200 CHAPTER 8 | Early Homo and the Origins of Culture
Culture, Skulls, and Modern
Human Origins
For Middle Paleolithic Homo, cultural adaptive abilities
relate to the fact that brain size was comparable to that
of people living today. Archaeological evidence indicates
sophisticated technology, as well as conceptual thought of
considerable complexity, matching the increased cranial
capacity. During this same time period, large-brained in-
dividuals with skulls with an anatomically modern shape
began to appear. The earliest specimens with this skull
shape—a more vertical forehead, diminished brow ridge,
and a chin—appear first in Africa and later in Asia and
Europe. Whether the derived features in the skull indicate
the appearance of a new species with improved cultural
capabilities remains a hotly debated question.
The transition from the Middle Paleolithic to the tools
of the Upper Paleolithic occurred around 40,000 years
ago, some 100,000 years or so after the appearance of the
first anatomically modern specimens in Africa. The Upper
Paleolithic is known not only for a veritable explosion
of tool industries, but also for clear artistic expression
preserved in representative sculptures, paintings, and
engravings (see Chapter 9). But the earliest anatomically
modern humans, like the Neandertals and other archaic
forms, used tools of the Middle Paleolithic traditions.
The relationship between cultural developments of
the Upper Paleolithic and underlying biological differ-
ences between anatomically modern humans and archaic
forms remains one of the most contentious debates in pa-
leoanthropology. Discussions concerning the fate of the
Neandertals and their cultural abilities are integral to this
debate. Whether or not a new kind of human—anatomically
modern with correspondingly superior intellectual and cre-
ative abilities—is responsible for the cultural explosion of the
Upper Paleolithic is considered in Chapter 9.The discovery of a “language gene” by Swedish paleo-
geneticist Svante Pääbo and colleagues at the Max Planck
Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Ger-
many, adds an interesting new dimension to the study of
the evolution of language.^40 The gene, called FOXP2 found
on chromosome 7, was identified through the analysis of
a family in which members spanning several generations
have severe language problems. Changes in the gene are
hypothesized to control the ability to make fine move-
ments of the mouth and larynx necessary for spoken lan-
guage. The identification of this gene in humans allowed
scientists to compare its structure to that found in other
mammalian species.
The human FOXP2 gene differs from versions of the
gene found in the chimpanzee, gorilla, orangutan, rhesus
macaque, and mouse. While these differences among liv-
ing species can be known, applying this knowledge to the
earlier members of the genus Homo is far more difficult.
We do not know precisely when in human evolution the
human form of the FOXP2 gene appeared or whether this
gene was associated with the formation of a new species
of Homo.
In light of these genetic discoveries it is also interest-
ing to consider the work done on language capacity in
the great apes. For example, in her work with the bonobo
named Kanzi, Sue Savage-Rumbaugh documented his
ability to understand hundreds of spoken words and as-
sociate them with lexigrams (pictures of words) on a com-
puter display while unable to create the sounds himself.^41
Speech and language are not identical.
(^40) Lai, C. S. L., et al. (2001). A forkhead-domain gene is mutated in severe
speech and language disorder. Nature 413, 519–523; Enard, W., et al.
(2002). Molecular evolution of FOXP2, a gene involved in speech and
language. Nature 418, 869–872.
(^41) Savage-Rumbaugh, S., & Lewin, R. (1994). Kanzi: The ape at the brink of
the human mind. New York: Wiley.
Questions for Reflection
- Members of the genus Homo draw upon integrated
biological and cultural capabilities to face the challenges of
existence. How do these factors play into the designation of
species in the fossil record? - Paleoanthropologists can be characterized as “lumpers”
or “splitters” depending upon their approach to the iden-
tification of species in the fossil record. Which of these ap-
proaches do you prefer and why? - In his 1871 book Descent of Man, and Selection in Rela-
tion to Sex, Charles Darwin stated, “Thus man has ultimately
become superior to woman. It is indeed fortunate that the
law of equal transmission of characters prevails with mam-
mals. Otherwise it is probable that man would have become
as superior in mental endowment to woman as the peacock
is in ornamental plumage to the peahen.” How were the cul-
tural norms of Darwin’s time reflected in his statement? Can
21st-century paleoanthropologists speak about differences
between the sexes in evolutionary contexts without introduc-
ing their own cultural biases?- Animals ranging from rabbits to plants have come to
occupy new niches without the benefits of culture. Was the
spread of Homo out of the African continent possible with-
out the benefit of culture? - Though language itself does not “fossilize,” the ar-
chaeological and fossil records provide some evidence of the
linguistic capabilities of our ancestors. Using the evidence
available, what sort of linguistic abilities do you think early
Homo possessed?