The jewel in the crown of Samizdata.net
A blog for people with a critically rational individualist perspective. We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR
[Russ.,= self-publishing house]
There is much to find for those who look
We are not alone
Made possible by...
 
December 17, 2005
Saturday
 
 
Homo Anglia
Philip Chaston (London)  Historical views

Perhaps this category should be referred to as prehistorical views. Usually, when we hear that palaeontologists and archaeologists have extended the prehistory of the human species, we think of the Leakeys, Africa, Lucy and the Olduvai Gorge.

For once, such an announcement comes from closer to home. The Ancient Human Occupation of Britain Project has discovered a site near Lowestoft dating human habitation in Britain to seven hundred thousand years ago. This date is based upon the vole teeth discovered on the site, compared with later discoveries at Boxgrove and Westbury sub Mendip in Somerset.

The dates involved are much too early for carbon dating - effective only to about 40,OOOBC - but scientists have been able to calculate good approximate ages from the known ages of animal fossils found at the sites.

In particular, the research centres on teeth belonging to a genus of prehistoric watervole, known as mimomys. About 700,000 years ago these voles had rooted molars, similar to those of human beings, which grow once then get worn down through adult life. But by 500,000 years ago, the animals had evolved rootless molars that continue to grow - an advantage to creatures that eat tough vegetation.

The voles found at Boxgrove are from the later era, but the East Anglian ones have primitive molars, dating the site definitively to at least 700,000 years ago. Those at Westbury are of an intermediate form. "The dating still involves some guesswork, but the best estimate is about 600,000 years ago," Professor Stringer said. Simon Parfitt, a fossil mammal specialist at the museum and at University College, London, who analysed the vole fossils, said; "We can put everything in a relative order, and Westbury could be 100,000 years earlier than Boxgrove. The Best Anglian finds go as far back as 700,000 years."

Early Man's reach extended further and earlier than we have anticipated. Who knows what else prehistory will throw at us.

Comments

Well that explains The Darkness then.


Posted by Andrew Ian Dodge at December 17, 2005 11:56 PM

Those were early hominids, but they weren't our ancestors. All modern humans are descended from the second wave that came out of Africa about a hundred thousand years ago. All the previous hominids in Asia and Europe are extinct.


Posted by Steven Den Beste at December 18, 2005 12:30 AM

As a supporter of the Multi-Regional evolutionary hypothesis, I must point out that Mr. Den Beste's opinion is only one of two strongly supported "evolutionary narratives."

Although I cannot say whether or not these particular hominids have living descendents, it might not be true that waves of newly evolved humans went out from Africa and replaced all who came before.

Evolution doesn't happen in one spot. There's nothing special about Africa in producing genetic mutation, and evolution is as likely in Anglia as on the slopes of Kilimanjaro. Beneficial mutations would happen randomly throughout Eurasia and Africa, and then spread out in all direction, merging with other populations. Think of raindrops on water, with all the ripples traveling across the pool and eventually merging. That's our gene pool.

There is good evidence that at least some of the traits we consider human today evolved outside of Africa and then made their way in. There is also evidence that if Tribe A evolved to a higher level of fitness than Tribe B, the humans that lived in the region later were a blend (more A than B, but a blend nonetheless). Particular traits observed in a region (such as molar size or what have you) were still observed there even after the latest "wave" from Africa.

So, my point is that perhaps, just perhaps, those vole eaters from East Anglia do have some descendents living today, and perhaps as far away as Africa.


Posted by Brock at December 18, 2005 02:54 AM

Steven den Beste - Yeah. The Africans thought, "Let's go somewhere colder! Let's go somewhere so cold, only the hardiest survive. And it's difficult to grow food. So a mango no longer so predictably plops onto our heads as we take a midday break under the shade of a mango tree. And we don't have to worry about bananas littering our path through the ice-packs. Sounds like a plan!"


Posted by Verity at December 18, 2005 02:55 AM

Verity,

That was rude.

And personally, I prefer the a more blustery climate than Africa anyway. It's bloody hot. No matter how cold it gets you can add another layer of fur, but the reverse is not true for heat. Perhaps those ancient hominids were also seeking a more reasonable climate.

Or maybe they were fleeing a drought, as Africa is prone to, or lions & hyenas, which Africa is also prone to.


Posted by Brock at December 18, 2005 06:24 AM

Wait a minute. Now we're descended from voles?

Good grief. That creation/religion thing is looking more attractive every day.


Posted by Kim du Toit at December 18, 2005 06:33 AM

"I must point out that Mr. Den Beste's opinion is only one of two strongly supported "evolutionary narratives"

Um, sorry Brock, but it is much more than that.

The Multi-Regional evolutionary hypothesis had some support amongst anthropologists for a while but it was always regarded as nonsense by evolutionary and genetics theorists. Widely separated populations will always diverge genetically. They will converge or co evolve in the same direction only if there is very high level of gene flow between them, and there was almost no gene flow between the different populations of H. habilis. SE Asia, Europe and Africa were simply too widely separated for this to happen.

Recent gene analysis makes it clear that the out of Africa hypothesis really is the only sensible explanation.

Although there is some evidence for H. sapiens sapiens and H sapiens neanderthalensis cross breeding, on the current state of knowledge Stephen Den Beste is pretty much right.


Posted by Chris Harper at December 18, 2005 08:01 AM

No Mr du Toit we are not descended from voles, they used voles as the dating method since carbon-dating is only good for 40,000 years back.

I don't think that anyone is saying that we are still not descended from the African 'Olduvai Man' - there is after all a big difference from finding bones from someone who might have lived 700,000 years ago against finding bones from someone who might have lived 1.7m years ago, or 3.2m years ago, as in the case of the fossiled remains of 'Lucy', found in the Afar region in Ethiopia.


Posted by Julian Taylor at December 18, 2005 08:46 AM

Brock - "Verity - that was rude". Who to?

I just don't believe the Africans sat around saying, "God, it's hot! Maybe somewhere off the North Sea would suit us better." Any more than I think people from East Anglia sat around saying, "God. it's bloody freezing around here. Why don't we go down the Med?"

Admittedly, before people started growing crops, there was nothing to keep them in one place, but I just can't believe human being were roaming around vast distances randomly tens of thousands of years ago - especially as there was so little known about the world then and it must have frightening and awesome.


Posted by Verity at December 18, 2005 01:57 PM

Verity,

Whether they were roaming vast distances or not simply doesn't matter. Even expanding at the rate of a few hundred yards every generation will, given a millennium or ten, result in populations spreading over vast distances.

And yes, various hunting, gathering and herding cultures did wander around vast distances as individual and family acts. Australian aboriginals, Lapps, plains Indians and Eskimo are examples from recent historical times.


Posted by Chris Harper at December 18, 2005 02:32 PM

Steven Den Beste;

Those were early hominids, but they weren't our ancestors. All modern humans are descended from the second wave that came out of Africa about a hundred thousand years ago. All the previous hominids in Asia and Europe are extinct.

Not so. Have you not noticed the title of the post? Homo Anglia. It is not a great stretch to get from there to Essex Man who is still very much alive today.


Posted by Bernie at December 18, 2005 02:37 PM

Chris harper, not exactly so

$ units --verbose
2084 units, 71 prefixes, 32 nonlinear units

You have: 100 yards / 20 years
You want: miles / millennium
100 yards / 20 years = 2.8409091 miles / millennium
So, really, it has to be deliberate migration. Just being pedantic ;-)


Posted by Julian Morrison at December 18, 2005 04:30 PM

The teeth belong to watervoles.

Since when are we related to watervoles?

I can't see how that dates the human species back 700,000 years at all. Am I missing something?

Pi.


Posted by Pi. at December 18, 2005 09:16 PM

Julian,

Ok, so I was a bit tongue in cheek and understated the situation. Still, a movement of only a couple of miles a generation will spread pretty far in the time frames available, and any nomadic hunter/gatherer group will regard moving that far in a day as but a short stroll.

Don't have a link, but it has been estimated that it took just a short thousand years to populate North America after a corridor through the ice became available.


Posted by Chris Harper at December 18, 2005 11:16 PM

I'm not going to get into this spat---I knew some of those guys, and they were a lot of fun to sit around with roasting a few watervoles and grunting dirty jokes. Ah, those were the days...


Posted by veryretired at December 19, 2005 03:27 AM

Of course there's also a minor possibility that the dating-voles are an isolated survival of earlier forms. It's not as if there is an available DNA clock in this case.


Posted by guy herbert at December 19, 2005 08:07 AM

PI and Kim du Toit the voles were just found in the same sediment layer and thus were usable as a dating method. How thick can you get.


Posted by John Rippengal at December 19, 2005 06:47 PM

I thought the voles were a food source . Archeologists use ... organic refuse all the time for dating sites. I knew one who spent an inordinate amount of time studying tiny fishbones looking for indentations (something about tool use).


Posted by michael farris at December 20, 2005 07:28 AM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?


Enter anti-spambot Turing code:





Select some text and click this to format it as a quote Make the selected text bold Make the selected text italic Add a web link


Basic html active.

Alas, but for obscure reasons Mozilla, Mac and Linux users shall not harness to power of the push-button formatting options and shall therefore compose basic html with their bare hands. Yet Mozilla, Mac and Linux users shall not fear, for we shall reveal forthwith the mysteries of Basic Html:

<strong>This text in-between is bold</strong>

<em>This text is in italics</em>

And
<blockquote>This is a quote</blockquote>
Remember to close your opened tags as such: <tag> tagged text and closing </tag> and we promise you will get out of here alive.

For adding links, either use the link URL button on the toolbar or enter your code by hand in the following format:
<a href="http://www.your_link.com">your link text or description here</a>

Movable Type's anti-spambot e-mail address protection is enabled.

You are a guest on private property. Have fun but please be civil and succinct. Blogroaches will be persecuted, not to mention IP banned.

Long third party quotes or articles will also be deleted... so just link to articles you think are germane to your comment, don't quote the whole bloody thing.