1

Anthropology Physical/Biological Anthropology

Emergence of Modern Human and Their Dispersal

Paper No. : 01 Physical/Biological Anthropology

Module : 09 Emergences of Modern Human and Dispersal

Prof. Anup Kumar Kapoor Department of Anthropology, University of Delhi

Development Team

Principal Investigator

Paper Coordinator

Content Writer

Content Reviewer Prof. Barun Mukhopadhyay Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata

Dr. Gopal Chandra Mondal

Bangabasi College, Kolkata

Prof. Subho Roy Department Of Anthropology ,University of Calcutta

2

Anthropology Physical/Biological Anthropology

Emergence of Modern Human and Their Dispersal

Description Of Module

Subject Name Anthropology

Paper Name 01 Physical/Biological Anthropology

Module Name/Title Emergence of Modern Human and Their Dispersal

Module Id 09

3

Anthropology Physical/Biological Anthropology

Emergence of Modern Human and Their Dispersal

Contents of this unit

1. Introduction

2. Trends of human evolution

Bipedalism

Increased brain size

Refinement of hand structure

Reduction of face, jaw and tooth size

Decreased sexual dimorphism

Refinement of tool design

Power and precision grip

3. Dispersal of modern humans

Complete replacement model

Regional continuity model

Partial replacement model

Learning objectives

To understand the emergence of modern human

To understand the general trends of human evolution

To study the different propositions of human dispersal

4

Anthropology Physical/Biological Anthropology

Emergence of Modern Human and Their Dispersal

Emergence of Modern Humans and their Dispersal

Introduction

One of the challenges of Physical/Biological Anthropology is to provide insight into the origins of

humankind. The fossil record preserves traces of the past life on earth, clearly charting a progression of

simple one-celled organisms to increasingly diverse forms.

The evolution is a slow but continuous process through which the organisms transform from simpler to

complex creatures. The theories, concerning the evolution of life date back to the ancient Greeks, but it

was only during the nineteenth century that the first comprehensive theories of evolution were

developed. Before the mid 1800s, many thinkers had suggested evolutionary theories. But those

theories were not acceptable because they lack understanding of the age of the earth and explanation

for the evolutionary process. One such early theory of evolution was posited by Jean Baptiste Lamarck

(1809). He proposed that species change and adapt to their environment through physical

characteristics acquired in the course of their lifetime and the characters so acquired are transmitted to

the next generation (inheritance of acquired characteristics).

The process of evolution was not fully understood when Darwin proposed the theory of Natural

Selection (1859), because genetics and the origin of variability were unknown. Variation within the

species and reproductive success are the basis of natural selection. Since the 1920s, when evolution

5

Anthropology Physical/Biological Anthropology

Emergence of Modern Human and Their Dispersal

through natural selection was tied to genetic concepts, evolution has been understood as the combined

effect of four ‘forces’: natural selection, gene mutation, gene flow and genetic drift. Gene mutation and

gene flow provide the raw materials, the genetic variation, for evolutionary change. Natural selection

and genetic drift are then the conservative forces that limit variation and guide the direction of

evolution. Evolutionary theories hold that existing species of plants and animals have emerged over

millions of years from simple organisms.

Human evolution is characterized by a number of morphological, developmental, physiological and

behavioral changes that have taken place since the split between the last common ancestor of humans

and chimpanzees. The most significant of these adaptations are bipedalism, increased brain size

(encephalization), refinements of hand structure, reduction in face, jaw and tooth size, decreased sexual

dimorphism, and refinement of tool design. Other significant morphological changes included the

evolution of power and precision grip.

Bipedalism: The evolution of the primates in the Eocene, Oligocene, and Miocene epochs serves as a

backdrop for the emergence of early human ancestors. By the Miocene epoch (25 million to 5 million

years ago), primates in various form- the precursors of modern Prosimian, monkeys, and apes –

proliferated in many geographic regions. But sometime in the late Miocene or early Pliocene, new and

distinct forms of primates emerged. Classified as the family Hominidae, or hominids, these primates

have subtle similarities in their teeth, jaws, and brains. However, the primary characteristic that

identifies them as a distinct genus is the structural anatomy needed for Bipedalism, the ability to walk

upright on two legs.

Bipedalism is the basic adaption of the Hominin line and is considered the main cause behind a suite

of skeletal changes shared by all bipedal hominins. The earliest bipedal Hominin is considered to be

either Sahelanthropus with Ardipithecus, a full bipedal, coming somewhat later. The knuckle-walkers,

the gorilla and chimpanzee, diverged around the same time, and either Sahelanthropus or Orrorin may

be our last shared ancestor. The early bipedal eventually evolved into the australopithecines and later

the genus Homo. There are several theories of the adaptation value of Bipedalism. It is possible that

Bipedalism was favored because it freed the hands for reaching and carrying food, saved energy during

locomotion, enabled long distance running and hunting, enhanced field of vision and helped avoid

hyperthermia by reducing the surface area exposed to direct sun; all this mainly for thriving in the new

grassland type environment rather than the previous forest type. A new study provides support for the

hypothesis that walking on two legs, or Bipedalism, evolved because it used less energy than

quadrupedal knuckle-walking. Anatomically the evolution of Bipedalism has been accompanied by

a large number of skeletal changes, not just to the legs and pelvis, but also to the skull, vertebral

column, pelvis, femur, feet and ankles. The foramen magnum, the opening in the base situated more or

less centrally than the quadrupeds. The developed mastoid processes help to hold the skull in

6

Anthropology Physical/Biological Anthropology

Emergence of Modern Human and Their Dispersal

balancing position. To support the increased weight on each vertebra in the upright position, the human

vertebral column became doubly S-shaped. The pelvic region became shorter and wider having large

acetabulum cavities. The femur evolved into a slightly more angular position to move the center of

gravity toward the geometric center of the body and also having developed linea aspera. The knee and

ankle joints became increasingly robust to better support increased weight. The human foot has shifted

from the nonhuman primate pattern of a grasping organ to a weight-bearing platform.

Source: www.custance.org

Basal aspect of skull of dog (A), chimpanzee (B) and human (C).

Increase in brain size: There has been a trend toward increased brain size and complexity during

human evolution; however, the trend was neither consistent nor steady. The size increase was slight

during approximately 3 million years of the evolutionary history of the Australopithecus and early

Homo lineages but rather rapid during the middle Pleistocene in Homo erectus and Homo sapiens.

Increased brain size and the complexity were probably related to tool manufacture and use, increasing

environmental challenges, and more complex social groups, among other factors. This may also be

related to the infant’s slower maturation rate, which required extended parental investment. Learning

may have been enhanced by increasing brain sizes and complexity.

7

Anthropology Physical/Biological Anthropology

Emergence of Modern Human and Their Dispersal

Cranial Capacity: Comparative account

The trend in brain enlargement continued in Africa with larger-bodied H. rudolfensis and especially H.

ergaster. Relative to the estimated body mass, H. habilis was actually “brainier” than H.

rudolfensis and H. ergaster. A similar interpretive challenge is presented by Neanderthals versus

modern humans. Neanderthals had larger brains than earlier Homo species, indeed rivaling those of

modern humans. Relative to body mass, however, Neanderthals are less brainy than anatomically

modern humans. Relative brain size of Homo did not change from 1.8 to 0.6 mya. After about 600 kya

it increased until about 35,000 years ago, when it began to decrease. Worldwide, average body size

also decreased in Homo sapiens from 35,000 years ago until very recently, when economically

advanced people began to grow larger while less-privileged people did not.

Form Ranges (cc) Average (cc)

Great apes

Chimpanzee

Gorilla

282-500

340-752

383

505

Hominidae

Australopithecus Afarensis

Australopithecus africanus

Homo habilis

Homo erectus

Homo sapiens neanderthalensis

Homo sapiens sapiens

380-500

435-350

590-752

750-1250

1000-2200

1000-2000

413

441

640

937

1650

1330

8

Anthropology Physical/Biological Anthropology

Emergence of Modern Human and Their Dispersal

Refinement of hand structure: Primates are hand-to-mouth feeders that pluck and catch items

selectively by hand before ingesting them. Without tools, emergent hominins would have relied on the

versatility and strength of their hands to collect food and on their teeth and jaws alone to process it.

Unless they used tools to fashion carrying devices such as bags from animal skins, they would have

needed a reliable source of water nearby, and they would also have been limited in the types and

number of objects that they could transport through their range. In addition to transporting objects and

water, there is the more obvious utility of animal skins in protecting against night chills, rain, and

strong sunshine. The features of human hands are easily distinguishable from those of the great apes,

and they underpin our refined manipulatory abilities. The most complex adaptations of the human hand

involve the thumb, which is fully opposable, wherein a unique, fully independent muscle gives this

digit remarkable strength in pinch and power grips. The fingertips are broad and equipped with highly

sensitive pads of skin. The proportional lengths of the thumb and other fingers give us an opposable

thumb with precise, firm contact between its tip and the ends of each of the other fingers. Special

configurations of joints the bases of the fifth, fourth, and second fingers facilitate tip-to-tip precision

grips with the thumb. Finally, numerous modifications of the small muscles in the hand are associated

with fine control of the thumb and fingers.

Source: blogs.plos.org

Comparison of the external (A) and skeletal (B) proportions of the hands of chimpanzees (at left) and humans. From

Morgan and Carrier, J.Exp.Bio. (2013).

9

Anthropology Physical/Biological Anthropology

Emergence of Modern Human and Their Dispersal

Australopithecus afarensis is the earliest hominin species for which there are sufficient fossil hand

bones to assess manipulatory capabilities. They were capable of gripping sticks and stones firmly for

vigorous pounding and throwing, but they lacked a fully developed human power grip that would allow

cylindrical objects to be held between the partly flexed fingers and the palm, with counter pressure

being applied by the thumb. Hand bones assigned to a 1.8-million-year-old specimen of h.

Habilis from Olduvai Gorge in northern Tanzania represent an advance over those of a. Afarensis in

features related to tool use. Because of an absence of fossils, it is not possible to track certain

refinements in hand structure that must have evolved in conjunction with innovations in tool

manufacture and use during the heydays of H. Rudolfensis, H. Ergaster (1.9–1.5 mya), and H.

Erectus (1.7–0.2 mya), as well as H. Antecessor (1.0–0.8 mya) and H. Heidelbergensis (600–200 mya).

Only prehistoric and modern Homo Sapiens and H. Neanderthalensis are fully represented by hand

skeletons.

Reduction of face, jaw and tooth size: In hominid evolution a series of interrelated changes is noticed

that are primarily associated with diet and food-processing requirements. The oldest fossil hominids

have a protruding or prognathous face. In addition, their incisor and canine teeth are large compared to

those of modern humans. To accommodate the larger canines, which extend beyond the other teeth,

there are gaps (diastema) between the teeth of the opposite jaw. The teeth were arranged in a U-shaped

pattern. Approximately 2 million years ago, these characteristics started to become less pronounced in

hominids. Some australopithecines developed massive chewing muscles and extremely large molars

compared to those of modern humans. Early representatives of genus Homo have smaller canines, and

the gaps associated with larger teeth disappeared. In the evolution of hominid dentition, the size of the

teeth has decreased and the length of that portion of the jaw that holds the cheek teeth has decreased

relative to the length of the skull. The reduction in the size of the teeth may be related to the

development of tool use and a more meat-oriented diet. The modern human jaw is smaller and shorter

related to the skull than is the ape jaw. Since human food is usually cut up or in some way processed

into smaller pieces so that it is easier to chew, humans do not need to exert much pressure when

chewing as the apes do. In the course of time, fire was used to cook meat, thus tenderizing it. In

modern humans, the evolution of a small jaw has resulted in the development of a chin, a product of

changes in the growth and development pattern of the jaw.

Tooth wear patterns in A. Afarensis indicate that it may have stripped vegetal foods by manually

pulling them across the front teeth. The robust-skulled Paranthropus may have eaten tougher foods

than did gracile-skulled Australopithecus. Additionally, some palaeoanthropologists believe

that Paranthropus was vegetarian, while A. africanus had more meat in its diet. Dental morphology

and wear patterns indicate that in South Africa P. robustus ate hard foods and that Kenyan P. boisei

chewed whole pods and fruits with hard coatings and tough seeds, though they probably did not chew

10

Anthropology Physical/Biological Anthropology

Emergence of Modern Human and Their Dispersal

quantities of grass seed, leaves, or bone. Unlike those of Paranthropus and Australopithecus, the teeth

of Homo became smaller over time. H. Rudolfensis has large rear teeth, even relative to estimated body

size, but H. Ergaster approaches the modern human condition. Concomitantly, the face of H.

rudolfensis is more like that of Australopithecus than H. Ergaster. One expects this trend to be related

somehow to changes in diet or techniques of food preparation, but evidence to support this link is not

available in the archaeological record.

Decreased sexual dimorphism : The reduced degree of sexual dimorphism is visible primarily in the

reduction of the male canine tooth relative to other ape species (except gibbons) and reduced brow

ridges and general robustness of males. Another important physiological change related to sexuality in

humans was the evolution of hidden estrus. Humans and Bonobos are the only apes in which the

female is fertile the year round and in which no special signals of fertility are produced by the body

(such as genital swelling during estrus). Nonetheless, humans retain a degree of sexual dimorphism in

the distribution of body hair and subcutaneous fat, and in the overall size, males being around 15%

larger than females. These changes taken together have been interpreted as a result of an increased

emphasis on pair bonding as a possible solution to the requirement for increased parental investment

due to the prolonged infancy of offspring.

Refinements in tool design: Stone tools are first attested around 2.6 Ma, when H. habilis in Eastern

Africa used so-called pebble tools, choppers made out of round pebbles that had been split by simple

strikes. This marks the beginning of the Paleolithic, or Old Stone Age; In Africa the Early Paleolithic

(2.5–0.2 mya) comprises several industries with the earliest man-made chipped flakes and core

choppers (2.5–2.1 mya). Double-faced hand axes, cleavers, and picks (collectively known as bifaces)

appeared about 1.5 mya and persisted until about 200 kya. Archaeologists have detected some

improvements of technique and product during the half-million-year span of core-flake industries.

Although the major bifacial industry—the Acheulian—has been characterized as basically static, it too

shows evidence of refinement over time, finally resulting in elegant, symmetrical hand axes that

required notable skill to make. By 1.7 mya a population of H. erectus similar to African H.

ergaster lived in Eurasia at what is now Dmanisi, Georgia. The associated choppers, chopping tools,

flakes, and scrapers recall the Oldowan core-flake industry of eastern Africa, but there are no bifaces

among them. In Europe, Acheulian tools appear 500 kya and persist until about 250–150 kya; they also

occur in South Asia. Sites in China (800 kya), Korea, and Japan contain bifaces, but they differ from

Acheulian tools. No such technology has been found in tropical Southeast Asia, where bamboo tools

may have sufficed.

In both Africa and Eurasia the Middle Paleolithic was long thought to have lasted from about 200 kya

to as recently as 30 kya, depending upon location. While tools from the Early Paleolithic slowly

changed across space and time, the Middle Paleolithic was characterized by an explosion of local and

11

Anthropology Physical/Biological Anthropology

Emergence of Modern Human and Their Dispersal

regional variations in size and shape and by frequencies of reshaped flakes, blades, scrapers, hand axes,

and other tools. Projectile points began to be emphasized in some regions, with bone being used as

well as stone; bone, arrow points dating to more than 60,000 years ago have been found at Sibudu

Cave in South Africa.

Although they vary across time and space, Middle Paleolithic tools as a whole are characterized by

carefully prepared cores from which elegant flakes or blades were struck. Notably, tools of this type

have been found at the Gademotta site in Ethiopia’s Rift Valley in stratigraphic levels that date to

approximately 275 kya. Late Paleolithic industries dating to 50–10 kya comprised of diverse blade and

micro-blade tools, especially in Europe. Late Paleolithic people used a variety of materials for their

tools and bodily ornaments, including bone, stone, wood, antler, ivory, and shell. Stone blades were

long, thin, and very effective cutting tools. Often, when they became dull, they are retouched by via

pressure flaking, which required fine motor control and coordination. Micro-blades and other points

were probably hafted to produce throwing and stabbing spears. Other composite tools of the period

include atlatls, harpoons, fish weirs, bows and arrows. Late Paleolithic people also developed

techniques for grinding and polishing, with which they made beads, pendants, and other artistic

objects. They also made needles (perhaps for sewing fitted clothing), fish hooks, and fish gorges.

Chopper Acheulian handaxe Round scraper

12

Anthropology Physical/Biological Anthropology

Emergence of Modern Human and Their Dispersal

Mousterian point’s Magdalenian blades

Power and precision grip: The hand is capable of several types of prehensile functions. In the power

grip, the primate grabs an object between the palm and the fingers; in this position, much force can be

applied. All primates are capable of the power grip. More important for fine manipulation of objects is

the precision grip, where the primate holds an object between the thumb and the fingers. This is made

possible by the presence of an opposable thumb. Humans have developed precision handling to a

degree not found in other primates. In the Old world monkeys, apes and humans, the development of a

saddle configuration in the joint between the carpal and metacarpal allows the thumb to be directly

opposed to the other fingers. Humans differ primarily in the degree of movement possible at this joint.

The human thumb is able to oppose the other fingers, and so the fleshy tip of the thumb comes into

direct contact with the fleshy tips to all fingers. In the apes, the fingers are elongated, and the

metacarpals and phalanges are curved; in humans these bones are straight.

13

Anthropology Physical/Biological Anthropology

Emergence of Modern Human and Their Dispersal

Propositions of human dispersal

The questions concerning the origins and early dispersal of Homo sapiens sapiens continue to fuel

much controversy among palaeoanthropologists. It is no wonder, that members of early Homo sapiens

sapiens are our direct kin and are thus closely related to all contemporary humans. They are much alike

us skeletally, genetically and (most likely) behaviorally as well. In fact, it is the various hypotheses

relating to the behavioral capacities of our most immediate predecessors that have fired the imagination

of scientists and lay people alike. In every major respect, these are the first hominids that we can

confidently refer to as “fully humans”. The evolutionary story of Homo sapiens sapiens is really a

biological autobiography of all humans. It is a story that still has many unanswered questions: but

several theories have been proposed that seek to organize the diverse information that is presently

available.

There are two major theories that attempt to organize and explain modern human origins:

(i) The complete replacement model

(ii) The regional continuity model

These two views are quite distinct and in some ways diametrically opposite to each other. Indeed, there

is a third theory, the partial replacement model, a compromise hypothesis incorporating some aspects

of the two major theories.

(i) The complete replacement model (Out of Africa model): The complete replacement model,

developed by British paleoanthropologists Christopher Stringer and Peter Andrews (1988), is based on

the origin of modern humans in Africa and migrated into Eurasia and replaced all populations which

had descended from Homo erectus. In brief, this theory proposes that anatomically modern populations

arose in Africa within the last 200,000 years, then migrated from Africa, completely replacing the

populations of Europe and Asia. This model does not take into account any transition from archaic

Homo sapiens to modern Homo sapiens anywhere in the world except Africa. According to this view

there could be no admixture of migrating African modern Homo sapiens with local populations

because the African modern humans were a biologically different species.

Critical to this model are the following tenets:

After Homo erectus migrated out of Africa the different populations became reproductively

isolated, evolving independently, and in some cases like the Neanderthals, into separate species.

Homo sapiens arose in one place, probably Africa (geographically this includes the Middle East).

14

Anthropology Physical/Biological Anthropology

Emergence of Modern Human and Their Dispersal

Homo sapiens ultimately migrated out of Africa and replaced all other human populations, without

interbreeding.

Modern human variation is a relatively recent phenomenon.

Using mtDNA gathered from a number of different populations, scientists at the University of

California, Barkley, constructed “trees” that, they claimed, demonstrated that the entire population of

the world today descended from a single African lineage. Using the same mtDNA material, other

scientists constructed many trees that differed from those of the Barkley group, and some of them are

without African roots. Recently, some further genetic data have helped bolster some of the main tenets

of the complete replacement model. A team of Yale, Harvard, and University of Chicago researchers

has investigated variation in the Y chromosome, finding much less variation in humans than in other

primates.

Source: http://image.frompo.com

(ii) The regional continuity model (Multiregional): The regional continuity model is most closely

associated with palaeoanthropologist Milford Wolpoff of the University of Michigan and his

15

Anthropology Physical/Biological Anthropology

Emergence of Modern Human and Their Dispersal

associates. These researchers suggest that local population (not all, of course) in Europe, Asia and

Africa continued their indigenous evolutionary development from archaic Homo sapiens to

anatomically modern humans.

This model contains the following components:

some level of gene flow between geographically separated populations prevented speciation, after

the dispersal.

all living humans derived from the species Homo erectus that left Africa nearly two million-years-

ago.

natural selection in regional populations, ever since their original dispersal, is responsible for the

regional variants (sometimes called races) that we see today.

the emergence of Homo sapiens was not restricted to any one area, but was a phenomenon that

occurred throughout the entire geographic range where humans lived.

Though gene flow and local selection, according to the multiregional hypothesis, local populations

would not have evolved totally independently from one another, and such mixing would have

“presented speciation between the regional lineages and thus maintained human beings as a single,

although obviously polytypic, species throughout the Pleistocene” (Smith et al., 1989).

16

Anthropology Physical/Biological Anthropology

Emergence of Modern Human and Their Dispersal

Source: www.wikipedia.org

Partial replacement model: The partial replacement model also begins with African early archaic

Homo sapiens. Later, also in Africa, anatomically modern Homo sapien populations first evolved. This

theory, proposed by Gunter Brauer of University of Hamburg, postulates the earliest dates for the

dispersal for African modern Homo sapiens at over 100,000 y.a. Brauer sees the initial dispersal of

Homo sapiens sapiens out of South Africa as significantly influenced by shifting environmental

conditions as a gradual process. Moving into Eurasia, modern humans hybridized, probably to a

limited degree, with resident archaic groups, and eventually replaced them. The disappearance of

archaic humans was therefore due to both hybridization and replacement and was a gradual and

complex process. This model includes components of regional continuity, hybridization, and

replacement, with the emphasis on replacement.

Summary

1. Human evolutionary trend is characterized by a number of morphological, developmental,

physiological and behavioural features

2. The most significant of these trends are Bipedalism, encephalization, refinements of hand

structure, reduction in face, jaw and tooth size, decreased sexual dimorphism, refinement of tool

design, power and precision grip.

3. Due to the achievement of Bipedalism, several changes have taken place in the skeletal structure.

4. Increased brain size and the complexity were probably related to tool manufacture and use,

increasing environmental challenges, and more complex social groups, among other factors.

5. Change in food habits resulted into the reduction of prognathus face, decrease in the size of teeth.

6. Gradual development of brain, freeness of hands, and development of precision grip helped

humans to gradually prepare refine and effective tools.

7. The complete replacement model of human dispersal denotes that anatomically modern

populations arose in Africa within the last 200,000 years, and then migrated from Africa,

completely replacing the populations of Europe and Asia.

8. The regional continuity model advocates that local population (not all, of course) in Europe, Asia

and Africa continued their indigenous evolutionary development from archaic Homo sapiens to

anatomically modern humans.