The archeology of modern human origins

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, B, 2001

The question of the mode of origin of modern humans (Homo sapiens) has dominated palaeoanthropological debate over the last decade. This review discusses the main models proposed to explain modern human origins, and examines relevant fossil evidence from Eurasia, Africa and Australasia. Archaeological and genetic data are also discussed, as well as problems with the concept of 'modernity' itself. It is concluded that a recent African origin can be supported for H. sapiens, morphologically, behaviourally and genetically, but that more evidence will be needed, both from Africa and elsewhere, before an absolute African origin for our species and its behavioural characteristics can be established and explained.

Twenty five years after the Out of Africa model was proposed, Africa remains at the heart of most theories for modern human origins. For all the ardour of its proponents, multiregional evolution continues to lack evidence from genetics and morphology. The question today is whether the African origin of Homo sapiens was in fact recent, or even a single event. The most likely scenario predicts a deep population sub-structure in the middle Pleistocene of Africa c. 200,000 years ago coupled with a complex emergence of the modern human genetic lineage. Sweeps of population interbreeding can explain the preserved traces of archaic genes that survive today in Homo sapiens. Anatomical modernity it seems was the product of a long-term accretion or piecemeal coalescence of morphological traits. Multiple dispersals and bottlenecks, rather than a single Out of Africa event, account for the observed distribution in the genetics, morphology and behaviour of modern humans today. Encounters with archaic populations such as Neanderthals in the Levant were likely exemplified by interbreeding events that have contributed to the present day genetic make-up of modern humans. Thus fundamental assumptions underpinning the Out of Africa model have been violated. Looking forward, only a redefinition of the origins of modern humans can accommodate the conclusions of 21 st century research and ultimately reunite all scholars.

International Encyclopedia of Anthropology, 2017

The origin and evolution of modern humans, their anatomy and behaviour, is one of the most debated topics in evolutionary anthropology today and is crucial for understanding how and why modern humans look and behave the way they do. Although it is agreed that humans emerged from Africa around 200,000 years ago, debates still surround the identification of the ancestral species of modern humans and the extent to which archaic species contributed to the modern human genome (which has implications for the Out of Africa and Multiregional hypotheses), the relationship between anatomical and behavioural modernity and how this affects the categorisation of fossils as “modern human”, and the exact centre of evolution within Africa (eastern or southern Africa). Only by drawing on a range of evidence from archaeology, palaeoanthropology, palaeontology, and genetic studies of both modern human populations and ancient DNA, can the origin of modern humans be illuminated.

In T. Rasmussen (ed.). The Evolution of Humans and Humanness. Pp 75-94, 1993

The Quarterly Review of Biology, 2014

American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 1989

During the past decade or so, considerable new data pertinent to the origin of modern humans have come to light. Based on these new data and reinterpretation of older information, three models have been offered to explain the development of modern people. These models-Brauer's Afro-European sapiens hypothesis, Stringer and Andrew's recent African evolution model, and Wolpoff, Wu, and Thorne's multiregional evolution model-have their roots in earlier models but differ from most by virtue of their worldwide perspective and integration of genetic and paleoanthropological data pertinent to modern human origins. This review presents a detailed discussion of these data in light of the three models. While convincing arguments can be offered for each of these models, it is concluded that none are unequivocally supported by the available data.

Journal of Human Evolution, 1992

The origins of Homo sapiens have traditionally filled the black hole of Pleistocene studies. While potassium-argon and related techniques are on hand to solve the chronological problems of the early Pleistocene, and 14C the details ofrecent prehistory, fossils and events in the period from about 300 to 40 Ky are notoriously difficult to date. Various exotic techniques have appeared sporadically, the results ofwhich were largely believable in proportion to how well they fitted expectations. These techniques, though, were erratic, had large errors and very sensitive assumptions. However, as a recent conference demonstrated,* the rate at which both new dates and new experimental techniques have been emerging in the last few years means that these new techniques must become comprehensible to, and scrutinized by, the palaeoanthropological community. If H. sapiens is 100 Ky old, then it is quite important to know how this date is obtained.

Clark, G. A. &. Willermet, C. M (eds.). Conceptual issues in modern human origins research. Pp 191-201., 1997

It seems that in the long-lasting controversy on modern human origins little agreement has been reached between the proponents of the multiregional evolution and Out of Africa models. The current situation looks somewhat like a "thicket" of misreadings, polarization, and biases, which instead of clarifying the problems have caused more confusion (cf. Frayer et al. 1994a; Stringer and Brauer 1994). Thus, a number of basic questions about preconceptions, biases, and assumptions will be addressed in this paper, providing some insights into major causes for such a development. We have not restricted ourselves to our own model because the relevant problems become more evident and clear in comparison with opposite views. In addition, proposals for more efficient research are outlined.

American Anthropologist, 2003

We present a review of the history of scientific inquiry into modern human origins, focusing on the role of the American Anthropologist. We begin during the mid-20th century, at the time when the problem of modern human origins was first presented in the American Anthropologist and could first be distinguished from more general questions about human and hominid origins. Next, we discuss the effects of the modern evolutionary synthesis on biological anthropology and paleoanthropology in particular, and its role in the origin of anthropological genetics. The rise of human genetics is discussed along two tracks, which have taken starkly different approaches to the historical interpretation of recent human diversity. We cover varying paleoanthropological interpretations, including paleoanthropologists' reactions to genetic interpretations. We hope to identify some of the crucial inflection points in which the debate went astray, to rectify some of the points of misunderstanding among current scientists, and to clarify the likely path ahead.

Accumulating evidence from various fields of study has substantially advanced our understanding of modern human origins and dispersal. Fossil evidence in hand supports the African origin of our species, although its sparseness leaves many questions unanswered. Similarly, genetic studies provide unprecedented insights into the evolutionary history of our species, lending further support to its African origin and Late Pleistocene dispersal beyond the continent. On the other hand, inferring the origin and dispersal of a given hominin species based on archeological evidence is more difficult because Paleolithic technologies do not necessarily imply the taxonomic or genetic affinities of their makers. Perhaps most difficult of all is inferring the origin and evolution of behaviors, such as language, which leave hardly any trace in the Paleolithic record.