') was larger and strongly
built species than Africanus. It is supposed to have lived between 2.5-1.5 mya and fossil find
ings suggest that it inhabited both Eastern and Southern Africa. It was much taller (averaging
about 5.3 feet) and heavier (average weight being 50 kg) with a bigger brain of 500 cc and a flat
ter skul. It had large teeth specialised for chewing coarse and fibrous plant foods as well as
hard seeds. The skull comparison has led some scholars to suggest that it was ancestral to
modern Gorilla. A. Boisei (Boise Southern Ape'), named after founder of its fossils, Charles
Boise, also known as zinzanthropus (East Africa Man), was a massive version of robustus. Its
height ranged between 5.3-5.8 feet and the weight between 60-80 kg. It lived between 2.5-1 mya
and inhabited Tanzania (South Africa) where its fossils have been found in Olduvai Gorge as
well as East Africa with its fossils having been found in Omo valley near West Turkana in Kenya.
It had a slightly bigger brain than robustus measuring 550 cc. It walked up right yet it was built
on the lines of a gorilla, and like them, males were much taller than females. This is called
sexual dimorphism that was also found among early Homo species. It had a large skull with
brow ridges, flatter face and small canine teeth but immense molars and premolars. Crude
stone tools found along with the bones of this species led few scholars to suggest that it may
have been the earliest toolmaker. But others have rejected this notion on the ground that with
a small brain size A. Boisei was not capable of designing crude tools that require certain
amount of imagination and planning.
Recently discovered Australopithecine species named Australopithecus garhi (garhi',
meaning surprise in the local dialect) from Awash desert of Ethiopia in East Africa has been
classified neither in gracile nor robust category. Dating about 2.5 mya, this species stood about
4.1 feet and had a brain size of 500 cc and had several features like that of a chimpanzee with
long lower limbs like humans and upper limbs like an ape. Butchered animal bones near the
fossil bones of garhi have led to suggestions that they were not only meat eaters but were also
efficient users of stone tools. Brian Fagan (2010) has suggested that a high protein diet in the
form of meat may have led to an increase in the brain size seen among early hominids. This also
 Evolution of Humans

must be seen in the background of the fact that major changes in the hominid skull and face
occurred after 2.5 mya, many of which were a direct outcome of brain enlargement. It is also
possible that increasing use of stone tools to scavenge meat from the dead animals may have
played an important role in this crucial stage of human evolution. Yet, it has not been conclu
sively established that A. garhi directly led to the evolution of first human.

Homo Species
All hominids other than Australopithecines have been classified under the single order Homo'.
The early species of genus homo is said to have evolved either from the more gracile forms of
Australopithecines such as A. africanus or those Australopithecine species displaying more
human characteristics such as A. garhi. Whatever the case may be, the homo species are dis
tinguished by their larger brain size, ability to acquire language, an opposite thumb facilitating
precision grip, small and crowded teeth, their ability to manufacture (not simply use) stone
tools and better social interaction. The homo group has been divided into four major subgroups,
that is, Homo habilis, Homo erectus, Homo sapiens and Homo sapiens sapiens (modern man).
These species evolved between 2.5 mya and 40,000 years ago. But even among these, bifurca
tion sometimes is made between H. habilis on the one hand and later Homo species on the
other. The rationale behind this is the similarity between Australopithecines and. habilis due
to a combination of terrestrial bipedalism and expert tree climbing and arboreal adaptation. A
low body mass, similar tooth design and sexual dimorphism among male and female species are
the other criteria. Other homo species have been placed in separate category based on shared
characteristics of larger body mass, a more human-like physique, larger brain size, suitability
with terrestrial living and limited ability to move around trees and tooth and jaw design being
more akin to that of modern humans.

Homo Habilis
All early homo species evolving from about 2.5 mya have been conveniently placed in the cat
egory of [Link] or Handy Man'. The earliest fossil of habilis was found in 1960 by Louis and
Mary Leakey at Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania (East Africa). Although most of the fossils of habilis
species have been found in East Africa but few fossils of the same species have also been recov
ered from South Africa and Southeast Asia where the terms Telanthropus and Meganthropus
have been used for the H. habilis species.
As pointed out earlier, H. habilis had many similarities with the Australopithecines species
as, besides other similarities, both weighed about 40 kg (average weight) and had a similar aver
age height of about 4.3 feet. Researches have suggested that both were bipedal and primarily
fruit eaters too. But the major difference lied in the cranial capacity and its structures as well
as the facial features. H. habilis had a larger brain with an average cranial capacity of 650 cc in
comparison to the Australopithecines species that had average cranial capacity of 450-500 cc.
The habilis head was also higher and rounder had a smaller jaw and a less protruding face.
Although it had a powerful grasping hand like chimpanzees, existence of an ape-like thumb
permitted both powerful gripping as well as manipulation of fine objects, which helped them
manufacture tools even though found technologically crude. Another major evolutionary
S10 Ancient and Medieval Worid

advantage that the habilis had over Australopithecines was the existence of speech producing
and control area termed as 'Brocas area' in the brain which allowed this species to produce a
variety of sounds. Though H. habilis is believed to be capable of taking out limited sounds only
yet this biological feature subsequently enabled the growth of articulate speech among the later
Homo species. Sexual dimorphism, however, was only slightly reduced among the habilis
species.
Apart from few crucial physiological differences, the other and more important aspects of
divergence that distinguished H. habilis from earlier hominids was the acquisition of culture,
represented chiefly, among other things, by their ability to manufacture tools. Adetailed discus
sion on the cultural achievements of H. habilis and the subsequent Homo species would be
taken up later in the chapter but here it would suffice to say that the ability to manufacture tools
and display of rudimentary form of social organisation proved to be an extremely efficient
adaptive strategy. These enabled habilis not only compete better with other animal species
while exploiting limited natural food resources but also enabled later Homo species to move
out of Africa and settle in extreme climatic conditions in different parts of the old world.
Large number of crude tools made from pebbles along with hominid and animal bones was
found at Olduvai Gorge (Tanzania) dated around 2 mya, making it the earliest designated human
culture, that is, the Oldowan culture. The artefacts found during excavations at Olduvai
between 1935 and 1959 by a team led by Louis Leakey suggests that H. habilis used chipped
stones to shape them into crude choppers, scrapers, burins and hammer stones. They used
these tools to cut, scrape or dig. The tool marks on the animal bones found from the same site
suggests that meat was a part of regular diet of habilis, distinct from exclusively vegetable/
plant diet of the apes. However, the small size and crudeness of the tools found at Olduvai has
led scholars to conclude that H. habilis was not an expert hunter but scavenged meat and bone
marrow from animal carcasses killed by other carnivores. Since the tools were not standardised
nor made with a predetermined design, it has been argued that habilis did not possess an
articulate speech. The evidence of rudimentary social organisation and cooperation among the
habilis species comes from Olduvai itself. A huge assemblage of animal bones and stone tools
have been found here and a careful analysis of these have led scholars to conclude that animal
carcasses were brought to this place from a distance and butchered for meat, and extraction of
bone marrow with the help of variety of tools that were also stored here. It has been argued, on
the basis of primitive tools and primitive language that habilis possessed, that they were not
big game hunters, but the findings of stone balls at Olduvai do indicate hunting of small animals
such as antelopes by them. With these cultural traits, the habilis species was not only able
adapt to the savanna-type environmental conditions of East Africa but also compete better with
contemporary animal species. H. habilis became extinct around 1.5 mya, paving way for the
evolution of much advanced Homo species.

Homo Ergaster and Homo Erectus

Based on the recent discoveries and a more scientific analysis, scholars argue that possibly
there were five to six hominid species along with H. habilis in existence before the beginning
of the Pleistocene period (1.64 mya). Connection of these with habilis is unquestionable, but
the evidence from Koobi Fora in Kenya (East Africa) of the coexistence of H. habilis (latest
fossil having been dated to 1.44 mya) and H. erectus (which emerged around 1.64 mya) have
 Evolution of Humans

raised doubts about the belief that the latter directly evolved from the former. A species named
H. ergaster (working man') emerged in East Africa and is said to have flourished between
1.8mya and 1.4 mya. The fossil of this species (in the form of a complete skeleton of a boy) was
discovered in 1984 by Richard Leakey and others from Nariokotome near Lake Turkana (there
fore named "Turkana boy' or Nariokotome boy') in Kenya dated about 1.6 mya. A careful analy
sis of the fossil has suggested that it was a powerfully built human with massive brow ridges,
large face with a low skull, which accommodated a larger brain than habilis, averaging about
800 cc. More importantly, it had larger legs and shorter arms suggesting an exclusively terres
trial living, and their narrower hips enabled them to run faster over long distance, which was
crucial for hunting and scavenging.
Tools found near the skeletal remains of H. ergaster suggest that they made such tools as
hand axe and cleavers which is considered as advancement over the crude tools fashioned by
H. habilis. The tools belong to the Acheulean industry that fully developed during the time of
H. erectus. H. ergaster is also known to have used natural fire, supposedly for protection
against cold and carnivores as well as for cooking. Sexual dimorphism diminished (estimated
to be 20 per cent) among the ergaster and a narrOwer birth canal among the females meant that
newborn was born early and was heavily dependent on the mother for its initial physiological
growth. From the present day experiences of modern humans, it can be assumed that this must
have increased the bond between mother and the child. While few scholars tend to put
H. ergaster and H. erectus in the same category, others consider ergaster an altogether differ
ent species. But recent researches do find a link between the two species and suggest that
ergaster was the direct ancestor of erectus.
Homo erectus (Upright man') emerged with the beginning of Pleistocene period, though the
earliest erectus fossil has been dated 1.7 mya. During this time, great mountain chains such as
Alps and Himalayas were formed, landmasses were raised and new species of animals such as
horses, wild cattle, elephants, camels and so on came into evolution. H. erectus emerged in
Africa and then radiated to Asia and Europe. In Africa, the earliest specimen of H. erectus has
been discovered from Eastern Turkana (Kenya) and is dated 1.75 mya. In Asia, the erectus fos
sils have been found from Trinil beds on the Solo River in Northeastern Java (ndonesia) by a
Dutch man E. Dubois. The fossil was named Pithecanthropus erectus ('upright ape man' or Java
man') and is dated about 700,000 years ago. Another significant erectus fossil discovery in Asia
was in Zhoukoudian (formerly Choukoutien) caves near Beijing (formerly Peking). The fossil
was named sinanthropus (Peking man') and is dated between 500,000-250,000 years ago. In
Europe, erectus fossils have been found spread over Spain, France, Germany, England and
Hungary, dated between l mya and 400,000 years ago. Their radiation suggests that H. erectus
species were adapted to different environmental conditions, from tropical savanna in East
Africa to forested parts of Indonesia, temperate climates in North Africa and Europe and the
extreme cold conditions of China and Northerm Europe. Such a wide distribution brought about
physical variations among the different erectus species. The erectus ability to adapt in these
diverse climatic conditions arose from some significant physiological changes (since H. habilis)
and acquisition of crucial cultural traits.
Homo erectus possessed a bigger brain (average cranial capacity being 1,000cc) and a bigger
body than habilis. While the average height of erectus species was between 5-6 feet, its weight
ranged between 40-75 kg and resembled a strongly built version of H. habilis. Its skull was long
and low with a bony bump behind, a sloping forehead, thick brow ridges, big projecting jaws,
smaller teeth than habilis and strong neck muscles at the back of the neck, which joined the
 Ancient and Medieval World

rear bump of the head stopping the head from sagging forward particularly while running. But
perhaps even more significant than these physiological features was the well-developed Broca's
area and more advanced vocal tract facilitating articulate speech which had significant social
and economic consequences for further human evolution.
The ability of the erectus species to colonise different habitats and climates largely resulted
from an improved tool technology, big game hunting, efficient use of fire and improved building
methods that put them much ahead of former hominids. Their tool culture, broadly termed as
Acheulean culture, based on the findings of large number of erectus tools at St. Acheul in
Northern France, was a marked improvement over habilis tools. The most prominent tool of
erectus species was the hand axe, which was a multipurpose hunting and meat processing tool.
They also fashioned a wide range of flake tools and choppers. Unlike habilis tools, these were
standardised (made on a similar pattern) suggesting an articulate speech necessary to pass on
the technology to the same or the next generation. A well-developed speech also helped the
erectus species in better cooperation, enabling them to hunt big animals such as horses, rhinoc
eros, boars, bisons and so on. The opportunistic use of fire by erectus assured not only protec
tion against extreme cold climates and carnivores but also enabled them to add to their diet
foods that were uneatable (when raw) until now. An improved communication skill, besides
facilitating big game hunting, also helped in gathering activities, storage of food as well as shel
ter building activities. Such significant advances achieved by the erectus species indicate that
cultural attributes became a major determining factor in the future human evolution. Homo
erectus became extinct around 400,000 years ago and prepared way for the evolution of more
advanced human species termed Homo sapiens.

Homo Sapiens
Homo sapiens (wise man') definitely branched out of H. erectus line of descent but there is no
unanimity among scholars regarding the time period of this transition. While few have consid
ered the period of transition about 400,000 years ago, others have given a much later time period
of 200,000 years ago. The earliest fossils of archaic H. sapiens, found from Atapuerca in Spain,
have been dated 300,000 years ago and are considered as intermediate between H. erectus and
Neanderthals to distinguish them from modern humans or H. sapiens sapiens. In view of the
limited fossil evidence, our knowledge about H. sapiens is largely dependent on the fossil
records related to Neanderthal species and cultural developments associated with them.
The Neanderthals (Homo neanderthalensis) emerged during 135,000-125,000 year ago.
Fossils of this species have been found mainly in Europe and Eurasia, the earliest being the
deposits at Neander valley (hence the name Neanderthals; thal' or tal' means valley in German)
near Dusseldorf in West Germany. Neanderthal fossils have also been found from other parts of
Europe, such as France, Yugoslavia, Italy, Belgium, Britain, Spain and Czechoslovakia, and in
Russia as well as in Southwest Asia, Africa and Central Asia. Since these fossils belong to dif
ferent time periods of the existence of Neanderthal during 135,000-35,000 years ago and since
the later fossils suggest anatomical variations in the same species, therefore a distinction has
been made between archaic and advanced Neanderthals. Neanderthals were robustly built
humans with an average height of 5.5 feet and weight of about 70 kg. They had a large, thick and
long skull with a bigger brain than that of modern humans averaging about 1,500 cc. They had
a sloping forehead with brow ridges, distinct cheekbones, a large nose, either flat or bulbous,
 Evolution of Humans

and chinless projecting jaws. These features termed as 'classical' however were mainly con
fined to Westerm Europe, particularly in Dordogne area of Southwest France, whereas later
Neanderthal fossils found from Shanidar caves in Iraq and Mount Carmel and Qafzeh caves in
Israel show considerable variation.
Although a little archaic than modern humans, Neanderthals possessed many cultural traits
akin to the modern humans which the earlier Homo species were incapable of. As the
Neanderthals inhabited the earth during last phase of the Ice Age, their reliance on meat
increased in order to survive the harsh winter climates. Their short and stocky body is also con
sidered as having adapted to winter climates. Their tool culture, known as Mousterian culture
(from the finds at Le Moustier rock shelter in Southwest France), was an innprovement over the
Acheulean chopper and handaxe industries. Use of a variety of tools from flakes made
Neanderthals an expert and opportunistic hunter. Animal bones found near their habitation
areas (cave, rock shelters and open camps) suggest that they killed such large animals as bison,
cave bears, horses, reindeer, wild cattle and other woolly mammoths. They also caught birds by
using snares and fish with the help of composite tools (tools made of more than one component,
e.g., a point, a shaft and a binding to secure the head to the shaft to make it a spear). It is need
less to mention here that such diverse hunting activities required careful planning as well as
greater cooperation than even before.
Another significant cultural aspect attributed to Neanderthal species is their ability to make
fire by striking sparks from iron pyrites. This was even more significant than the use of natural
fire by the erectus species as they could now light fire instead of making opportunistic use of
the natural forest fire. The choice of their settlement-caves, rock shelters and open
encampments-enabled them not only to survive in diferent climatic conditions but also to
exploit diverse economic resources offered by nature due to varying climatic conditions of the
last Ice Age. Neanderthals are also said to have possessed abstract thoughts like the notion of
life after death' as reflected in the careful burial of the dead along with grave goods such as
stone tools, stone pillows, flowers and roasted joints of meat. Earliest signs of religious beliefs
and rituals, art form (although debatable) and social awareness (like compassion) is also seen
as a part of the cultural practices of the Neanderthals. A further elaboration of these aspects of
Neanderthal existence in the next section on Palaeolithic cultures would make it clear that
what is termed as 'culture' became more visible and more significant than biological features in
the further human evolutionary process. Regarding language and speech capabilities of the
Neanderthals, however, it has been argued by few scholars like Brian Fagan (2010) and others
that they did not possess a well-developed language. Basis of this argument is the fact that the
Neanderthal culture remained unchanged throughout the period of their existence whereas
language, by promoting exchange of ideas and a complex thought process, becomes a major
catalytic force for change.
The Neanderthals became extinct about 30,000 years ago. The reason behind extinction of
Neanderthals and emergence of fully modern human is an issue of much debate among the
scholars. The evidences from the Western Europe have indicated that Neanderthals disap
peared soon after the arrival of the first species of H. sapiens sapiens whereas those from West
Asia suggest that they disappeared after a long period of cohabitation with latter. This has led
to belief among some that Neanderthals were wiped out by the emergent fully modern man who
had evolved somewhere else, while others point out that either they interbred with other con
temporary H. sapiens species or they themselves evolved into H. sapiens sapiens. But despite
this debate, there is near unanimity among the scholars on two important aspects. First, the
 e
Ancient and Mealeva IY
World

disappearance of Neanderthals was not sudden, and second, that they definitely contributed a
small share in the gene pool of modern humans.

Homo Sapiens Sapiens

As indicated before, the emergence of H. sapiens sapiens (fully modern humans') has been a
highly debatable issue among the paleoanthropologists (those engaged in the study of human
origin). The present debate can be classified into three major hypotheses: (a) 'Out of Africa' or
'African Origin' or Total Replacement model, (b) 'Multiregional Evolution' or 'continuity'
model and (c) 'Intermediate' or 'Assimilation' model. These theories have developed at different
points of time depending upon the quantity and quality of fossil records found from Europe,
Asia and Africa. Recent archaeological discoveries supplemented by a more scientific study
involving molecular biology have further contributed to this debate.
The African Origin model hypothesises that fully modern humans evolved first only in
Africa and that too only few hundred thousand years ago. Once they evolved as anatomically
modern humans, H. sapiens sapiens travelled out of Africa to explore and colonise other parts
of the world, replacing all other hominid forms with little or no genetic interchange with other
older forms. This model thus assumes a single source of the origin of modern humans. The
Multiregional Evolution model on the other hand refutes the notion that modern human origin
occurred only in Africa and argues that human population throughout the old world (Africa,
Asia and Europe) evolved independently first into archaic H. sapiens and then to fully modern
humans. According to this model, between 2 and 1 mya, a generic Homo ancestor of ours
spread out across the warmer latitudes of Africa, Middle East, Asia and perhaps southern
Europe. Although there was divergence due to local and differential environment, across the
whole range of the genus Homo, they were evolving towards H. sapiens as a result of gene flow
through mating and mutation that connected all human groups to some extent. Since all of them
were hunters and foragers, they all emerged in the last 30,000 years as one species-H. sapiens
sapiens- eventhough some of them evolved into fully modern humans earlier than the others
and had physical differences that distinguish modern Europeans, Asians and Africans. The
'Intermediate' or 'Assimilation' model accepts an African origin for moderm humans but rejects
the notion of total replacement or migration of Africans as the mechanism for evolution of
modern humans. Instead, this model suggests genetic hybridisation, gene flow and regional pat
tern of evolution as factors leading to the evolution of H. sapiens sapiens. Thus, moden
humans in some places (like Asia) could be largely 'African' in genetic terms but show some
regional genetic continuity over the past million years.
Until recently, the 'Multi-regional Evolution' model had assumed wide acceptance mainly
due to the fact that largest number of fossils of early and later H. sapiens were found from
Western Europe and Southwest Asia, suggesting at least twO points of origin of H. sapiens
sapiens. The anatomical variation between European Neanderthals (archaic) and Neanderthals
of Southwest Asia (more modern) provided further evidence to support multiregional model.
However, more recent researches, based on biochemical evolutionary record contained within
human gene (DNA analysis), have strengthened the case for an African origin of modem
humans. An investigation of the pattern of genetic variation among modern humans supports
African origin of H. sapiens sapiens. For the purpose of such an investigation, modern
researchers like Cann, Stoneking and Wilson (1987) have particularly used mitochondrial DNA
 Evolution of Humans 15

(mtDNA) as a tool for arriving at mutation rates. The mtDNA is passed on only through females
or matermal line and does not get diluted by paternal DNA. Thus, it proved to be an effective
tool to establish a reliable link of present with ancestral population. A study by Cann et al. of
182 women from Africa, Erope, Asia, Australia and New Guinea has suggested that differences
among them were very small and that all maternal lineages can be traced back to a single female
ancestor (nicknamed as 'mitochondrial Eve') or a very small group that lived in Africa 200,000
years ago. The study also suggests that this small population migrated to the rest of the world
with little or no interbreeding with the existing archaic H. sapiens. Another similar research
undertaken by F. Cruciani et al. (2011) has suggested a most common male ancestor (nick
named as "Y-chromosomal Adam') also living in Africa about 1444,000 years ago. Like the mtDNA,
Y-chromosomes can only be passed through paternally-from father to son-and like the study
of mtDNA, mutations of Y-chromosomes can also be calibrated and dated to reveal a recon
struction of ancestral Y-chronmosomal DNA sequences.
Scholars like J. G. D. Clark (1977) and Brian Fagan (2010) argue that these molecular biologi
cal studies, though yet to be refined, show greater likelihood that the modern gene pool (of
H. sapiens sapiens), originated in one nuclear region (Africa) from where it spread very rapidly
than that of modern humans, evolved independently from archaic forms in each of the main
regions of the old world. Further evidence from the same study that Africans display more
diverse types of mtDNA than other present day population suggests that they had more time to
develop such mutations. This study along with the database of normal DNA (known as nuclear
DNA), which involves blood groups and enzymes has also suggested that there was a primary
split between Africans and non-Africans and then a later one between Eurasians and Southwest
Asians. The African origin studies have also demolished the earlier notion of Europe being the
cradle of modern humans and Africa being the backwater.
The H. sapiens sapiens emerged from the early and later H. sapiens, showing anatomically
archaic and modern physiological features respectively. Archaic H. sapiens emerged about
200,000 years ago, whereas anatomically modern species of the same genus started evolving
about 100,000 years ago. Prominent among the fossils of this species are the ones that have
been found at Omo Valley in Ethiopia by Richard Leakey dated 195,000 years ago, a skull found
at Broken Hill (Kabwe) in Zambia dated 110,000 years ago and those found at Qafzeh in Israel
dated about 92,000 years ago. Here, it must be pointed out that the designation of archaic or
modern assigned to these fossils is largely based on the structure of the skull and does not
imply major cultural differences. Prior to the emergence of H. sapiens sapiens, these several
species of H. sapiens displayed a high level of cultural adaptability.
The earliest evidence of H. sapiens sapiens comes from the findings at a rock shelter named
Cro-Magnon near Les Eyzies village in Southwestern France. The Cro-Magnon man (as the earli
est species of H. sapiens sapiens was called) evolved around 40,000 years ago and is said to be
the white ancestors of today's Europeans. The Cro-Magnon specie, with a height ranging
between 5.6 and 5.8 feet, was taller, had thinner bones and less rugged features than the
Neanderthals who may have co-existed with the former at least up to 5,000 or 10,000 years.
Compared to the Neanderthals, the Cro-Magnon head was relatively tall but small with a more
rounded brain case containing a slightly smaller brain of 1,400 cc average capacity. Besides
these, other significant physiological changes were an upright forehead, not forward-jutting but
a straight face, only slight brow ridges, smaller nose and jaws, a more crowded teeth and a well
developed chin.
 16 Ancient and Medieval World

In cultural terms too, the H. sapiens sapiens displayed remarkable variety and improvement
Over that of the Neanderthals. A versatile tool technology of this species enabled them to sur
vive the extreme climatic variations of the last phase of the last Ice Age that began about
116,000 years ago. They colonised all the continents of the Old and the New World (America
and Australia) except Antarctica. To effectively exploit the vegetation and food resources in
different climatic conditions in these continents at different points of time, the early H. sapiens
sapiens made extensive use of stone, bone, antler and wood to manufacture tools with a new
technology of making blades, thus, giving rise to distinct cultures such as Perigordian/
Chatelperronian, Aurignacian, Gravettian, Solutrean and Magdalenian.
Along with innovations in tool technology, the period of early H. sapiens sapiens has been
termed as one of 'cultural explosion' by scholars such as Steven Mithen (1996). This term has
been used in the context of several developments such as increased economic specialisation,
development of fully articulate speech, restructuring of social relations between various groups
and above all, the development of art as means of expression and communication. The tech
nique and the new behavioural pattern of the early H. sapiens sapiens transformed the human
way of life and brought about explosive population growth. Endowed with superior intellectual
capabilities, they pushed earlier human species into extinction. Grahame Clark (1977) has
remarked that one can assume from their art and complexity of their technology that the men
tality of the Cro-Magnon man could hardly have differed from the existing human races. The
racial differences among the modern humans were mainly an outcome of genetic variations
linked with widespread colonisation of new territories towards the end of the Pleistocene
period and particular climatic conditions in these areas.
From the above description of the evolution of humans, it is clear that there was a close
interrelationship between biological endowments and cultural achievements of the evolving
species. Elaborating it further, bipedalism or an erect posture for example, was a response to
thinning of forests in the savanna region and the consequent need to crossover from there to
the forested lands that facilitated acquisition of culture. Bipedalism led to freeing of hands from
the locomotion and made them available for first tool using and ultimately for tool manufactur
ing. At the same time, an erect posture had reduced the tree climbing abilities of the hominids
and had therefore exposed them to dangers from the wild animals. Under these circumstances,
only those hominid groups survived who were capable of intelligent use of tools and weapons.
These activities precipitated development of brain. Brain development was also facilitated by
changes in the architecture of the skull due to shortening of teeth that led to lighter jaws,
enabling the brain case to expand for housing a larger size brain. The shortening of the teeth
itself was due to dietary changes among early human species, reducing the role of big teeth
which was a cultural attribute. At the level of human social relations too, we see an intercon
nection between biological and cultural traits. The narrowing of birth canal among female
hominid species (a direct outcome of bipedalism) led to the delivery of babies much before
their brain development. The longer dependence of the baby on the mother accounted for
greater social bondage between the two. Last but not the least, acquisition of language resulted
from some crucial changes in the brain structure, providing for sound producing abilities of the
hominids. This directly impacted the nature of tools manufactured by early humans, bringing
about more uniformity and technological advancement besides promoting better social coop
eration in hunting and foraging activities. But having mentioned these, we must, at the same
time, concede that by the time of the evolution of advanced hominids, biological features of the
human species were taken over by their cultural developments.
 Evolution of Humans

PALAEOLITHIC CULTURES
The previous section included a brief analysis of the biological and cultural evolution of
humans and an attempt was made (again a brief one) to point out the interrelationship
between the two. The present section would include a detailed description of the cultural
attributes of various human species (from H. habilis to H. sapiens sapiens) during what is
known as the Palaeolithic Age. Although culture can be and has been defined in several
manner, the most accepted definition of the term among the anthropologists is that culture is
a sum total of learned behaviour of humans which evolves out of the need to adapt within a
given environment. More than any other hominid group, this definition quite appropriately fits
into the cultural life of the early Homo species, including early modern humans who had to
survive in varying climatic conditions in the process of their colonisation of different conti
nents of the Old and New World.
Human cultural progression is invariably linked with their technological progress, and
during the time of early humans, this has been associated with the tool technology. Use of terms
like Stone Age,Copper Age and Iron Age to describe various human social formations are also
attempts to divide human cultural accomplishments based on particular technical stages. The
term 'Palaeolithic' is a combination of Greek words 'paleos' (old) and lithos' (stone), thus
derivatively meaning 'Old Stone Age'. Likewise, Neolithic refers to 'New Stone Age' represent
ing a marked improvement in the stone technology whereas Mesolithic is a period now consid
ered as intermediate between the Old and New Stone Ages. Based on the tool technology and
the level of socio-economic development, the Palaeolithic Age has been classified into
(a) Lower Palaeolithic (roughly dated between 2.5 mya to 300,000 years ago) (b) Middle
Palaeolithic (between 300,000 years ago and about 35,000 years ago) and (c) Upper Palaeolithic
(between 35,000 years ago and 12,000 years ago). Although this classification may not fit all the
regions of early human colonisation but has been found to be appropriate markers of the tech
nological achievements of early human species such as H. habilis, H. erectus, H. sapiens
(Neanderthals) and H. sapiens sapiens. Hence, the present section would be devoted largely
to the description of tool technology and partly to other cultural traits of the above human spe
cies during these three phases of the Paleolithic.

Tool Culture
Lower Palaeolithic
The earliest group of human toolmaking cultures has been termed as Lower Palaeolithic cul
tures. Toolmaking began with the emergence of H. habilis about 2.5 mya, even though
Australopithecus robustus and boisei may have made use of naturally available stone or
wooden tools. The bigger brain size of H. habilis has been considered by scholars such as
Richard Leakey (1994) as the key factor facilitating manufacture of tools. Besides a larger brain,
highly specialised hands and a bipedal posture also played an important role in the toolmaking
exercise. A broader diet of this species in comparison to that of the Australopithecine species,
which included meat was an additional factor. The label of 'handy person' associated with
H. habilis basically relates to their toolmaking abilities. Tools made by H. habilis have been
found from Gona in Ethiopia dated 2.6 mya, Koobi Fora areas of East Turkana (Kenya) dated
 18 Ancient and Medieval World

1.8 mya and Olduvai Gorge (Tanzania) dated about 1.75 mya. Since large number of hominid
and animal bones, along with a huge pile up of artefacts, have been found from Olduvai and
most of our knowledge of the material culture of the earliest Homo species also come from this
site, the earliest Palaeolithic culture has been termed, by Mary Leakey (founder of the site) and
others as the Oldowan culture.
The tools found at Olduvai and other sites of East and North Africa are simple stone tools
made from pebbles or lava cobbles. The pebble was first struck with a heavier stone near the
natural edges of the pebble to remove flakes and subsequent blows on the ridges formed near
the earlier flakes to produce several tools that have been identified as choppers, scrapers,
burins and hammer stones. The studies of Mary Leakey (1979) and Nicholas Toth (1994) sug
gest that these tools were extremely crude and their classification into distinct tool types is
difficult because their manufacture was not based on any standardised pattern unlike the later
tools of the Lower Palaeolithic period. The H. habilis tool technology has been categorised as
'core' technology where the core (pebble) was itself turned into a tool by the above-described
flaking method. However, Nicholas Toth's (1994) research has shown that even though simple
and fashioned out of practical requirements, these tools required careful selection of the raw
material (for proper flaking), a high degree of motor skills and coordination of different parts
of the body (eyes, limbs and fingers) in order to exercise precise control over the force and
direction of the blows to the stone as well as certain measure of conceptualisation (mental
image) before it could be given a definite shape. Recent researches have suggested that the
habilis species consciously used igneous rocks and quartz pebbles as raw materials to fashion
their tools according to their requirement and had good understanding of the flaking properties
of the stone.
The Oldowan culture is dated between 2.6 mya and 1.5 mya, and for a long times, it was
believed that this culture represented a static technology without any distinguishable change
during its existence. But more archaeological discoveries and more scientific analysis of tools
have suggested that this technology was simple but highly effective and became more complex
in the later periods. These tools were used by the habilis species to procure and process plant
and animal foods. Recent studies of the Oldowan tools have suggested butchering and cutting
meat, sawing and scraping wood, cutting soft plants, breaking nuts, digging roots and extracting
bone marrow from the carcasses of animals as the possible usages of such tools as choppers,
scrapers, burins and hammer stones. The microscopic study of the bones found at Olduvai and
considering the simplicity and size of these tools, it has been argued that though a meat eater,
H. habilis could not have been an expert hunter and possibly could have been able to kill only
such small animals as antelopes. Thus, from the nature of discovered tools, H. habilis appears
as an opportunistic scavenger (scavenging meat from carnivore kills) and a plant forager. The
absence of any predetermined design on the large number of habilis tools found from several
sites in East and North Africa also indicates that this species had not yet developed an articu
late speech which was crucial for passing on information to the present and the next genera
tion. Apart from stones, the habilis species could also frequently have made use of bone and
wood which were easily available.
Regarding the social organisation of the earliest human species, it has been argued that in
the savanna (grassland interspersed with isolated trees) environment of East Africa, the habilis
species could not have been able to compete with other animals without better social coopera
tion and successful reproduction. However, evidence of social cooperation is limited to archae
ological evidence from Koobi Fora and Olduvai Gorge in the form of cluster of bones of both
 Evolution of Humans 9

big (like hippopotamus) and small (mainly antelopes) animals. Few scholars like Louis Leakey
(1980) had argued that these were 'central place' or 'home base' of the habilis species where
they slept, manufactured tools and butchered dead animals brought to this place from some
distance. This notion was based on the assumption that H. habilis was an accomplished hunter
and gatherer. But the recent microscopic studies of these tools, controlled experimentation and
other sophisticated research methods have ruled this out. It is now suggested that these were
not 'home bases' but transitory camps where the human groups butchered the dead animals
with tools carried from a distance further away or manufacturing it on the site itself due to
abundant supplies of toolmaking stones in the area. However, scholars do agree that these
transitory camps may have preceded 'central places' of the later huntergatherer societies.
H. habilis primarily lived in the savanna interspersed with forested areas of tropical Africa
where both games and predators were in plenty. Competing for natural resources with other
animals and the need for protection must have forced them to live in groups and near water
resources (like the shallow lake at Olduvai) where animals routinely appeared for drinking
water. The larger brain size of the habilis also helped in the further evolution of their social
intelligence. According to a rough estimate, H. habilis flourished in larger groups of about
80-85 to 65-70 of Australopithecines. Living in larger groups, besides providing security, also
facilitated efficient foraging and sharing of plant and other food resources, individually or in
pairs. This had far reaching consequences for humans in terms of prolonged mortality and
increased reproduction.
The emergence of H. erectus around 1.64 mya brought about some significant changes in the
Lower Palaeolithic tool technology. As mentioned in the previous section, the erectus species
did not remain confined to Africa but radiated to Europe as well as Asia and followed different
adaptive strategies to survive in diverse climaticconditions of these regions of the Old World.
Although erectus tool technology did not fundamentally differ fronm that of the habilis, it dis
played nmore complexity and diversity, making the former an expert hunter and gatherer. The
tools of H. erectus have not only been found in East and North Africa but also in Central Europe
(France and Hungary), Southeast Asia (Indonesia, Thailand, Burma and Malaya), China
(Beijing) and Northwest part (Soan Valley) of India. These tools were standardised and were
found to be made according to a repeated pattem. This suggests that tools of this period were
made with a predetermined design, indicating an articulate speech, pooling of experience,
transfer of knowledge and a higher level of intelligence on part of the erectus species. With the
emergence of this species, hunting became well established and it, along with foraging, became
the basis of their economy.
The tool technology practiced by the erectus species is also classified under the 'core' tech
nology but was more complex and advanced than that of the early Lower Palaeolithic period.
The most distinctive tool of this period was the hand axe. Discovery of large numbers of hand
axes along with other artefacts at St. Acheul in Northern France has led scholars to term the
erectus tool culture as Acheulean culture. Acheulean hand axes have been found in different
shapes and sizes, ranging from crude teardrop shaped foms to a refined bifacial form. It was
made from a larger core (stone) where the core itself was carefully trimmed with hammer
blows to get the desired shape. Scholars are in broad agreement that hand axe was a multipur
pose tool used for cutting meat and skinning prey, digging up roots and working on wood. Few
scholars such as Eileen O'Brien (1981) have argued that if thrown like a discus, the pointed side
of the hand axe could work like a weapon to hit an object or animal with great force. Thus, it
could be used for both hunting prey and defending oneself. The popularity of this tool can be
 20 Ancient and Medieval World

gauged from the fact that originating in Africa, it reached Asia and Europe and continued to be
used until about 150,000 years ago. Robert J. Wenke and Deborah I. Olszewski (1985) are of the
opinion that the Acheulean hand axe may not seem like a marvellous bit of technological
advancement but had several features that seem to reflect human intellectual evolution. It
required more processing, that is, a more actual step of manufacturing and was also more stan
dardised in proportion than earlier tools. The manufacture of hand axe also indicates that
H. erectus had a geometrically accurate sense of proportion imposed accurately on stone.
Besides hand axe, the erectus species also fashioned choppers, cleavers, bola stones and
some small flake tools such as side scrapers, knives and bores for skinning, working on wood
and other purposes. In Southeast Asia, hand axe has not been found in significant numbers.
Here, choppers dominated the tool types that reflect greater human concentration on plant
foods in the warmer and more vegetated zones than on meat. In East Asia, such tools were used
to work on bamboo which was available in plenty and which could itself be turned into such
small tools as sharp knives and spears besides being used for making containers, ropes and
dwellings. In the Asian zone, tools like drills, gravers, point and choppers were as efficient as
hand axe in the West in exploiting plant and small animal resources. Similarly, at Clacton in
Southeast England, tree leaf shaped stone tools were manufactured for working on wood. This
200,000 years old culture known as Clactonian culture (based on the site Clacton-on-sea in
Essex, England), has also provided evidence of a wooden spear tip which was used either as a
stabbing spear or digging stick. Another noteworthy tool culture contemporary with H. erectus
was the Levalloisian culture, named after Levallois-Perret, a suburb of Paris in France where
round tools in the shape of an inverted tortoise shell were made from a core by carefully trim
ming it to produce points and scrapers. The Clactonian and Levalloisian technique became
more complex in the Middle Palaeolithic under the Neanderthals.
The diverse tool kits of H. erectus, having a predetermined shape and standardised patterrn,
represented improved communication and a high degree of social interaction. This promoted
other cultural developments too. Better social cooperation facilitated big game hunting, a defi
nite evidence of which has come from Torralba and Ambrona, northeast of Madrid (Spain),
dated between 400,000 and 200,000 years ago. These sites have yielded elephant tusks and
bones along with those of rhinoceros, wild ox, stags and horses. It has been postulated that by
using fire, these animals would have been driven towards swamps and then killed. Evidence of
big game hunting by the erectus stock have also come from Schoningen (Germany), dated about
400,000 years ago, and Boxgrove site (Southern England), dated 500,000 years ago where bones
of large mammals such as rhinoceros, bison, dear, horse and bear have been found. Such find
ings suggest that H. erectus was an expert big game hunter having an efficient knowledge of the
terrain along with that of the raw materials besides possessing the mental ability to manufac
ture effective hunting weapons. They also had the precise knowledge of the place where and
when the animals gathered, that is, cliffs, water holes and so on during the summer, autumn,
winter or spring seasons.
Another significant cultural development in the Lower Palaeolithic period coinciding with
the existence of the erectus species was the opportunistic use of natural fire. Use of fire was an
important innovation as an adaptive strategy that had far-reaching consequences for future
human evolution. Fire was used for warmth in extremely cold climatic conditions, for protec
tion from predators as well as to hunt big and small animals (by scaring them down the cliff
towards swamps or forcing them to come out of their hiding places) and most importantly for
cooking. Use of fire for cooking was of supreme importance in the sense that hitherto inedible
 Evolution of Humans

plants and vegetables could now be added to the human diet as roasting them in fre helped to
neutralise toxins present in them. Few scholars have suggested that possibly H. erectus knew
how to conserve fire by using the smouldering tree stumps (fire being caused by lightning
strikes) to kindle flames to light dry grass or bushes. The earliest evidence of the use of fire
have been found in Swartkrans in South Africa and Chesowanja in Kenya's Rift Valley, dated 1.6
mya in the fornm of hearth like arrangement of stone artefacts, fragmentary bones and baked
clay. Another more recent evidence of the same comes from Zhoukoudian caves, west of
Beijing in China, where charred Chinese huckleberry seeds along with other plants such as
walnut, hazelnut, pine and so on have been found along with many hearths and ash layers.
These have been dated between 500,000 years ago to 250,000 years ago. Although there is a
debate among scholars over the issue of fire being used to cook meat but there also is a broad
agreement among themn, based on evidence from this and other sites, that H. erectus was an
expert hunter.
The settlement pattern of H. erectus varied from region to region, depending upon the cli
matic condition, but was always close to water sources such as a spring, an artesian well, lake,
river or near beach. Water was necessary for the animals which converged to drink water near
these sources. Besides, these water bodies were also important source of raw materials such
as stones and pebbles to manufacture tools. In different regions of erectus colonisation, human
settlements or camps were set up keeping in consideration climatic conditions and protection
from predators. These included open air, rock shelters or cave settlements. Thus, while erectus
lived in open camps in the temperate climate of Africa, they preferred rock shelters or settle
ments deep inside the cave in the cold climate of Europe and China.
The absence of H. erectus burials and rituals have led scholars to suggest that though this
human species was capable of articulate speech and hence displayed better social cooperation in
hunting and other community activities such as gathering and setting up camps, its smaller brain
size (1,000cc compared to 1,500cc of the H. sapiens and 1,470cc of the H. sapiens sapiens)
meant that they may have lacked the mental capabilities to generalise and symbolise their experi
ences unlike later human species. In addition, their language skills may also have been quite
limited unlike modern humans, who are capable of taking out variety of sounds due to particular
positioning of larynx in the speech producing area.

Middle Palaeolithic
The Middle Palaeolithic period saw the emergence of H. sapiens, both archaic and advanced.
Among the latter, the most prominent in terms of cultural acquisitions were the Neanderthals.
Neanderthals lived during 135,000 years ago until about 35,000 years ago. They had to adapt in
warmer climatic conditions immediately preceding the last Ice Age that began about 118,000
years ago. They lived in such environmental conditions when big games were in abundance.
Further, seacoasts, streams and rivers had provided additional aquatic food resources in the
form of fishes and water mammals such as whales, sharks, seals and so on. Exploitation of such
resources required modification in the existing tool technology of the Lower Palaeolithic.
A larger brain size of the Neanderthals along with other physical attributes facilitated this
process.
The Middle Palaeolithic tool is identified with the Mousterian culture attributed to the
Neanderthals. The name has been derived from the Neanderthal site of Le Moustier rock shelter
situated in Southwest France where large deposits of tools associated with this species have
 Ancient and Medieval World

been found. However, the Middle Palaeolithic technology should not only be associated with
Neanderthals as the H. sapiens that emerged prior to them around 200,000 years ago had
already began to fabricate tools of various shapes for various purposes which later became
standardised anda part of the tool culture of different H. sapiens groups. Prominent among the
pre-Mousterian culture was the Tayacian culture which was spread across the Mediterranean
France and in Italy. It was characterised by small-sized tools made from pebbles or other stones
by the process of trimming.
The Mousterian tool culture represented an important technological innovation, where sev
eral flakes were taken out of a prepared core through the Levallois technique to manufacture a
number of small tools and weapons. Thus, Mousterian tool technology has been termed as
"lake' technology that was distinct from the Oldowan and Acheulean 'core' technology, where
the core itself was trimmed into the shape of a tool. The Neanderthals developed upon the
already existing Levallois technique to prepare the core by giving it a particular shape to prede
termine the shape of the flake that was to be removed. Such a core is generally referred to
as tortoise core as it resembles a tortoise shell. Through this technique, several flakes, blades
or triangular points could be taken out from a single core. Since this was a complex method and
required careful planning prior to taking out the flakes, this is considered as technological
advancement over the earlier tool technology. Most of the Mousterian and other Middle
Palaeolithic tools were made out of flakes. The flakes were trimmed from the edges to produce
a wide range of side scrapers, points, backed knives, tiny saws and bores.
Another remarkable feature of the Middle Palaeolithic tool technology was the great diver
sity of tool kits. A French archaeologist, Francois Bordes, has identified 60-63 Mousterian tool
types dated between 90,000 40,000 years ago, while excavating the Combe Grenal cave in
Perigord (France). The Mousterian tool types have also been found in other parts of Europe,
North Africa and Southwest Asia. The tools could be used for killing, cutting up and skinning
prey and also for making wooden tools and clothing. Evidences show that Neanderthals were
skilled hunters and killed such large games as, bison, cave bears, horses, woolly rhinoceros,
wild cattle and reindeer. Hunting of bigger animals was organised in groups. It is quite possible
that individual animal was separated from the herd and brought down. Favourable geographical
terrain such as watering places, gorges or narrow mouths of valleys were used by the
Neanderthals to hunt animals. With the use of composite tools (as explained in the earlier sec
tion) large animals could be killed at close quarters while swift moving animals could be
brought down by a javelin like hunting weapon. With the help of available tools, animal fur,
bones and sinews were utilised for making clothes and tents (in open encampments) and snares
were used to catch birds. The first evidence of river and sea fishing also comes from the Middle
Palaeolithic period. Thus, it can be said that Neanderthals were opportunistic hunters using
every possible opportunity to hunt variety of animals. Besides meat, plant food was also an
essential part of their diet.
Even though there is a lot of debate on when the mastery over fire was achieved, traces of
iron pyrites found in the Neanderthal encampments strongly suggest that they were making
fire, not simply using naturally ignited fire, by rubbing iron pyrites together. Numerous evi
dences of hearths along with burnt and unburnt charcoal (particularly in the cave sites), heated
stone artefacts, burnt bones and heated sediments tend to confirm this notion. Few scholars
have suggested that perhaps the conservation and taming of fire, as much as food sharing and
meat eating, helped to forge close-knit family groups among the Neanderthals. This is evident
from their social behaviour discussed in the following paragraphs.
 Evolution of Humans

The social organisation of the Neanderthals was more developed than those of H. habilis
and H. erectus. A major factor contributing to this was the better linguistic capabilities of
Neanderthals though still inferior to the modern humans. Manufacture of diverse tool kits and
opportunistic big and small game hunting could not have been possible without a high degree
of social cooperation. Scholars also suggest a possible existence among the Neanderthals of
sexual division of labour, where men hunted and women gathered and cooked food. Based on
the size of their dwelling units, it has been estimated that Neanderthals must have lived in small
groups of 25-30, which was also ideal from the point of view of provisioning of food. The
Neanderthal settlements included caves, rock shelters as well as open-air dwellings and
exceeded in number than those of H. eretus. In Europe, large number of both caves and rock
shelters were used during greater part of the year as protection against Arctic cold. While open
encampments were used during short summer months in the Tundra plains. Evidences from the
dwelling sites also suggest that a small group of Neanderthals also made repeated use of open
sites as temporary halting places while being away from the main group.
A significant cultural achievement of Neanderthals, indicating their highly evoBved thinking,
came from their careful disposal/burial of the dead. Burials provide the most important and
trustworthy archaeological evidence to analyse spiritual ife of the prehistoric humans and
social divisions, if any. Mousterian sites have revealed earliest burial traditions (dated between
100,000 and 40,000 years ago) of the human species. Neanderthals did not simply abandoned
the dead but buried them under the dug up earth with stone pillows and other grave goods such
as flint tools, burnt bones, flowers and roasted meat. Most of the Neanderthal burials have been
found in caves or rock shelters in Europe, Southwest Asia and Eurasia. Such ritual burials sug
gest that Neanderthals had begun to think about the phenomenon of death or life after death',
which reflects a nmuch higher level of thinking and imagination. While most of these are single
burials, evidence of group burial comes from the rock shelters of La Ferrassie in Southwest
France where two adult Neanderthals have been buried close together alongside four children.
In this context, scholars like Karel Volch (1994) have opined that first evidence of family group
ing can be seen from here. A Shanidar cave burial in the Zagros Mountains of Iraq provides the
evidence of social consciousness and compassion among the Neanderthals. Here, a 30-40 year
old man, half blind with a crippled right arm and right leg (much before his death) has been
found buried. Since such a person could not have been economically useful for the group, his
long survival reflects the cre and support extended to him by his social group.
Neanderthals have also been associated with ritual cannibalism. A broken human skull to get.
at the brain found from Moula-Guercy in France lend credence to this hypothesis. At some
places, horns of goat and a bear skull kept in a ring have been linked with goat and bear cult.
But it is a debatable issue among the scholars. Evidence of rudimentary art forms such as bone
amulets, scratched pebbles and tools and lumps of red iron oxide (to paint the body before
burial or on the tools) have also at times been associated with the Neanderthals. Although few
scholars point out that these evidences can hardly be termed as the work of art, it can safely be
concluded that the Neanderthals had reached a much higher level of intellectual capacity and
imagination than their predecessors.

Upper Palaeolithic
The Upper Palaeolithic period saw the emergence of H. sapiens sapiens or the modern man.
This period also coincided with the last phase of the Ice Age which witnessed reduced
 Ancient and Medieval World

temperature in Europe, Asia as well as in Africa. Since this was the final part of the last glacia
tion (termed as Wurm or Weichsel glaciation), there were frequent climatic variations between
colder and warmer seasons of varying intensities. The climatic changes and the geographical
conditions led to the growth of different cultural traditions of the early H. sapiens sapiens. A
well-developed brain, along with some crucial physiological changes in the shape of the thorax
and release of upper extremities allowing rotatory movement in the shoulder joint, a perfect
bipedal motion due to modifications in the pelvis bone to take up the body weight and final
shaping of the hand allowing throwing of objects with great force and accuracy as well as
enabling humans to produce most delicate objects, turned the Upper Palaeolithic period into a
period of accelerated evolution for humanity. It was a period when the prehistoric hunter
gatherer societies reached the peak of their development largely due to their technological
progress. Technological progress was accompanied by a high degree of spiritual and artistic
achievement.
The Cro-Magnon man, earliest of the H. sapiens sapiens species, developed different cul
tures with distinctive adaptive strategies. Subsequent to an extensive research of the French
prehistorian Henri Breuil on Upper Palaeolithic cultures in Western Europe, different cultures
of early modern humans have been identified as ChatelperronianPerigordian, Aurignacian,
Gravettian, Solutrean and Magdalenian. Almost all of these cultures have been found concen
trated in France and Spain and covered a time period between 35,000 years ago and 11,000
years ago. These cultures have differed from each other very slightly, depending upon their
immediate geographical conditions. Among them however, the Aurignacian, Solutrean and
Magdalenian have been considered as crucial for proper understanding of these Upper
Palaeolithic cultures.
The Upper Palaeolithic tool technology, although did not fundamentally differ from that of
the Middle Palaeolithic, but was marked by some crucial innovations in taking out stone blades
that were then reshaped into variety of tools. Besides, there was also an extension in raw mate
rials used for the manufacturing of tools. Apart from stones, wood, bone, ivory and antler (rein
deer horm) were now increasingly used for this purpose. The tool technology of this period has
been termed as 'blade' technology. To take out stone blades, the toolmaker of this period used
a stone, bone, wood or antler hammer to strike a bone or antler punch resting on one edge of
the prepared core of cylindrical shape. This indirect percussion technique enabled splitting off
of long, flat, narrow and sharp edged flake or blade. This was then delicately trimmed by press
ing a pointed stick against the blade edge to snap off tiny flakes. This method is known as pres
sure flaking.
Scholars such as Bohuslav Kima (1994), Brian Fagan (2010) and others have argued that an
important advantage of the blade technology over the previous flake technology was its more
economical use of the raw material. This was an important point in environments where raw
materials may have been harder to find. Further, the blade technology with a portable core
proved to be extremely efficient for late Ice Age hunter gatherers who exploited resources over
large territories.
Following the above technique, the Cro-Magnon man made a variety of finely crafted tools
such as knives, scrapers, saws, points, bores and, most importantly, a fine-edged graving tool
called burin. Burin was used to manufacture sharp edged bone, antler and ivory tools such as
eyed needles, fishhooks, harpoons, handles of composite tools and spear thrower. Use of
diverse bone and antler points greatly enhanced the hunting effectiveness of the Upper
Palaeolithic men. The use of spear thrower after 20,000 years ago proved to be particularly