L'homme fossile de la Chapelle-aux-Saints

Boule, Marcellin

doi:10.5962/bhl.title.77337

Cited by 128 publications

(102 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The "brachiationist" hypothesis was opposed by vociferous critics, including Boule (1912), Osborn (1927), Wood Jones (1916), and later Le Gros Clark (1940) and Straus (1949). Although they varied in the details of their views, these authors all believed humans to be more distantly related to apes and, thus, argued that humans and apes arose independently from a more primitive primate.…”

Section: A Century Of Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Origin of human bipedalism: The knuckle-walking hypothesis revisited

Richmond

Begun

Strait

2001

Am. J. Phys. Anthropol.

219

164

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Some of the most long-standing questions in paleoanthropology concern how and why human bipedalism evolved. Over the last century, many hypotheses have been offered on the mode of locomotion from which bipedalism originated. Candidate ancestral adaptations include monkey-like arboreal or terrestrial quadrupedalism, gibbon-or orangutan-like (or other forms of) climbing and suspension, and knuckle-walking. This paper reviews the history of these hypotheses, outlines their predictions, and assesses them in light of current phylogenetic, comparative anatomical, and fossil evidence. The functional significance of characteristics of the shoulder and arm, elbow, wrist, and hand shared by African apes and humans, including their fossil relatives, most strongly supports the knuckle-walking hypothesis, which reconstructs the ancestor as being adapted to knuckle-walking and arboreal climbing. Future fossil discoveries, and a clear understanding of anthropoid locomotor anatomy, are required to ultimately test these hypotheses. If knucklewalking was an important component of the behavioral repertoire of the prebipedal human ancestor, then we can reject scenarios on the origin of bipedalism that rely on a strictly arboreal ancestor. Moreover, paleoenvironmental data associated with the earliest hominins, and their close relatives, contradict hypotheses that place the agents of selection for bipedality in open savanna habitats. Existing hypotheses must explain why bipedalism would evolve from an ancestor that was already partly terrestrial. Many food acquisition and carrying hypotheses remain tenable in light of current evidence.

show abstract

Section: A Century Of Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Origin of human bipedalism: The knuckle-walking hypothesis revisited

Richmond

Begun

Strait

2001

Am. J. Phys. Anthropol.

219

164

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[20][21][22][23][24][25] have argued that the Neanderthals had limited manipulative capabilities. This idea was based largely on the mistaken belief that Neanderthals had relatively short thumbs, unusual thumb muscle morphology, and limited thumb mobility compared with recent humans.…”

Section: Neanderthal and Upper Paleolithic Human Hand Functional Anatomymentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioral inferences from the Skhul/Qafzeh early modern human hand remains

Niewoehner

2001

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two groups of humans are found in the Near East Ϸ100,000 years ago, the late archaic Neanderthals and the early modern Skhul͞ Qafzeh humans. Observations that Neanderthals were more heavily muscled, had stronger upper-limb bones, and possessed unusual shapes and orientations of some upper-limb joint complexes relative to the Skhul͞Qafzeh hominids, have led some researchers to conclude that significant between-group upperlimb-related behavioral differences must have been present, despite the association of the two groups with similar Middle Paleolithic archeological complexes. A three-dimensional morphometric analysis of the hand remains of the Skhul͞Qafzeh hominids, Neanderthals, early and late Upper Paleolithic humans, and Holocene humans supports the dichotomy. The Skhul͞Qafzeh carpometacarpal remains do not have any unique morphologies relative to the other fossil samples remains examined. However, in the functionally significant metacarpal 1 and 3 bases they resemble Upper Paleolithic humans, not Neanderthals. Furthermore, the Skhul͞Qafzeh sample differs significantly from the Neanderthals in many other aspects of hand functional anatomy. Given the correlations between changes in tool technologies and functional adaptations seen in the hands of Upper Paleolithic humans, it is concluded that the Skhul͞Qafzeh hand remains were adapted to Upper Paleolithic-like manipulative repertoires. These results support the inference of significant behavioral differences between Neanderthals and the Skhul͞Qafzeh hominids and indicate that a significant shift in human manipulative behaviors was associated with the earliest stages of the emergence of modern humans.

show abstract

“…Les premières reconstitutions graphiques de l'Homme de Néandertal montrent une démarche aux genoux pliés (Figure 1) [5]. Cette vision simiesque du Néandertalien a perduré jusqu'à la moitié du xx e siècle.…”

Section: La Locomotion Des Néandertaliensunclassified