按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
tattersall and schwartzmaintain that 鈥渨hether any or all of them actually represent our species still awaits definitiveclarification。鈥�
the first undisputed appearance of homo sapiens is in the eastern mediterranean； aroundmodern…day israel； where they begin to show up about 100；000 years ago鈥攂ut even therethey are described （by trinkaus and shipman） as 鈥渙dd； difficult…to…classify and poorlyknown。鈥潯eandertals were already well established in the region and had a type of tool kitknown as mousterian； which the modern humans evidently found worthy enough to borrow。
no neandertal remains have ever been found in north africa； but their tool kits turn up allover the place。 somebody must have taken them there： modern humans are the onlycandidate。 it is also known that neandertals and modern humans coexisted in some fashionfor tens of thousands of years in the middle east。 鈥渨e don鈥檛 know if they time…shared thesame space or actually lived side by side；鈥潯attersall says； but the moderns continued happilyto use neandertal tools鈥攈ardly convincing evidence of overwhelming superiority。 no lesscuriously； acheulean tools are found in the middle east well over a million years ago； but scarcely exist in europe until just 300；000 years ago。 again； why people who had thetechnology didn鈥檛 take the tools with them is a mystery。
for a long time； it was believed that the cro…magnons； as modern humans in europebecame known； drove the neandertals before them as they advanced across the continent；eventually forcing them to its western margins； where essentially they had no choice but tofall in the sea or go extinct。 in fact； it is now known that cro…magnons were in the far west ofeurope at about the same time they were also ing in from the east。 鈥渆urope was a prettyempty place in those days；鈥潯attersall says。 鈥渢hey may not have encountered each other allthat often； even with all their ings and goings。鈥潯ne curiosity of the cro…magnons鈥櫋rrivalis that it came at a time known to paleoclimatology as the boutellier interval； when europewas plunging from a period of relative mildness into yet another long spell of punishing cold。
whatever it was that drew them to europe； it wasn鈥檛 the glorious weather。
in any case； the idea that neandertals crumpled in the face of petition from newlyarrived cro…magnons strains against the evidence at least a little。 neandertals were nothing ifnot tough。 for tens of thousands of years they lived through conditions that no modern humanoutside a few polar scientists and explorers has experienced。 during the worst of the ice ages；blizzards with hurricane…force winds were mon。 temperatures routinely fell to 50 degreesbelow zero fahrenheit。 polar bears padded across the snowy vales of southern england。
neandertals naturally retreated from the worst of it； but even so they will have experiencedweather that was at least as bad as a modern siberian winter。 they suffered； to be sure鈥攁neandertal who lived much past thirty was lucky indeed鈥攂ut as a species they weremagnificently resilient and practically indestructible。 they survived for at least a hundredthousand years； and perhaps twice that； over an area stretching from gibraltar to uzbekistan；which is a pretty successful run for any species of being。
quite who they were and what they were like remain matters of disagreement anduncertainty。 right up until the middle of the twentieth century the accepted anthropologicalview of the neandertal was that he was dim； stooped； shuffling； and simian鈥攖hequintessential caveman。 it was only a painful accident that prodded scientists to reconsiderthis view。 in 1947； while doing fieldwork in the sahara； a franco…algerian paleontologistnamed camille arambourg took refuge from the midday sun under the wing of his lightairplane。 as he sat there； a tire burst from the heat； and the plane tipped suddenly； striking hima painful blow on the upper body。 later in paris he went for an x…ray of his neck； and noticedthat his own vertebrae were aligned exactly like those of the stooped and hulking neandertal。
either he was physiologically primitive or neandertal鈥檚 posture had been misdescribed。 infact； it was the latter。 neandertal vertebrae were not simian at all。 it changed utterly how weviewed neandertals鈥攂ut only some of the time； it appears。
it is still monly held that neandertals lacked the intelligence or fiber to pete onequal terms with the continent鈥檚 slender and more cerebrally nimble newers； homosapiens。 here is a typical ment from a recent book： 鈥渕odern humans neutralized thisadvantage ＇the neandertal鈥檚 considerably heartier physique＇ with better clothing； better firesand better shelter； meanwhile the neandertals were stuck with an oversize body that requiredmore food to sustain。鈥潯n other words； the very factors that had allowed them to survivesuccessfully for a hundred thousand years suddenly became an insuperable handicap。
above all the issue that is almost never addressed is that neandertals had brains that weresignificantly larger than those of modern people鈥�1。8 liters for neandertals versus 1。4 formodern people； according to one calculation。 this is more than the difference between modern homo sapiens and late homo erectus ； a species we are happy to regard as barelyhuman。 the argument put forward is that although our brains were smaller； they weresomehow more efficient。 i believe i speak the truth when i observe that nowhere else inhuman evolution is such an argument made。
so why then； you may well ask； if the neandertals were so stout and adaptable andcerebrally well endowed； are they no longer with us？ one possible （but much disputed）answer is that perhaps they are。 alan thorne is one of the leading proponents of an alternativetheory； known as the multiregional hypothesis； which holds that human evolution has beencontinuous鈥攖hat just as australopithecines evolved into homo habilis and homoheidelbergensis became over time homo neanderthalensis； so modernhomo sapiens simplyemerged from more ancient homo forms。homo erectus is； on this view； not a separate speciesbut just a transitional phase。 thus modern chinese are descended from ancient homo erectusforebears in china； modern europeans from ancient european homo erectus； and so on。
鈥渆xcept that for me there are no homo erectus；鈥潯ays thorne。 鈥渋 think it鈥檚 a term which hasoutlived its usefulness。 for me； homo erectus is simply an earlier part of us。 i believe onlyone species of humans has ever left africa； and that species ishomo sapiens。鈥�
opponents of the multiregional theory reject it； in the first instance； on the grounds that itrequires an improbable amount of parallel evolution by hominids throughout the old world鈥攊n africa； china； europe； the most distant islands of indonesia； wherever they appeared。 somealso believe that multiregionalism encourages a racist view that anthropology took a very longtime to rid itself of。 in the early 1960s； a famous anthropologist named carleton coon of theuniversity of pennsylvania suggested that some modern races have different sources oforigin； implying that some of us e from more superior stock than others。 this hearkenedback unfortably to earlier beliefs that some modern races such as the african 鈥渂ushmen鈥�
（properly the kalahari san） and australian aborigines were more primitive than others。
whatever coon may personally have felt； the implication for many people was that someraces are inherently more advanced； and that some humans could essentially constitutedifferent species。 the view； so instinctively offensive now； was widely popularized in manyrespectable places until fairly recent times。 i have before me a popular book published bytime…life publications in 1961 called the epic of man based on a series of articles in lifemagazine。 in it you can find such ments as 鈥渞hodesian man 。 。 。 lived as recently as25；000 years ago and may have been an ancestor of the african negroes。 his brain size wasclose to that of homo sapiens。鈥潯n other words black africans were recently descended fromcreatures that were only 鈥渃lose鈥潯o homo sapiens。
thorne emphatically （and i believe sincerely） dismisses the idea that his theory is in anymeasure racist and accounts for the uniformity of human evolution by suggesting that therewas a lot of movement back and forth between cultures and regions。 鈥渢here鈥檚 no reason tosuppose that people only went in one direction；鈥潯e says。 鈥減eople were moving all over theplace； and where they met they almost certainly shared genetic material throughinterbreeding。 new arrivals didn鈥檛 replace the indigenous populations； they joined them。 theybecame them。鈥潯e likens the situation to when explorers like cook or magellan encounteredremote peoples for the first time。 鈥渢hey weren鈥檛 meetings of different species； but of the samespecies with some physical differences。鈥�
what you actually see in the fossil record； thorne insists； is a smooth； continuoustransition。 鈥渢here鈥檚 a famous skull from petralona in greece； dating from about 300；000 yearsago； that has been a matter of contention among traditionalists because it seems in some ways homo erectus but in other ways homo sapiens。 well； what we say is that this