Tutorial+2+-+Early+homo

Homo habilis

Anthropologists generally believe that Homo habilis was the earliest species of the homo genus to evolve from Australopithecus afarensis. The name Homo habilis is derived from a Latin term meaning "handy man" or "skillful person". It is believed that Homo habilis lived approximately 2.5 to 1.8 million years ago. Homo habilis, though of the same genus as the modern Homo sapiens, nevertheless shared more similar physical characteristics to Australopithecus afarensis. Homo habilis had a short body with disproportionately long arms when compared to modern humans. An evolutionary feature of Homo habilis that begins to differentiate him from Australopithecus afarensis is a lesser protrusion of the skull. Homo habilis had a brain approximately half the size of the modern Homo sapien. The study of archeological sites once inhabited by Homo habilis reveal that this human ancestor utilized primitive stone tools. homo habilis shows beginning of cultural trends with early tool use using small pebbles. Early Human Evolution Homo habilis cranium replica

http://www.aurorahistoryboutique.com/Homo-Habilis.cfm

The skulls by and large have thin walls and are rounded, rather than low and flattened; they do not have the heavy crests and projecting browridges characteristic of later H. erectus. The underside of the cranium is shortened from the back of the palate to the rear of the skull, as in all later Homo species. Average capacity of brain case in homo habilis is roughly 640cm3

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/270419/Homo-habilis

Homo habilis, a maker and user of crude stone tools, appeared up to 2.3 million years ago. Giant buffalo and other grazer animals replaced forest antelope fossils while H. habilis appeared. This suggested that grasslands had expanded and tree cover was less. It had small teeth, signs of a protruding nose, was lightly built, at 1.52 m tall and weighing 45 kg, and had a brain volume of about 650 cc. Males were much larger than females, similar to the sexual dimorphism of the Australopithecines. Animal bones found with habline tools show scratch marks suggesting that these creatures ate meat and also fruit, insects and plants. Tools and a jaw bone fragment dated at 1.9 million years old have been found in central China.

http://www.ecotao.com/holism/hu_habilis.htm

Homo habilis inhabited parts of sub-Saharan Africa about 2 – 1.5 million years ago. Remains were first discovered in 1959 and 1960 at Olduvai Gorge in northern Tanzania; additional remains have since been found in the Lake Turkana region of northern Kenya and, arguably, at Sterkfontein in South Africa. The cranial capacity of H. habilis ranged from 500 to 800 cc. Limb bones suggest that the species walked upright efficiently, and the fossil of a hand suggests that H. habilis was capable of precise manipulation of objects. Crude tools found along with H. habilis remains provide further evidence that this species could shape stone.

http://www.answers.com/topic/homo-habilis

Homo habilis

Until 1964, Australopithecus remains had been found in Africa, but remains of the oldest representative of the genus Homo had been recognized only in Asia. In that year, however, Louis Leakey, Phillip Tobias, and John Napier announced the new species Homo habilis, or "handy man". They had to redefine the genus to accommodate this oldest form.

The type specimen was a mandible, with associated postcranial bones, and a fragmentary cranial vault; Olduvai Hominid 7 (OH 7). They based their placement of OH 7 in Homo primarily on brain expansion. Until then, an arbitrary lower limit had been set between 700cc and 800cc as the cutoff for the genus Homo. With an estimated cranial capacity of 680cc, Leakey and his colleagues chose to lower this number to 600cc. While calling attention to anatomical differences between OH 7 and Australopithecus, they chose a behavior- the ability to make stone tools-to help place OH 7 in Homo. This point relied on stone tools found in the same geologic horizon as the fossils.

The OH 7 mandible is shown at the top right. In the 1960s, many researchers argued that Homo habilis was not a valid species, and that the fossils attributed to H. habilis were really members of other species. But with the discovery of KNM ER 1470, acceptance of Homo habilis became universal. In hindsight, this seems strange since ER 1470 is now considered to belong to a species distinct from H. habilis. There is much debate as to the number of species that existed in Homo 2 million years ago, and KNM ER 1470 is now assigned to the species Homo rudolfensis. The name Homo habilis is reserved primarily for the Olduvai material and several other specimens. The OH 62 partial skeleton of a female H. habilis provides another interesting twist in the debate about early members of the genus Homo.

Homo habilis was originally thought to be the ancestor to all later Homo. In a neat, linear progression, later species emerged resulting in what we call modern humans. This is now known not to be the case.

http://anthropology.si.edu/humanorigins/ha/hab.html

Homo habilis Exemplar: KNM-ER-1813 [Koobi Fora, Kenya] - 1.9 million y.a.

HOMO HABILIS lived from about 2.4 to 1.5 million years ago, and is the earliest known species to show novel differences from the chimpanzee and australopithid skulls. The face is still primitive and projecting, but the jaw is pulled under the brain, with smaller molars (though still much larger than in modern humans), and the skull is thinner, with a distinctive rounded shape, vertical sides and a small forehead above the brows. The first humans have arrived on the scene.

A male habilis may have stood at around 1.3 meters and weighed 37 kilos, and females 1.2 meters and 32 kilos. However, some forms of habilis were apparently smaller, and may have stood little more than a meter tall.

The two signature evolutionary trends in hominids are increasing brain size -- in habilis, to an averge of about 650cc -- and a proportionate reduction in the size of the face. In habilis the brain shape is more humanlike: the bulge of Broca's area, implicated in human language, is visible in at least one habilis brain cast. Another resemblance to modern humans is the reduced, less apelike or australopithid sexual dimorphism.

In habilis, increased brain power coincided with the first known use of manufactured stone or quartz tools (hence the choice of name, which means "handy man"). Habilis is associated with the Oldowan tool industry which is characterized by crude stone flakes, rounded hammer stones, and bones used for digging. Though odd stones or pieces of bone may have been used as weapons or scrapers much earlier, tools now begin to show up regularly near dismembered animal remains. One interpretation of the evidence is that habilis scavaged dead prey from carnivore meals, using stones to extract the marrow from bones too large for carnivores to break. Habilis may also have had a more agile gait than the larger australopithids, and for protection against predators may have moved in larger groups.

Despite its distinctively human cranium and its chronological position near the origin of the human line, habilis had a fairly apelike physical form: its arms were almost as long as its legs. It is therefore a controversial species. Similar in physique to the australopithids, without a clear evolutionary descendant, and appearing highly variable in the fossil record, habilis raises more questions than the available fossils are able to answer.

http://www.handprint.com/LS/ANC/hfs4.html



As the early hominids, Homo habilis and H. ergaster, switched to an increasingly carnivorous diet in Africa, they would have encountered the prey and carnivores carrying these parasites. T. solium, a human-specific tapeworm, is closely related to tapeworms such T. hyaenae (brown hyenas, spotted hyenas and African hunting dogs), T. crocutae (spotted hyenas and African hunting dogs), T. gonyamai (lions and cheetahs) and T. madoquae (jackals). Our hominid ancestors must have occupied a similar ecological niche to these species, relying on similar prey as food. This is good proof that early Homo hunted and scavenged animal carcasses and is supported by archaeological evidence such as the presence of stone tools, cutmarks and hominid-induced breakage patterns on the fossil bones at hominid sites.

Between 2.5 and 2.0 mya, a more omnivorous line, the earliest species of the genus Homo emerged, (Larick and Ciochonto, 1996). Oldowan core and flake tools associated with Homo habilis are found with animal bones, such as antelope lower legs (parts with little or no meat), that show tool marks (Feder, Kenneth L., and Michael Alan Park, Human Antiquity, Mayfield Publishing Company, Mountainview, CA, 1997. ). Oldowan tools were definitely used for cutting meat, possibly scavenged for marrow rather than hunted.

Genus Homo made crude bifacial tools by 2.0 mya. Typical Acheulean biface tools had evolved by 1.5 mya in the eastern Rift in Ethiopia, and in Peninj and Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania (Larick, 1996). Acheulian bifaces are found in Israel by 1.4 mya (Jacobs, 2000). The oldest ergaster populations made Oldowan tools, but by around 1.6 to 1.7 Mya, bifaced “hand axes” and cleavers typical of “Acheulean” industries were being made.

Meat eating allowed H. ergaster to migrate across vast distances and into new ecological niches with different plants. This led to H. ergaster's dispersal at a time of climate change a process probably enabled by meat scavenging. Fossil finds of H. ergaster from Dmanisi, Georgia and dated at 1.7 million years old are the oldest evidence of this species early dispersal out of Africa. The two skulls were found with fossil bones (a dozen kinds of animals including giraffe, gazelle, rhinoceros, and ostrich (Archaeology Online News)) and over 1000 tools of the simpler "pebble-chopper" (Oldowan) type that preceded the Acheulean tools in Africa, appearing about 2.4 million years ago. The site itself is older than any known Acheulean tools (Gabunia, et al 2000). It is clearly a less developed hominid than Homo erectus previously thought to be the first hominid to move out of Africa to populate Asia and Europe. The associated animal bones show no signs of butchery and there is no evidence that the Georgian hominids had mastered fire.

http://www.hss.caltech.edu/courses/2005-06/Spring/An101/lectures/03.%20Lecture%203%20Homo.pdf **// Homo habilis //** ** OLDOWAN TOOL TRADITION ** > "PALEOLITHIC" > (divided into Lower, Middle, Upper) ** OLDOWAN TRADITION ** ** OLDOWAN TOOL TYPES ** ** Types of Oldowan Sites ** ** Hunting vs. Scavenging Debate ** Lewis Leakey Big Game hunters R. Blumenshine, L. Binford , P. Shipman -scavenging -broken bones ** FLK North ** Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania > Sites with stone tools and bones of 1 animal ** DK ** ** Living Site ** Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania ** Food Sharing and Glynn Isaac ** •  Scavenging, but sharing food ( Koobi Fora and FLK sites) •  Provides economic stability •  Females could stay at home with their children •  Development of language •  Reciprocal obligation •  Marriage patterns and division of labor ** Lewis Binford and “Uncle Wilbur” ** •  Binford  argues against the DK site as a living site and FLK as a kill site • Problems according to Binford – Scavengers, not hunters – Lake shores are dangerous – Death of animals over time – Low intelligence – No evidence for social organization ** Death Sites in Modern Savannas vs Olduvai Sites ** • Low bone concentrations –  Olduvai  3-214 times greater • Little mixing of bones from different animals –  Olduvai  high numbers of mixing • Low ecological diversity –  Olduvai  high ecological diversity • Vertebrae and other axial skeletal parts remain near the site and limb bones tend to be removed –  Olduvai  – small frequency of axial elements to limb bones • Catastrophic mortality (drought or flood) leave diagnostic geologic evidence –  Olduvai  low articulated skeletons ** Robust Australopiths v. Homo ** ** The end of //Homo habilis // ** > > > > >  > **__ Weight and Height: __** > The male habilis stood at roughly 1.3 meters and weighed 37 kilos, > while females were around 1.2 meters and 32 kilos. However, some forms of habilis were > apparently smaller. The arms of the homo habilis were almost as long as its legs. > > **__Brain:__** > The brain size of the homo habilis was much larger compared to previous species with an average of about 650cm3. It also had a reduction in the size of the face. In habilis the brain shape is more human like also and the bulge of Broca's area, implicated in human language, is visible in at least one habilis brain cast. It also has a reduced, less apelike or australopithid sexual dimorphism, which is much like today’s modern humans. > > **__ Development of tools: __** > With the increased brain size, this coincided with the first known use of > manufactured stone or quartz tools. The Habilis is associated with the Oldowan tool industry which > is characterized by crude stone flakes, rounded hammer stones, and bones > used for digging. Pieces of stones or pieces of bone may have been used > as weapons back then. One way they would use weapons is that they would get dead prey from carnivore meals, using stones to > extract the marrow from bones too large for carnivores to break. The homo habilis become the first species to be good at tool making and was know as the "handy man" due to its capablity > > > **__Teeth:__** > The molars are longer than they are wide with homo habilis and also smaller molar and premolar teeth compared to the earlier species. > The jaw was also thinner and it had smaller, narrower molars. The back teeth are also smaller, but still considerably larger than in modern humans. > > > **__Fire starting:__** > Homo habilis did not have fire-making skills , so to create a fire for warmth and for cooking, they had to wait until they found something burning from natural causes, set aflame, such as from a lightening strike. The fire had to be carefully watched, because if the fire went out, they did not know how to start it again. The area around the campfire was probably used as a sleeping area.The campfire would keep most wild animals away, because most are afraid of fire. When they broke camp, they most probably tried to bring their fire with them by carrying several lit branches. > > **__Food and Shelter:__** > They followed food sources, and set up camp as needed. They sheltered under cliffs, whenever possible. Sometimes the caves had often had dangerous occupants. Although this group made stone tools and weapons, these weapons were still pretty basic to defend from others. Their main diet was fruits, roots, nuts and vegetables that they found growing wild and occasionaly meats. With the aid of the tools such as stones, there where able to kill animals and crack open the bone marrow and collect nutrients which benifited the evolution more. > > ** __Relgion: __ ** > There was no evidence to find that the homo habilis had any faith or religion with most believing relgion and faith didn’t occur till years after the homo habilis and erectus. > > **__Loaction:__** > The homo habilis evolded in Africa, especially East and Southern Africa, which was where the majority was found. > > > > > > **__Daily Life:__** > The daily life was mainly gathering food and hunting and they would usually find a new place to stay each night, with walking endlessly in the days for food and shelter and stayed in small groups. > > __ > Physical characteristics! __ > Although Homo habilis is of the same genus as the Homo sapiens, they are actually physically more similar to Australopithecus afarensis. Homo habilis had short bodies with disproportionately long limbs (with the arms being almost the same length as the legs). Their height ranged between 1.52m tall, to some forms being little more than one meter, with their weight ranging from 32 to 45kg. Sources are conflicting over whether there was a reduced sexual dimorphism compared to the Australopithecines or not, however, it is clear that males were slightly larger and heavier than females. Homo habilis had approximately half the brain size of modern Homo sapiens, at about 650cm3, although this was still much larger than previous species. A feature which begins to differentiate Homo habilis from Australopithecus afarensis is a lesser protrusion of the skull, which was rounded, rather than low and flattened, with thin walls. The skull had vertical sides and a small forehead, without the heavy crests and projecting brow ridges of later Homo erectus. The underside of the cranium was shortened from the back of the palate to the rear of the skull, as it was with all later Homo species. The face was still primitive and projecting, with a protruding nose, but the jaw was pulled under the brain, with smaller molars, though they are still much larger than those we have today. The molar and premolar crowns, particularly in the lower jaw, were narrower in Homo habilis compared to the Australopithecines. In habilis, the increase in brain size was proportional to the reduction in the size of the face. The shape of the brain itself is also more human-like, with the bulge of Broca’s area implicated in human language, indicating that habilis may have had some form of speech. Homo habilis had dexterous hands, though the bones were still apelike in some aspects, making it possible for them to shape stone. They were able to have a power grip and tended to be right-handed. This “handedness” continues in Homo erectus. Some of the physical differences between Homo habilis and Homo erectus are that the teeth and jaws are larger in habilis, indicating they may have eaten tougher food; whilst Homo erectus had more modern arm and leg proportions and a more projecting nose. > HHHhhjhjhhjikj > > **__temporal ang geographic distribution__** > > > >  > __ Questions! __ > > 1)  What is the approximate brain size of Homo habilis? > >  2)  What was the height and weight ranges of Homo habilis? > > 3)  Which sex was slightly larger and heavier? > >  4)  Was the Homo habilis skull rounded, or low and flattened? > > 5)  In habilis, the increase in brain size was proportional to what? > >  6)  Did Homo habilis tend to be right-handed or left-handed? > > 7)  Were Homo habilis’ teeth larger or smaller than those of Homo erectus?  > > > Anne is cool (: so is ryan, luke and brodie
 * Larger cranial capacity than Australopiths
 * 631 cc average (500-800 cc range)
 * Larger brain but no increase in body size
 * larger front teeth, somewhat smaller molars than Australopiths
 * FIRST ARCHAEOLOGICAL CULTURE
 * Oldowan = Lower Paleolithic
 * Eastern Africa
 * 1.8 mya
 * Locally available materials
 * Different Raw Materials
 * Omo, Ethiopia (quartz pebbles)
 * Koobi For a, Kenya (basalt and quartzite)
 * Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania (basalt and quartzite)
 * Sites with Stone Tools Only
 * Sites with Stone Tools and Bones of One Animal = "Kill" or "Butchery" Site
 * Sites with Stone Tools and Bones of Many Animals = "Living Site", "Home Base" or " Central Place "
 * location of cut marks
 * " Kill or "Butchery" Site
 * Extinct Elephant ( Deinotherium ) bones
 * Striations and cut marks on the bones
 * Sites with Stone Tools and Bones of Many Animals
 * Circle of stones- possible wall for a structure
 * ** Clearly two separate adaptations **
 * ** robust Australopiths fitting hypervegetarian niche **
 * **// Homo habilis //**** fitting niche of meat scavenging, foraging omnivore **
 * Oldowan tools
 * Home bases
 * Scavenging
 * [|homo habilis site with above information]