판매가 400000
할인판매가 400,000원 총 할인금액 원 (모바일할인금액 원)
국내/해외배송 | |
---|---|
배송비 방법 | 택배 |
배송비 | 4,000원 (50,000원 이상 구매 시 무료) |
수량 |
상품 정보 | 가격 | 삭제 |
---|---|---|
[총 상품금액(수량)] 0 (0개) |
일반명 : 오모 에렉투스(자바원인)
학명: Homo erectus (Sangiran 17)
시대 : 1~1.6 million-year-old
발견지역 : Java, Indonesia
발견시기 : 1969
발견자 : Mr. Towikromo
비고 : 피테칸트로푸스 에렉투스(Pithecanthropus erectus)직립원인뜻으로 자바원인을 말한다.
Older than 1 MYA and possibly as old as 1.6 MYA. The Homo erectus Skull Sangiran 17 was discovered in 1969 by Mr. Towikromo in
Written by C. David Kreger
Introduction
Throughout the early years of paleoanthropology, there were only two different species that were attributed to the genus Homo. These included the Neanderthals, and Homo erectus. In the early 1960s, this began to change, and human ancestry seemed to be populated by many different players. Accordingly, erectus is one of the better-known members of genus Homo, especially in terms of its well-established place in paleoanthropology. This has begun to change, however, and now some question its place in human evolution.
Some (e.g., M. Wolpoff) claim that erectus is an invalid taxon, though few accept this interpretation at this point in time. Others believe that the material previously attributed to erectus should be split into several different taxons: Asian and later African material remaining as erectus (with erectus not contributing to modern humans), early African material as ergaster, and European material as heidelbergensis. In this description of the species, the material that has been attributed as ergaster and erectus in the above splitting scenario will be covered, with the heidelbergensis material discussed under the page dedicated to that species.
The species was named by Eugène Dubois (it was originally designated as Pithecanthropus erectus) in 1894, after his 1891 find from Trinil, Java, in
The material was later associated with the Chinese material from Zhoukoudian, and renamed Homo erectus. Except for modern Homo sapiens, erectus was the most far-ranging hominid to have existed. Material that has been attributed to erectus has come from
Diagnostic Features
The dates for erectus have become earlier and earlier, while habilis remains have been found in later and later deposits, making a lineage involving habilis ancestral to erectus increasingly unlikely. Specimens that are considered erectus are dated very securely to at least 1.8 myr, and fairly securely to 1.9 myr. The question of this species' evolutionary destiny is under some disagreement. Those who accept the validity of ergaster usually consider erectus an evolutionary dead-end that went from Africa into
This view has some validity in that these species are usually considered "chronospecies" due to anagenesis. Some researchers do not support the concept of anagenesis as a valid mechanism of speciation, since there is a "fuzzy" area where the transition between species occurs, whereas in cladogenesis (the splitting of a species into two new species or the branching off of one species from another) there is a "clear" boundary. However, the method of speciation is the same in both, since beyond the moment of the split in cladogenesis, the transition to new species is by anagensis. So this is really a matter of semantics and differing ideologies. In any case, erectus shows clear trends in the modern direction, and I personally think that the most parsimonious answer is that erectus is an ancestor of modern humans, and not an evolutionary dead-end. However, that is just my personal opinion.
There are specimens from a wide time span and a vast geographical area that have been attributed to erectus. The traits of these specimens are very similar, and show a trend toward the modern human condition. Some of the trends linking erectus with sapiens includes:
One of the most important erectus specimen is the Nariokotome Boy,
The narrow spinal canal has been an issue of much speculation. Some contend that this means that KNM-WT 15000 had small intercostal muscles (used for fine air control during speech in modern humans). However, this was a juvenile and the neurocanal size may have increased by 30% by maturity. Also, even though it has a small canal size relative to its body size, it is still within the modern human range (albeit, at the bottom.) This is a very tenuous piece of evidence that has been used to make very specific statements about early human capacity for speech. Considering it is within the human range at all, it makes it unlikely that this would have prevented the capacity for speech, and since it is a juvenile specimen, sweeping statements about the species capacity for language based on this trait is very weak.
A very important specimen (especially in terms of the history of paleoanthropology) is KNM-ER 3733. This fairly complete cranium is responsible for sinking the single species concept as a hard and fast rule. The specimen was found by a team led by R. Leakey at Koobi Fora,
Another African erectus specimen is KNM-ER 3883. This specimen is thought to be a male from the same population that ER 3733 came from. It was found in the same area, Koobi Fora,
The five skullcaps have a mean cranial capacity of 1043 cc. The supraorbital torus on the reconstruction is smaller than that of OH 7 or Sangiran 17 from Java. The Zhoukoudian occipital bones are strongly flexed with a broad torus across the bone's width. The skullcaps are also characterized by flat, thick, rectangular parietal bones. The facial bones are massive, and the mandibles are very robust. The Asian specimens show some general differences from African erectus, including more robust ridges of bone with the walls of the skull greatly thickened.
The Javanese specimens are a source of great controversy. No specimen from
The best preserved hominid cranium from Java is Sangiran 17. This specimen was discovered by a farmer at Sangiran,
The Sangiran 17 specimen itself shows several other features that distinguish the Indonesian material from other populations of erectus. Many of these also fit into the multiregional model. These features include:
Conclusions
Homo erectus (or the various species which may be subsumed under that appellation) are extremely important in the study of modern human origins. The Middle Pleistocene is where the modern human postcrania develops, the modern cranial features begin to develop, and significant increases in brain size occur. It is also important because many behavioral changes occur in this time period, e.g., much more developed lithic industries, the controlled use of fire, regular meat-eating, hunting, etc. This is where the things most people consider "human" start to develop to the point where most people would recognize these pattern of anatomy and behavior as human. This is also a dynamic time in the evolutionary perspective caused by these species, with the recent well-dated Dmanisi remains in the
Bibliography
Bräuer, G., and E. Mbua. 1992. "Homo erectus features used in cladistics and their variability in Asian and African hominids." In Journal of Human Evolution, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 79-108.
Brown, F., J. Harris, R. Leakey, and A. Walker. 1985. "Early Homo erectus skeleton from west
Clark, J.D., J. de Heinzelin, K.D. Schick, W.K. Hart, T.D. White, G. Woldegabriel, R.C. Walter, G. Suwa, B. Asfaw, E. Vrba, and Y.H. Selassie. 1994. "African Homo erectus: Old radiometric ages and young Olduwan assemblages in the Middle Awash Valley, Ethiopia" In Science, vol. 264, pp. 1907-1909.
Clarke, R.J., and F.C. Howell. 1972. "Affinities of the Swartkrans 847 hominid cranium." In American Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 319-335.
Clarke, R.J., F.C. Howell, and C.K. Brain. 1970. "More evidence of an advanced hominid at Swartkrans." In Nature, vol. 225, pp. 1219-1222.
Dubois, E. 1894. Pithecanthropus erectus, eine menschenaehnliche Übergangsform aus Java. (Landesdruckerei,
Dubois, E. 1926. "On the principle characters of the cranium and the brain, the mandible and the teeth of Pithecanthropus erectus." In Proceedings of the
Franciscus, R.G., and E. Trinkaus. 1988. "Nasal morphology and the emergence of Homo erectus." In American Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 75, no. 4, pp. 517-527.
Grine, F.E., W.L. Jungers, and J. Schulz. 1996. "Phenetic affinities among early Homo crania from East and
Holloway, R.L. 1982. "Homo erectus brain endocasts: Volumetric and morphological observations with some comments on cerebral asymmetries." In L'Homo erectus et la Place de l'Homme de Tautavel parmi les Hominidés Fosiles., ed. by H. de Lumley, pp. 355-369. 1er Congrès International de Paléontologie Humaine, Nice, Prètirage. Vol. 1. Nice: Louis-Jean.
Johanson, D., and B. Edgar. 1996. From Lucy to Language.
Jones, S., R. Martin, and D. Pilbeam, eds. 1992. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Human Evolution.
Kramer, A. 1993. "Human taxonomic diversity in the Pleistocene: Does Homo erectus represent multiple hominid species?" In American Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 91, no. 2, pp. 161-171.
Leakey, R.E.F. 1976. "New hominid fossils from the Koobi Fora formation in
Leakey, R.E.F., and A. Walker. 1976. "Australopithecus, Homo erectus and the Single Species Hypothesis." In Nature, vol. 261, pp. 572-574.
Rukang, W., and L. Shenglong. 1983. "Peking Man." In Scientific American, vol. 248, no. 6, pp. 86-94.
Sartono, S. 1971. "Observations on a new skull of Pithecanthropus erectus (Pithecanthropus VIII) from Sangiran,
Strait, D.S., F.E. Grine, and M.A. Moniz. 1997. "A reappraisal of early hominid phylogeny." In Journal of Human Evolution, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 17-82.
Stringer, C. 1987. "A numerical cladistic analysis for the genus Homo." In Journal of Human Evolution, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 135-146.
Swisher, C.C. 1994. "Dating hominid sites in
Swisher, C.C., G.H. Curtis, T. Jacob, A.G. Getty, A. Suprijo, and Widiasmoro. 1994. "Age of the earliest known hominids in
Tobias, P.V., and G.H.R. von Koenigswald. 1964. "A comparison between the Olduvai Hominines and those of Java, and some implications for hominid phylogeny." In Nature, vol. 204, pp. 515-518.
Walker, A., and R.E.F. Leakey, eds. 1993. The Nariokotome Homo erectus Skeleton.
Walker, A., and P. Shipman. 1996. The Wisdom of the Bones: In Search of Human Origins.
Weidenreich, F. 1943. "The skull of Sinantropus pekinesis: A comparative study of a primitive skull." In Palaeontologia Sinica New Series D, Ne. 10 Geological Survey of
Wolpoff, M. 1999. Paleoanthropology. second edition.