Time Space & Chg Human Soc (D)
Time Space & Chg Human Soc (D) ISS 220
Popular in Course
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
Dr. Penelope Bradtke
verified elite notetaker
Dr. Penelope Bradtke
verified elite notetaker
Popular in Integrative Studies Social Sci
This 14 page Class Notes was uploaded by Buster Heller on Saturday September 19, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to ISS 220 at Michigan State University taught by G. Wrobel in Fall. Since its upload, it has received 37 views. For similar materials see /class/207766/iss-220-michigan-state-university in Integrative Studies Social Sci at Michigan State University.
Reviews for Time Space & Chg Human Soc (D)
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 09/19/15
Problems with Predator Avoidance Model 0 Bipedalism is not needed for this temporary task apes do this all the at time So do prairie J dogs etc 0 Bipedalism also increases chances of predators spotting you 0 Tree climbing ability would be better for avoiding predators 7 Bi edalism Re roduction Model Allows for more ef cient transport of babies and greater ease in transporting food thus increased tness reproductive success 0 Allows rnore offspring through overlapping births since more than one infant can be cared for at a time thus greater fertility and population growth 0 Caring for infants reduces rnothers39 mobility so monogamous pair bonded males would carry food bacl in exchange for sex 0 More sex led to loss of estrus cycle 8 Problems with Reproduction Model 0 Sexual behavior leaves no fossil evidence 0 Social structure hard to tell from fossil evidence Monogamy is rare among hominids today 0 Can t prove overlapping births or reproductive success either 0 Can t really test the hypothesis 0 Also bipedalism does not require monogamy and the mother infant bond was more important as in all primate societies 9 Temperature Regulation 0 Upright posture reduces the amount of sunlight that strikes the body during hottest part of the day 0 Higher wind speed and lower temperature away from the ground Problem with Heat Stress Model V 0 Other animals who live in Savanna aren t bipedal They just wisely avoid the midday sun 0 Also earliest bipeds all found at sites with forests Free hands allow individuals to carry food especially useful for moving across open woodland and savanna 0 Energy ef ciency is increased in upright walking looking for food Problem with Food Acquisition Model 0 Primates generally feed at food source they don t transport food 0 Analogy when chimps are seen bipedal they are usually standing not walking or carrying and feeding 0 Bipedalism human style is less ef cient than knuckle walking or running in other apes 7 though does seem to be more ef cient for walking slowly 2945 kph The Genus Homo 0 Homo habilis Homo erectus Homo sapiens 11m possibly more gt r 7 0 Evolution of the genus Homo involved an ER 1813 39 ER 11570 increase in brain size a reduction in face and r teeth size and increased tool use and reliance on Homo East Thrk a culture Eventually larger body size reduced 39 sexual dimorphism altered limb proportions 7 Q d39wai 0 Many uncertainties remain on 7 Was hominid evolution cladogenic or anagenic When did humans rst use re Hunt large animals a glerkfo tein What were the social organizations of the past 5 STW 53 I V 0 Found mostly in East Africa but also in South Africa 0 25 7 16 mya Overlaps Robust Australopithecines De nitely bipedal Smaller teeth 0 Larger brain 0 More dexterous hands 7 Handy man Australopithecus boisei Homo habilis But retained alotof EastA 39ica 25 1 mya EastA 39ica 23 15 mya australopithecine traits 3 Hominid Brain size Brain size 1500 cc 1000 cc 500 cc 350 c goril a AquotT a 39quot39e quots Homo w Body size 50 lbs 100 lbs 150 lbs 200 lbsZn habilis Hom1n1d Brain s1ze Hom1n1d Bram s1ze Brain size Brain size 1500 cc 1500 cc 1000 cc 1000 cc Homo habill39s robust A s 60075001 graclle As s 500 cc 500 cc I Australopithecines Body size 50 lbs 100 lbs 150 lbs 200 lbs Body size 50 lbs 100 lbs 150 lbs 200 lbsZZ Thinking about What 0 Survival 7 Food 7 Sex 7 Danger Homo habilis Brain Larger brain size average 40 larger than Gracile Australopithecine cranial capacity 7Ranges from 510 750 cc avg 630 cc 7Fr0ntal lobe sizes similar to modern humans suggestions of specializations 0 speech and language u H habilis sexual dimorphism smaller ess M99quot smaller brain brain lllulars large nae ram Homo habilis teeth 0 Molars are smaller than australopithecines species but larger than modern human teeth 0 Large front teeth compared to back teeth 0 Shape of premolars more similar to me ern humans more elongated PMs than australopithecine PMs Homo habilis body Similar to Australopithecines Small body size Bipedal though not completely ef cient Long apelike arms Some have suggested there are multiple species lumped into this category small 2 H habilis7 large 2 H rudolfensis not all of whom are our direct ancestors Oldowan Tools FIGURE ID2I Hunter versus Scavenger Original interpretation was H habilis was a hunter We know believe more likely a scavenger based on the distribution of animal bones found with the tools 60 of bones have carnivore tooth marks Carnivores were widespread at these sites Hypotheses is that H habilis was scavenging the meat of carnivores whatever was left over 0 Can see cut marks in bone using SEM Meat Eating H hobilis 0 Since it appeals the meat was brought back to feed others this implies a social organization with division of labor within a social group 0 Isaac suggests this implies home bases or camp sites where food was brought processed and distributed to the others in the group 0 Probable that vegetation collected by others was shared then as well Home Bases Assumption of home bases was largely based on modern human behavior of hunter gatherers Maybe they just scavenged at the sites of the carcasses 7 Skeletal elements are mostly those you would nd after a carnivore meal 7 Teeth marks on hominid E bones indicates H habili was the prey of carnivores so probably did not scavenge right near predator ens Likely explanation is they y scavenged very quickl and ed as quickly as possible Homo erectus 0 Homo erectus upright walking human when 1st discovered was rst bipedal hominid Found in North South and East Africa as well as East Asia and Southeast Asia and Europe 0 Homo erectus although it originated in Africa was the rst member of Homo to leave Africa Distribution of H erectus 39nmnw mm a SMhAIyJunmuun 39 n1st Nmumw quotmquot n a L m M Km Vummm an v at 0quot Lunarwk d P if r 4 mmwmvampn 9 a Sign mm 9 9 Distrlbutlon of H erectus H erectus from East South and North Africa Asia EastAsia and Europe Note that the Asian specimens are nearly as old as the African lenl Sum mm Fnsnl sue Iquot mm Iulrmnllllra and An ammm Amwuww mm mm Emmya snsmsrwm mmsm wwvrnwwrm mum Kenya East nmm 1 ed a u 4 weslimkmm 16 u m Tanzam mam Game 1 207 awlnmnca Hepnmwuv awanmm 1 Ha Saummrmz Nunnarm Axum mmquot a 7 1 I a Momma Sale in swulneaslm mumsa 5mm 17 us mm 097 Szmhunqmcmn o 4 Nm qu 02 Easl Asia Dhmz Linksquot 0 haukou mu a M u 5 New 025 wan1AmiwnvYulDlrlumtitlingmmwnsasmmsnNWMMHnIlsthewmmnldalmum nmummw west 1km w v yuumnuma r 52 um Age Of Homo erectus 0 Homo Erectus fossils date between 18 mya and 200000 ya and maybe even younger 0 Some time overlap with Homo habilis which lasted until 15 mya 0 Overlap may be due to dating error margins or common evolutionary change where parent and daughter species coexist for a time 0 Evolution was rapid with overlap of only 100200000 yeais short in evolutionary time When did H erectus leave Africa I Ubeidiya Jordan Valley Israel Barr Yosef 1980 I Oldestwidelyraccepted site showing 3939 Y emigration from Africa 1 million ya 7 I Redating of fossils from Modjokerto Java C suggests it may by 18 million years old n v i I Dating of fossils from Sangiran Java 7 b 1 suggest these are 16 million years old I But new nd in Dmanisi Republic of Georgia showed H erectus in Eurasia E of the Black Sea dated to 17 mya I Dates on fossils from Gongwangling China are between 800000 and 1 million years old Homo erectus cranial capacities I Cranial capacities for H erectus averaged 1000 cc Much larger than previous horninids With little overlap in capacity With H habilis or Australopithecines I aim n 2 H erectus Cnmuziliim ntlhniamli 4 new Namamclus rm ls amaauszmiwinzcmas 5 E quotmm teisHm nun vmuu Melina Indicate In mnul ntuariill mums upuilylmmmimmumm maumum Samwldiil mm Aigllwllid ulinailWZi Cianial capacilytcc Homo erectus cranial capacities I Cranial capacities increased over time for Australopthecines H habilis and H erectus mm a m IZUSIMiftrem E m l m i I inssi swims imirlmn loi l M erectus I I AnnaWimsz Hm i075 I namimammamms I I al ameliouidnunha 915 39 i 3 u 3 372 39 I u g u u g 775 quot 39 a 2 2 r Millmns cl yaals a p Crania I Overall H erectus crania are larger than H habilis and smaller than H sapiens I Skull is lower face protrudes more than modern humans I Strong neck muscles attach to a bony ridge on the back of the skull rlllMiii iiiiiii iiitiiiim i ii Crania I Note the narrower front of the skull postorbital constriction for H erectus vs H sapiens indicating smaller frontal and temporal lobes less developed V I FIGURE 117 f Top views at the siuiis at l Hoiiiu mm lam arid quot modem Ham sagens trigit 39 Nara Ille greater constriction 7 behind me eyes In Haiin moms 39 var ran1a Note the Wider rear vieW of the skull for H sapiens vs H erectus broader brain case Jaws and Teeth 0 Still large compared with modern humans but smaller than earlier hominids 0 Front teeth are larger than modern humans Jaws and Teeth 0 More robust ascending rarnus compared to H sapiens so bigger chewing muscles W ear patterns t vvrth ems extensrve meat 0 5 eating a H erectus H apien M W Cranial m 31 P0st cran1a1 Skeleton r Com pan sons W 0 Eugene Dubois found the rst H mm erectus in 1891 skull cap and m 7 Th face Protrudesy femur Piltdown assumptions av mm mm m mun but not as much as earlier hominids Large ridges above the eye orbits brow ridges This are not present in H habilis and are much smaller in H sapiens kept it out of the family tree at rst 0 This was because brain was smaller but femurs were identical to humans indicating upright walking came rst Post cranial Skeleton 0 16 mya nearly complete skeleton KNMWT 15000 12 year old boy nally found in 1984 near Lake Turkana 0 Called Nariokotome Boy or the Strapping Youth Very tall for a 12 yr old boy It is thought he would be 6 tall as an adult Post cranial Muscle attachment marks suggest robust muscularity Proportions very similar to modern humans and different from earlier hominids which had longer arms Pelvis relatively narrow vs oder umans Little sexual dimorphism Argues thatH erectus could not have given birth to large headed babies lmplies human pattern of postnatal bone amp brain growth more than just the doubling of chimps 3 Cultural Behavior 0 Stone tools of H erectus were much more complicated than H habilis Probably a skilled cooperative hunter 0 Used caves for shelter and might have made temporary shelters Used re for cooking and warmth although it is not known if they could make Homo erectus and controlled use of re 0 Earliest evidence dated at 14 15 my at Koobi Fora and Chesowanja7 Kenya 0 Most compelling evidence from Zhoukoudian Burnt bones stones thick ash beds Dated at 400K Stone Tool Technology First tools similar to Olduwan tools of H habilis called evolved Olduwan 14 mya new type of stone tool technology appeared called the Achenlian tradition More diverse thanH habilis Diversity of tools occurred over time with the evolution of H erectus rather than appearing immediately Acheulean Tradition Consisted of biface tools worked on both sides 0 Flatter and have straighter sharper sides than Olduwan tools 0 Requires great skill to manufacture 0 One method of manufacture uses a softer material like bone or wood to make the akes Softer material absorbs more of the shock of the blow Hunting While H habilis was likely a scavenger and gatherer H erectus was de nitely a hunter of small and large game Earliest clear evidence of hunting is from Olduvai Gorge 15 mya All the larger animals were butcheredin a single site Bones were more fragmented due to more complete use of the animal carcass like modem pops do rather than quick scavenging raids as H habilis likely did Bone evidence in KNMAER 1808 16 mya suggests Hypervitaminosis Eating the liver of a carnivore Archaic Homo sapiens Fossils different from Homo erectus appear 400000 years ago Archaic Homo sagiens refers to early Homo sapiens which are not yet in anatomically modern form Anatomically Modern Homo sapiens AMHS These individuals often possess a MIX of primitive erectus like traits and derived sapiens like traits 5 Archaic Homo sapiens 0 Some Homo erectus lasted until 200000 years ago 0 H erectus may have lasted to as recently as 30000 years ago if a controversial Indonesian site is H erectus and is dated correctly 0 So there was AT LEAST a 200000 year overlap between Homo erectus and Archaic Homo sapiens Distribution of Sites 0 AHS Archaic Homo sapiens fossils range from 400000 to 35000 ya 0 AHS found in Sub Saharan Africa North and South Asia Southeast Asia 7 Europe and Australia 55 T i am Physical lme m it NW 5 J 39 W Character1st1cs Llne Ha n s quotA WW Rammmtmnr i J urn NW WNWSfM W W m W g 7 ML 0 Brain Size Archaic and Modern Homo sapiens both o 7 mm have large brains of equal size 0 Average for AMHS is 1345cc 0 Average for AHS is 1370cc 5a Cranial Capacities 0 Note rapid increase in size over the 200000 year period between 400Kya and 200Kya Incunm rs 7 39 mm m Llama nimcmzs or ms 39 Austrabprmscu silsnewvellsbvu mm A H nubihs Avlslrzopr mus Nam mm Hammer and a 9mm Atomic H sapm 2a Mlmnsotyearss Brain Size 0 Cranial Capacity has not increased at all over the last 45000 years and has actually DECREASED a bit 0 AHS had slightly larger brains on average thanAMHS 7 This is the rst break from the trend of increasing brain sizewith time but only ifAMHS are descended from bigger brained AHS Cranial Shape 0 There is a trend towards less occipital angulation 0 Also a trend from pentagonal to globular skull shape as seen from the rear cranial nun high Ind munded null law ms angular H erectu Archiac H apien Differences between AHS and AMHS 0 Both have large brains 0 Postcranial skeletons very similar 0 AHS have low skulls and sloping foreheads 0 AMHS have high skulls and vertical foreheads 0 AHS has larger face and teeth than AMHS 0 AHS rarely have chins common in AMHS 0 AHS on average have thicker bones and greater musculature 52 Comparison of H erectus AHS AMHS Madam Wquot m Ymnrucrauul buru 2111 l ma K by W O o Regional Variation Geo h39 11 QWQ grap 1ca y 5 very widely dis ersed m I 0 Much variation xx within each region w H pk Mammy and between 39 WW regions Q mm cmrmmmmmmmw WWW I 53 Quiz 10 Reg10nal Var1at10n As1an 1 2 points Olduwan refers to a Last common ancestor of Australopithecines and Home b Earliest stone tools c Area of forebrain developed by Home erectus d Site of rst Home erectus fossil found 2 3 points Name and critique a model explaining the evolution of bipedalism in 2 sentences 7 smaller cc also smaller body size also lower skull with sloping forehead 7 Face is on average smaller and atter than in other Regional Variation 0 EuropeAppearance of Neandertal traits 125000 to 33000 ya 7 Name comes from where rst type specimen was found in the Neander Valley in Germany Tal thal means Valley in German 0 Very large brains l465cc on average Males had larger brain and body sizes Neandertal average cc s were larger relative to body size than AlVEHS 0 Structural organization from endocasts casts of the inside of the skull indicate structure of Neandertals was very similar to AMHS 57 Occipital bun the back of the skull is puffed out Neandertal front teeth relatively large compared to back teeth and show lots of wear Neandertal faces protrude more than other AHS 0 Large faces interpreted as biomechanical adaptations to relatively large front teeth Nasal region is large suggesting large noses Interpreted as cold adaptation 53 Neandertal s long an Ion bulimia nigh munan wills anIIIildlzd rmml meal1 Ionm Iargl 1m lee Neandertals postcranial Postcranial remains consistent with short stocky build Lower arm and leg bones are relatively short Limb and shoulder more rugged than AMHS Pelvic bones more robust than AMHS Exception upper portion of pubis at the front of the pelvis which is thinner and longer than in AMHS Neandertals had a smaller pelvic outlet so may have had more dif cult childbirths Neandertal vs AMHS Neandertal Development Evidence suggests that Neanderthals develop faster than contemporary humans Neanderthal child from Devil39s Tower Gibraltar Growth rings of teeth Striae of Retzius suggest an age of3 instead of 4 e 5 years suggested by the cranial anatomy More precocious brain growth Neanderthal Geographic Range Amunxlnml dun1mm a m Neandrnmls Variation Within Neandertals 0 Middle Eastern Neandertals are not as morphologically extreme 0 ME Skulls are more rounded than Western European skulls I new 1122 u anquot ummwm Mlnhmn 0 May represent adaptation to different environments Neandertals and Ice Age 0 Lived during cold phases of glacial advance in Europe 0 Likely that much of their morphology was adaptation to stresses of ice age 0 Upper F islozelle Glarii an Neandertals and Ice Age Egyptian 39 Melanesiaquot Bushman s Alriun black American white L an as Mean TimFauna Lens CrItal lndeu Mean Annual Temperature c I FIGURE 25 Ex Ilnwammnm m 0 Stone Tool Technology advanced from the earlier Acheulian technology of H erectus and earliestAHS 0 Variation from region to region in Mousterian tools 0 Uses a preparedicore technique to manufacture the tools called Levallois technique 0 Flint nodule is chipped around the edges 0 Then small akes are removed from the top of the core 0 Then the core is struck at one end to split off the too 77 SIDE VIEWS TOP VIEWS 5 I SURE quot24 MIMUM WH D39 a Mnustel39an DBL usng the WEDEWWCME v mum rust ma cow is f shaped ny vemovinu small 39 m 2 Flam Amman Hirsuqu mum 7n 6 JV Rabm 5mm Cuzth o m ny Mayhem Punishing comm FLAKE Symbolic Behavior possibly even beliefs in the supernatural 0 Evidence of burial from many European and Middle Eastern sites 7 The dead carefully arranged in graves sometimes in association with tools food and owers 79 0 AHS may have been cpable of symbolic thought 7 Symbolic Behavior A Indicating they were cared for cmed for Jem 0 Many individuals had 01d wounds 7 Suggests someo g 1 Language Ability 0 Did AHS have language 0 Lieberman and colleagues reconstructed vocal anatomy and concluded Neandertals were incapable of vocalizing some vowel sounds Implies Neandertals may not have had a wide range of language r p f Language Ability Much criticism over the reconstructions Hyoid bone in throat is basis for much of these arguments 7 Used to reconstruct respiratory tract Hyoid shows no difference between AMHS and Neandertals 7 However pig hyoid also very similar to AMHS and pigs can39t talk so Hyoid alone is not a good indicator No major difference in brain anatomy either Anatomically Modern Homo sapiens 100000 years ago anatomically modern humans appear 0 It is clear they are in some way derived from archaic Homo sapiens but the exact mode is unclear When and where did the transition occur Why did the changes from archaic to modern occur 0 By 33000 BP all fossils are modem Homo sapiens in form a Locations of early AMHS sites g If I mu 1 x mm mm llumnv 3 Mly mm H mm m5 Distribution of Sites AMHS are found throughout the world Oldest sites are from South and East Africa and date to between 90 and 130 kya BP Sites in the Middle East date back 92 kya BP AMHS existed before AHS disappear and Characteristics No occipital bun Back of the skull is rounded Forehead rises vertically above the eye orbits and does not slope back like AHS Physical there was potential for up to 100 kya of small brow dges overlap between the two groups Face does not protrude muc 85 Strong chin present Cultural Behavior Upper Paleolithic Tools 0 Anatomically modern H sapiens had a huge amount of variation in stone tool technologies I FIGURE 127 Examples m Uppnv Paleolithic stnne Dnls d kmlc AyehyF Smiles r953 Ruplmleu le wunssmu at me nutMsmn m i Tools are much more precisely made than in any previous period More functions and styles are present Blades stone tools that are at least twice as long as they are wi e Burins small stone tools with a sharp edge used to cut whittle or engrave bone 7 Used to make needles awls points knives harpoons art Burins are not found prior to AMHS Sorne bone tools now known to date back to 90 kya BP previously only 40 kya tools were known from the fo 139 record at Shelter I Modern H sapiens lived in caves and rock shelters where available Manufactured shelter huts made of wood animal bone animal hides also sted Such shelters exist at least as far back as 30740 kyaBP 0 Cave Art symbolic behavior Art dating back over 30000 yrs most is much more recent and hunting plus anthropomorphic gures Sites known from Europe Africa and Australia 7 Anatomically correct well dra 7 Unknown function Other Art 7 Venus gurines found throughout Europe 9 Pictures of large game animals
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'