The history of human settlement. How did human exploration of the Earth take place? Main stages and features

Modern Homo sapiens or Homo sapiens originated on Earth about 60-70 thousand years ago. However, our species was preceded by many ancestors that have not survived to this day. Humanity is a single species, October 31 - November 1, 2011, its population reached 7 billion people and continues to grow. However, such a rapid growth in the population of the Earth began quite recently - about a hundred years ago (see graph). For most of its history, the number of people was no more than a million individuals on the entire planet. Where did man come from?

There are several scientific and pseudo-scientific hypotheses of its origin. The dominant hypothesis, which in fact is already a theory of the origin of our species, is the one that claims that humanity arose in equatorial Africa about 2 million years ago. At this time, the genus Man (Homo) stands out in the animal kingdom, one of the species of which is modern people. The facts confirming this theory, first of all, include paleontological finds in this territory. On no other continent of the world, except Africa, are the remains of all the ancestral forms of modern humans found. In contrast to this, it can be said that the fossilized bones of other species of the genus Man have been found not only in Africa, but also in Eurasia. However, this hardly indicates the existence of several centers of the emergence of mankind - rather, several waves of settlement on the planet various kinds, of which, in the end, only ours survived. The closest form of man to our ancestors is the Neanderthal man. Our two species split from a common ancestral form about 500,000 years ago. Until now, scientists do not know for sure whether the Neanderthal is an independent species or is it a subspecies of Homo sapiens. However, it is known for certain that Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons (the ancestors of modern humans) lived on Earth at the same time, perhaps even their tribes interacted with each other, but Neanderthals died out several tens of thousands of years ago, and Cro-Magnons remained the only human species on the planet .
It is assumed that 74,000 years ago on Earth there was a strong eruption of the Toba volcano - in Indonesia. It has become very cold on Earth for several decades. This event led to the extinction a large number animal species and greatly reduced the human population, but may have been the impetus for its development. Having survived this catastrophe, humanity began to spread throughout the planet. 60,000 years ago, modern man migrated to Asia, and from there to Australia. Settled Europe 40,000 years ago. By 35,000 BC it reached the Bering Strait and migrated to North America, finally reaching the southern tip of South America 15,000 years ago.
The spread of people across the planet led to the emergence of numerous human populations that were already too distant from each other to interact with each other. Natural selection and variability led to the emergence three big human races: Caucasoid, Mongoloid and Negroid (often a fourth, the Australoid race, is also considered here).

The resettlement of man on the planet is one of the most exciting detective stories in history. Deciphering migrations is one of the keys to understanding historical processes. By the way, you can see the main routes on this interactive map. Recently, many discoveries have been madeScientists have learned how to read genetic mutations; in linguistics, methods have been found in accordance with which it is possible to restore proto-languages ​​and the relationships between them. There are new ways of dating archaeological finds. The history of climate change explains many routes - man went on a great journey around the Earth in search of a better life and this process is still going on.

The ability to move was determined by the level of the seas and the melting of glaciers, which closed or opened up opportunities for further advancement. Sometimes people have had to adapt to climate change, and sometimes it seems to have worked out well. In a word, here I reinvented the wheel a little and sketched brief summary on the settlement of the earth, although I am most interested in Eurasia, in general.

This is what the first migrants looked like

The fact that Homo sapiens came out of Africa is now recognized by most scientists. This event happened plus or minus 70 thousand years ago, according to the latest data, it is from 62 to 130 thousand years ago. The figures more or less coincide with the determination of the age of skeletons in Israeli caves at 100,000 years. That is, this event still took place over a decent period of time, but let's not pay attention to the little things.

So, a man came out of southern Africa, settled on the continent, crossed into the narrow part of the Red Sea to the Arabian Peninsula - the modern width of the Bab el-Mandeb Strait is 20 km, and in the Ice Age the sea level was much lower - perhaps it could be crossed almost ford. The level of the world's oceans rose as the glaciers melted.

From there, part of the people went to the Persian Gulf and into the territory of approximately Mesopotamia,part further to Europe,part along the coast to India and further - to Indonesia and Australia. Another part - approximately in the direction of China, settled Siberia, partly also moved to Europe, another part - through the Bering Strait to America. So Homo sapiens basically settled around the world, and in Eurasia there were several large and very ancient centers of human settlements.Africa, where it all began, is by far the least explored, it is assumed that archaeological sites can be well preserved in the sand, so interesting discoveries are also possible there.

The origin of Homo sapiens from Africa is also confirmed by the data of geneticists, who discovered that all people on earth have the same first gene (marker) (African). Even earlier, there were migrations of homoerectus from the same Africa (2 million years ago), which reached China, Eurasia and other parts of the planet, but then died out. Neanderthals most likely got into Eurasia by approximately the same routes as homo sapiens, 200 thousand years ago, they died out relatively recently, about 20 thousand years ago. Apparently, the territory approximately in the region of Mesopotamia is generally a passage yard for all migrants.

In Europe the age of the oldest Homo sapiens skull is determined at 40 thousand years (found in a Romanian cave). Apparently, people climbed here for animals, moving along the Dnieper. Approximately the same age as the Cro-Magnon man from the French caves, who is considered in all respects the same person as we are, only he did not have a washing machine.

The lion man is the oldest figurine in the world, 40 thousand years old. Restored from micro parts over 70 years, finally restored in 2012, kept in the British Museum. Found in an ancient settlement in southern Germany, where the first flute of the same age was found. True, the figurine does not fit into my understanding of the processes. In theory, it should be at least female.

Kostenki, a large archaeological site 400 km south of Moscow in Voronezh region, whose age was previously determined at 35 thousand years. However, there are reasons to make the time of the appearance of man in these places ancient. For example, archaeologists have found layers of ash there -trail of volcanic eruptions in Italy 40 thousand years ago. Numerous traces of human activity were found under this layer, so the man in Kostenki is more than 40 thousand years old, at least.

Kostenki were very densely populated, the remains of more than 60 ancient settlements were preserved there, and people lived here for a long time, not leaving it even during the Ice Age, for tens of thousands of years. In Kostenki, they find tools made of stone, which could be taken no closer than 150 km, and shells for beads had to be brought from the sea coasts. This is at least 500 km. There are figurines made of mammoth tusk.

Diadem with mammoth tusk ornament. Kostenki-1, 22-23 thousand years old, size 20x3.7 cm

Most likely, the process of resettlement to one degree or another continued constantly. For example, one of the monuments of this period is Dolni Vestonica (South Moravia, Mikulov, the nearest Big City- Brno), the age of the settlement is 25 and a half thousand years.

Vestonica Venus (Paleolithic Venus), found in Moravia in 1925, 25 thousand years old, but some scientists consider it older. Height 111 cm, kept in the Moravian Museum in Brno (Czech Republic).

Most of the Neolithic monuments of Europe are sometimes combined with the term "Old Europe". These include Trypillya, Vinca, Lendel, the culture of funnel-shaped goblets. Pre-Indo-European European nations consider Minoans, Sikans, Iberians, Basques, Lelegs, Pelasgians. Unlike the Indo-Europeans who came later, who settled in fortified cities on the hills, the old Europeans lived on the plains in small settlements and did not have defensive fortifications. They did not know the potter's wheel and wheel. On the Balkan Peninsula there were settlements of up to 3-4 thousand inhabitants. The Basque Country is considered to be a relic old European region.

In the Neolithic, which begins about 10 thousand years ago, migrations begin to take place more actively. The development of transport played an important role. The migrations of peoples take place both by sea and with the help of a new revolutionary vehicle - a horse and cart. The largest migrations of the Indo-Europeans belong to the Neolithic. Regarding the Indo-European ancestral home, almost unanimously they name the same area in the territory around the Persian Gulf, Asia Minor (Turkey), etc. Actually, it has always been known that the next resettlement of people occurs from the territory near Mount Ararat after a catastrophic flood. Now this theory is increasingly being confirmed by science. The version needs proof, so the study of the Black Sea is of particular importance now - it is known that it was a small freshwater lake, and as a result of an ancient catastrophe, water from the Mediterranean Sea flooded nearby areas, possibly actively inhabited by Proto-Indo-Europeans. People from the flooded area rushed in different directions - theoretically, this could serve as an impetus for a new wave of migrations.

Linguists confirm that a single linguistic Proto-Indo-European ancestor came from the same place where migrations to the territory of Europe and in earlier times take place - approximately from the north of Mesopotamia, that is, roughly speaking, all from the same area near Ararat. A large migration wave went from about the 6th millennium almost in all directions, moving in the directions of India, China and Europe. In earlier times, migrations also took place from the same places, in any case, it is logical, as in earlier times, the penetration of people into Europe along the rivers approximately from the territory of the modern Black Sea region. Also, people actively populate Europe from the Mediterranean, including by sea.

During the Neolithic, several types of archaeological cultures developed. Among them are a large number of megalithic monuments.(megaliths are large stones). In Europe, they are distributed mostly in coastal areas and belong to the Eneolithic and Bronze Age - 3 - 2 thousand BC. To more early period, Neolithic - in the British Isles, in Portugal and France. They are found in Brittany, the Mediterranean coast of Spain, Portugal, France, as well as in the west of England, in Ireland, Denmark, Sweden. The most common are dolmens - in Wales they are called cromlech, in Portugal anta, in Sardinia stazzone, in the Caucasus ispun. Another common type of them is corridor tombs (Ireland, Wales, Brittany, etc.). Another type is galleries. Menhirs (separate large stones), groups of menhirs and stone circles, which include Stonehenge, are also common. It is assumed that the latter were astronomical devices and are not as ancient as megalithic burials, such monuments are associated with migrations by sea. Complex and intricate relationships between settled and nomadic peoples - separate story, by the year zero, a quite definite picture of the world is formed.

Quite a lot is known about the great migration of peoples in the 1st millennium AD thanks to literary sources - these processes were complex and diverse. Finally, over the course of the second millennium, a modern map of the world is gradually taking shape. However, the history of migrations does not end there, and today it takes on no less global scale than in antiquity. By the way, there is an interesting BBC series "The Great Settlement of Nations".

In general, the conclusion and the bottom line is this - the resettlement of people is a living and natural process that has never stopped. Migrations occur according to certain and understandable reasons- Well, where we do not. Most often, a person is forced to move on by worsening climatic conditions, hunger, in a word, the desire to survive.

Passionarity - a term introduced by N. Gumilyov, means the ability of peoples to move and characterize their "age". High level passionarity is a property of young peoples. Passionarity, in general, was good for the peoples, although this path has never been easy. It seems to me that it would be better for a single person to be smarter and not sit still :))) Willingness to travel is one of two things: either complete hopelessness and compulsion, or youth of the soul .... Do you agree with me?

Molecular genetics makes it possible to reconstruct the history of the formation of both individual peoples and humanity as a whole. Research in recent decades has literally turned our understanding of the origin of man upside down. The study and comparison of DNA samples isolated from the blood of inhabitants of different continents made it possible to establish the degree of their genetic relationship.

As in comparative linguistics by number common words determine related languages, also in genetics by the number common elements the genealogy of mankind is built in DNA (see "In the world of science", No. 7, article by L. Zhivotovsky and E. Khusnutdinova "Genetic history of mankind").

It turned out that in the female line of all people can be traced to a single common foremother, which was dubbed mitochondrial (mitochondria is a cellular organ in which DNA is located), or African Eve.

Theme: Man on planet Earth

Lesson: Settlement of the Earth by man. Races

1. Today we will find out

How man populated the planet

How people have changed living in different natural conditions.

2. Human settlement of the Earth

The main difference between the Earth and many other planets is the presence of intelligent beings on it - people. Where and when did the first man appear? People have been searching for an answer to this question for a very long time.

Most scientists distinguish two stages in the resettlement of people on planet Earth (see Fig. 1). The first is that about 2 million years ago, ancient people began to penetrate from East Africa to other regions and to other continents. This stage ended about 500 thousand years ago. Subsequently, people died out.

Modern man - Homo sapiens (reasonable man) - appeared in Africa about 200 thousand years ago. It was from here that the second stage of human settlement began. To go to new, unexplored lands, they were forced by concern for food. With an increase in the number of people, the territories on which hunting was carried out expanded, and edible plants were collected.

The level of the ancient World Ocean was 130 meters lower than the modern one, so there were "land bridges" between the continents and the islands. On the site of the Bering Strait, there was land, which about 30 thousand years ago connected the northeastern part of Eurasia and North America.

Through this land "bridge" ancient hunters penetrated into North America, and then into South America, up to the islands of Tierra del Fuego. Humans entered Australia from Southeast Asia.

Findings of fossil remains of ancient people helped scientists draw conclusions about the ways of human settlement and the civilizations that they created.

Rice. 1. Ways of resettlement ancient man

3. Changing people

The long existence of people in various natural conditions led to the emergence of races. A race is a large group of people who have common, inherited, external signs. According to external signs, all of humanity is divided into 4 large geographical races.

4. Negroid race

Formed in hot regions of the Earth. Representatives of this race are characterized by dark, almost black skin, coarse curly or wavy black hair. Brown eyes. Wide flat nose and thick lips.

The main region of settlement is the region of the historical formation of the race: Africa, south of the Sahara. Also, a significant part of the population of Brazil, the West Indies, the USA and France belongs to the Negroid population at the beginning of the 21st century.

4. Australoid race

Australo-Negroid race

Negroids are dark-skinned, they are characterized by curly dark hair, a wide and flat nose, brown or black eyes, sparse facial and body hair. Classical Negroids live in equatorial Africa, but a similar type of people is found throughout the equatorial belt.

australoids(Indigenous people of Australia) are almost as dark-skinned as Negroids, but they are characterized by dark wavy hair, a large head and a massive face with a very wide and flat nose, a protruding chin, considerable hair on the face and body. Australoids are often isolated as a separate race.

To describe a race, the signs that are most characteristic of the majority of its members are distinguished. But since within each race there is an enormous variation in hereditary characteristics, it is practically impossible to find individuals with all the characteristics inherent in the race.

5. Mongoloids

They have adapted to life in the steppes and semi-deserts, where summer temperatures are high, winds and dust storms are frequent. The yellow color of the skin protects against excessive exposure to sunlight. The narrow slit of the eyes saves them from wind and dust. Mongoloids have coarse, straight hair, a flattened face, and prominent cheekbones. This race predominates in Asia, but as a result of migration, its representatives settled throughout the globe.

6. Caucasoid race

It is divided into northern and southern branches.

The people of this race are characterized by light skin, straight or wavy light blond or dark blond hair, gray, gray-green, brown-green and blue wide-open eyes, a moderately developed chin, a narrow protruding nose, thin lips, well-developed hairline. on the face of men. Now Caucasians live on all continents, but they formed in Europe and Western Asia.

7. Mixed races

Over time, the proportion of people on Earth is growing, in the form of which there are signs of different races. They form mixed races (see Fig. 2).

Rice. 2. Mixed races

Homework

Read § 10. Practical work.

Explore the placement features of the main races.

"Assistant"

What continents are inhabited by representatives of the Caucasian race? What continent is inhabited by representatives of the Australoid race? What continents do not have them? On which continents is it not common? Mongoloid race? On which negroid?

Bibliography

MainI am

1. Geography. Earth and people. Grade 7: Textbook for general education. uch. / A. P. Kuznetsov, L. E. Savelyeva, V. P. Dronov, series "Spheres". – M.: Enlightenment, 2011.

2. Geography. Earth and people. Grade 7: atlas, series "Spheres".

Additional

1. N. A. Maksimov. Behind the pages of a geography textbook. – M.: Enlightenment.

Literature for preparing for the GIA and the Unified State Examination

Analysis of craniometric (that is, related to measurements of the skull) indicators modern man indicates that all people living on Earth now descended from a relatively small group of individuals that lived in Central Africa 60-80 thousand years ago. As the descendants of these people settled around the globe, they lost some of their genes and became less and less diverse. In a paper recently published in the journal Nature, the hypothesis of a single center of origin of modern man was confirmed by the analysis of not only molecular genetic data, but also phenotypic (in this case, the size of the skull).

More and more data collected in recent years indicate that "modern" man was formed in equatorial Africa 150-200 thousand years ago. Its settlement on the planet began about 60 thousand years ago, when a relatively small group of people moved to the Arabian Peninsula, and from there their descendants gradually began to spread across Eurasia (moving primarily east along the coast of the Indian Ocean), and then across Melanesia and Australia.

The process of human settlement of our planet, according to this hypothesis, should have been accompanied by a decrease in the initial stock of genetic variability. Indeed, at each stage, not the entire “parental” population is put on the road, but some small part of it, a sample into which all genes could not get into. In other words, there should be a founder effect - a sharp decrease in the overall genetic diversity during the formation of each new group migrants. Accordingly, as a person spreads, we must detect the gradual disappearance of a number of genes, the impoverishment of the original gene pool. In reality, this can manifest itself in a decrease in the level of genetic variability, and the farther from the source of settlement, the more. If the center of origin of the species (in this case Homo sapiens) not one, but several, then the picture will be completely different.

The hypothesis of a single center of origin for modern humans was recently confirmed by molecular genetic data collected as part of the international Human Genome Diversity Project (HGDP). Genetic diversity in human populations did decline with distance from Central Africa, the putative center of human origin (see, for example, Ramachandran et al. 2005). However, it remained unclear whether this effect could be detected by referring to phenotypic features, for example, the anatomical features of modern humans.

This task was undertaken by Andrea Manica from the Department of Zoology at the University of Cambridge (UK) together with colleagues from the Department of Genetics of the same university and the Department of Anatomy at Saga Medical School (Japan). The material was the measurement data of skulls (craniometric indicators), collected around the world. A total of 4666 male skulls from 105 local populations and an additional 1579 female skulls from 39 populations were analyzed. The data on male skulls were taken as a basis as more representative. The analysis did not include skulls older than 2000 years to avoid measurement errors associated with the poor preservation of ancient bones.

The results of the study confirmed the hypothesis of a single center of human origin. With distance from central Africa, the variability of the main dimensional parameters of the skull decreased, which can be interpreted as a decrease in the initial genetic diversity. Additional difficulties in analysis were associated with the fact that as a person masters new climatic zones certain signs of it turned out (or did not turn out) useful and, accordingly, were supported or not supported by selection. Such climatic adaptation also affected the size of the skull, but the use of special statistical methods made it possible to isolate this “climatic” component and not take it into account when analyzing the dynamics of the initial variability.

In parallel, in the same work, the degree of genotype heterozygosity was assessed for 54 local populations of modern humans. To do this, we used data on microsatellites (DNA fragments containing repeats) also collected within the framework of the HGDP program. When mapped, these data show a distribution very similar to that found on the basis of phenotypic traits. As you move away from the center of human origin, heterozygosity (and this is a measure of genetic diversity) decreases as well as phenotypic diversity.

A source: Andrea Manica, William Amos, François Balloux, Tsunehiko Hanihara. The effect of ancient population bottlenecks on human phenotypic variation // Nature. 2007. V. 448. P. 346-348.

See also:
1) Why man left Africa 60 thousand years ago, "Elements", 06/30/2006.
2) The most ancient history of mankind is revised, "Elements", 03/02/2006.
3) Journey of Mankind. The Peopling of the World. Bradshaw Foundation (see free map with animation showing the route of the settlement of ancient people from Africa).
4) Paul Mellars. Why did modern human populations disperse from Africa ca. 60,000 years ago. A new model (full text: Pdf, 1.66 Kb) // PNAS. 06/20/2006. V. 103. No. 25. P. 9381-9386.
5) Sohini Ramachandran, Omkar Deshpande, Charles C. Roseman, Noah A. Rosenberg, Marcus W. Feldman, L. Luca Cavalli-Sforza Support from the relationship of genetic and geographic distance in human populations for a serial founder effect originating in Africa ( full text: Pdf, 539 Kb) // PNAS. 2005. V. 102. P. 15942-15947.
6) L. A. Zhivotovsky. Microsatellite variability in human populations and methods of its study // Vestnik VOGiS. 2006. V. 10. No. 1. S. 74-96 (there is a Pdf of the entire article).

Alexey Gilyarov

Show comments (29)

Collapse comments (29)

I explain popularly about genetic drift. Suppose there is some large population, for example, 100,000 individuals of the same species (let there be a person, but with the same success, maybe a hare, a gray crow, a forest geranium ...). If we take some small random sample of 10 individuals from this large population, then obviously not all the genes that are in the parent population will get there, but those that are, in case of successful reproduction and an increase in the size of the daughter population, will be reproduced in many copies. If in parallel we take some other small sample from the parental population, then other genes can accidentally get there, which will also be reproduced in in large numbers individuals, if some new population comes from this sample. Accordingly, differences may arise between such daughter populations isolated from each other (which will also appear in the external appearance of individuals), which are not the result of natural selection (i.e., not adaptive, not adaptive), but simply due to some random coincidence of circumstances. This phenomenon was independently discovered by Wright (who gave the name "genetic drift" and our compatriots, Dubinin and Romashov, who called it "genetic-automatic processes." Populations of terrestrial animals and plants from remote oceanic islands often originate literally from a couple of individuals. Of course, and the founder effect and genetic drift are particularly pronounced in this case.

Human settlement of the American continent occurred no earlier than 25 thousand years ago. People crossed there from the most northeastern part of Asia along the "bridge", a piece of land (Beringia), which then connected Eurasia with America. Then, 18 thousand years ago, there was the last strongest glaciation (ice from the north reached south to 55 latitude) and it completely cut off the people who migrated to the American mainland (descendants of Asians) from contacts with the parent population. The formation of Indian culture began.

All xenophobes and nationalists of all stripes (it does not matter - they prefer the Aryan race, or Negroids, or Mongoloids) should be disappointed. Modern man descended from a very small group of people, with "Eve" being black. All of us, people living on the Earth, are VERY CLOSE RELATIVES. For example, genetic differences between different groups of chimpanzees living in different parts of Central Africa are much more significant than differences between representatives different races Homo sapiens. The loss of genetic (and, as shown in the article under discussion, also phenotypic) diversity as we move away from our common homeland - Africa, is another powerful evidence in favor of the hypothesis of a single center of origin of modern man. Such as in the case of humans, depleted genotypes, resulting from the passage of the population through the bottle-neck (bottleneck, the stage of extremely low abundance), are also found in other groups of animals. For example, among all cats, the cheetah occupies a special place. All cheetahs are also very close relatives, which cannot be said about lions, tigers, lynxes and domestic cats. I apologize for the verbosity, but I hope that now everything is clear.

Answer

• Dear Alexey Gilyarov,

  It so happened that I read your note in a row and the note "SENSATIONAL FINDING REFUTED THE THEORY OF "EXODUS FROM AFRICA"" (http://www.inauka.ru/evolution/article74070.html)

  There we are talking about the discovery in China of a skeleton about 40 thousand years old, which, on the one hand, is similar to a modern person, and on the other, it clearly differs from the African phenotype.

  These data, in my opinion, are in clear contradiction with the materials of your note, and it would be interesting to know how you can resolve this contradiction.

  On the other hand, data on the genetic variability of the African genotype may have not only a "historical" but also a "bio-geographical" nature - for example, it can be assumed that Africans, IN PRINCIPLE, due to some local geographical or climatic reasons, are more active there is a process of genetic mutations, which, in particular, manifests itself in phenotypic diversity. If such a process (not yet discovered) really takes place, then, in theory, the thesis that the "more diverse" African genotype is a confirmation of the "seniority" of Africans should be corrected.

  Personally, it seems to me that the state of affairs in the theory of the origin of man is somewhat similar to the situation with systematics chemical elements before the advent of the periodic table. The problem then was that scientists tried to "naturally" arrange all the KNOWN data "in a row", leaving no room for the UNKNOWN, and THEREFORE they did not succeed. Likewise, the presence contradictory friend of theories of the origin of man, based on firmly established facts, says that EACH of these theories does not leave "gaps" for YET UNKNOWN facts - and therefore is incorrect.

  Answer

  • Dear Mikhail, unfortunately, in the note to which you refer, neither the source (the name of the journal and the coordinates of the article), nor even the names of the researchers in English transcription. Therefore, I cannot find that original publication about the Chinese find that started it all, and it is simply impossible to judge by a journalistic text written completely without understanding the issue. So, if you find the coordinates of the original (and not secondary) publication - report on the site! It is likely that this is not Homo sapiens at all, but some other representative of hominids. If earlier for decades they talked about the missing links in human paleontology, now there is even an excess of them. In any case, all major anthropologists agree that there was a period on Earth when several hominids COEXISTED at once, i.e. several types of ancient "people" (quotation marks - because people are understood in a broad sense, including, for example, Neanderthals, who in Europe coexisted for a long time with Homo sapiens, but then nevertheless died out). So the remains of the "ancestors" are mostly representatives of the lateral lines (later extinct), and not at all the real ancestors of Homo sapiens.
    As for the assumption about some particularly high rates of mutation of the African human ancestors, there are no grounds for it. Still, let's observe Occam's rule and let's not produce entities beyond necessity.

    Answer

    • An early modern human from Tianyuan Cave, Zhoukoudian, China
      (Late Pleistocene | Neandertals | mandible | postcrania | paleopathology)

      Hong Shang*, Haowen Tong*, Shuangquan Zhang*, Fuyou Chen*, and Erik Trinkaus
      ================

      As for Occam's razor... This is a VERY good trick, but you need to use it carefully, otherwise you can cut off what is obviously necessary :))

      In the example with the periodic table, Mendeleev made a very serious "violation" of this principle - and turned out to be right.

      Comparing the maps you cited with the maps of the settlement of Homo Sapiens (or at least with the dates of the settlement of Asia and Europe), I see a clear contradiction. Based on the theory of genetic drift, then the later a particular territory was populated, the less gene variability there should be. According to available data, Europe was settled later than Asia, and therefore must be "darker" than Asia. Or, speaking more globally, the maps you provided SHOULD be "spotty". But on them we see a "continuous gradient" - as if the settlement from Africa went from south to north (Africa-Europe), and then from west to east (Europe - Asia). Aren't you confused by such inconsistencies? If they showed me these maps and did not give any additional explanations about what is displayed there, I would see there a clear indication of the manifestation of some planetary geophysical phenomenon and would ask how things are in another part of the world (i.e. in America).

      Answer

      • Thank you very much for the link. Unfortunately, only abstract is open, from which you can learn a little. I'll try to log in from the university computer, maybe I can get the whole text. As for your remarks about the settlement of Europe and Asia, I cannot fully substantiate the author's point of view. It is necessary to ask them. Look at the cards
        which are referenced on Elements (in particular, with animation!). People went to Europe quite early (but already from Asia). Yes, and in PNAS there are completely open works (if this is not the most Last year). There are still inconsistencies, of course. This is not surprising, since until recently we did not know anything at all. Surprising is the progress in knowledge that has been achieved literally over the past 10-20 years.

        Answer

        • I hope to see an overview of this article in Elements.

          Thank you very much for the animated map - it's exactly what I've been looking for.

          And you did not come across maps (static or animated), on which chronological order Were there archaeological evidence of human technological progress (stone tools, dwellings, etc.)? Or, maybe, somewhere there are resources on which such a map could be built?

          http://site/news/430144

          Answer

          • Yes, I read this article in due time. Unfortunately, it does not quite accurately correspond to the topic of discussion.

            It says that the theory of displacement by the latest human ancestors (3rd wave of expansion, about 100 thousand years ago) is not true, and genetic data indicate that biologically, we humans are descendants of all immigrants from Africa, starting from about 2 million years ago.

            Given this fact (and I don’t see any point in arguing with it), then I can quite agree with the statement that some group of immigrants from Africa settled in China a couple of million years ago, which by the time Homo Sapiens appeared had changed so much that no longer resembled their African ancestors. Maybe it was this group that gave rise to the Sinanthropes, and those, in turn, to the modern Chinese and Asians.

            In fact, from my point of view, the problem is NOT whether Neanderthals could interbreed with Cro-Magnons and whether representatives of the 3rd wave could interbreed with representatives of earlier "expansion waves". All this, from my point of view, has NO meaning in relation to the problem of the emergence of intelligence on Earth, since it refers to the evolution of the body, but not consciousness.

            What REALLY matters is finding out the causes of the CULTURAL EXPLOSION.

            By "cultural explosion" is meant a SHARP time boundary (approximately 40-50 thousand years ago), after which people began exponential progress in technology, culture and development environment. Actually, we can assume that the Reasonable Man (ie the modern bearer of consciousness) appeared just then - about 50 thousand years ago, and not 150, and even more so not 800 thousand years ago. From this point of view, all our ancestors (including the representatives of the 3rd "expansion wave" mentioned everywhere), who lived before this "fatal line", have nothing in common with us in terms of the level of consciousness, although they are biologically "practically identical" to us. I gave arguments in favor of this assumption in another discussion (see?discuss=430541). And no analysis of the DNA of MODERN people, unfortunately, will give an answer to the reasons for this "gap in consciousness."

            Answer

            • : By "cultural explosion" is meant a SHARP time boundary (approximately 40-50 thousand years ago), after which people began exponential progress in technology, culture and development of the environment.

              And how was the absolute significance of the level of technology, culture and environment assessed? Is there somewhere an illustration of a chart that plots this level based on a known fact, and from which one could conclude about the exponential growth at that time, and about the point of its beginning, if there was one? Is there somewhere an analysis of changes in environmental conditions or other factors that could serve as persuasive incentives to increase this level? Finally, it would be interesting to read what are the incentives for raising this level now. :-)

              : Actually, we can assume that the Homo sapiens (i.e. the modern bearer of consciousness) appeared just then - about 50 thousand years ago, and not 150, and even more so not 800 thousand years ago. From this point of view, all our ancestors (including the representatives of the 3rd "expansion wave" mentioned everywhere), who lived before this "fatal line", have nothing in common with us in terms of the level of consciousness, although they are biologically "practically identical" to us. I gave arguments in favor of this assumption in another discussion (see?discuss=430541). And no analysis of the DNA of MODERN people, unfortunately, will give an answer to the reasons for this "gap in consciousness."

              Answer

              • >And how was the absolute significance of the level of technology, culture and environment assessed?...

                Read the discussion I linked to. There, the questions raised by you were partially considered, in particular, I gave an indirect method by which it would be possible to quantify the rate of development of consciousness (that is, to get exactly a visual graph, and not general reasoning). On this graph, if you build it, the "starting point" will be quite clearly visible.

                As for the "cultural explosion" itself, this is a fairly well-known fact. It’s just that after this time limit, the tools became more elegant and perfect, the drawings became more realistic, household and cultural objects became more diverse, and, most importantly, over these 50 thousand years, we “got” from a stone knife to spaceships(this also applies to the issue of environmental development). And ALL of our ancestors over a similar period of time only slightly improved the stone knife. Read the discussion - there, perhaps, answers are given to most of the questions that first come to mind.

                > Is there any analysis of changes in environmental conditions or other factors that could serve as incentives to increase this level?

                In the same discussion, I tried to show that, firstly, these conditions must be VERY specific (namely, they must imply a very rigid evolutionary selection according to the degree of development of consciousness, which we never observe in real living nature), and, secondly, during the period under consideration (40-50 thousand years ago) there were no conditions on Earth at all that suggested an increased rate of speciation. That is, based on logic and known facts, the human mind simply SHOULD NOT have appeared on our planet. But it did appear, and it makes one think about missing facts or about the wrong assumptions that underlie logical analysis.

                >> And no DNA analysis of MODERN people, unfortunately, will give an answer to the reasons for this "gap in consciousness".

                > First, is he really trying to answer the _etot_ question? As far as I understand, he does not concern him at all.

                That's just the point, that really "does not concern at all"! But in the literature relating to the problem of the appearance of people, there is a persistent substitution of concepts. There, an equal sign is put between biological evolution (ie OBSERVED changes in the genotype and phenotype) and the evolution of consciousness. Researchers simply refuse to recognize the fundamental difference between these phenomena.

                > Secondly, the fact that he does not show any fundamental gap is about 50 thousand years ago, is already part of the answer to this question. :-)

                This is TOO crude a tool to be used to find these differences. It's like measuring a bacterium with a student's ruler.

                And then, if the emergence of human consciousness was the result of some small modification of the genome, then the analysis of the DNA of modern people DO NOT show when this modification occurred and whether it occurred in principle, because. it is present in ALL people, and it is simply impossible to understand that this is a modification of the "pre-human" genome.

                > Wasn't the transition from bacterial colonies to single-celled ones no less of a gap? Was the transition from unicellular to multicellular not less of a gap? Etc.

                These questions are also very interesting, but, firstly, they relate specifically to BIOLOGICAL evolution and, secondly, they have a fundamental difference from the question of the emergence of consciousness, because occurred much more "naturally", i.e. for sufficiently long periods of time (millions of years) and by the "trial and error" method. And, besides, they were not connected with such a completely unnecessary thing for survival as the Mind.

                Answer

boldly somehow people work with statistics ... On the territory of Russia (except for the edge of Kamchatka, it seems) there is not a single fence of skulls, but then they boldly paint over its territories in a very specific temporary zone of settlement!

Answer

As you move away from the center of human origin, heterozygosity (and this is a measure of genetic diversity) decreases as well as phenotypic diversity.

In other words, the farther from Africa, the more stable the heterozygous and phenotypic traits, i.e. the entire set of features has gone through a longer and more thorough selection and the sample has been firmly established, which means that in these regions people are older than in Africa, where they are still very, very young, and so they change every year, like children when they grow up.
And in Africa, people lived, more precisely, on a line parallel to the equator, approximately at latitude North Africa, where they were periodically driven by glaciers. From there they later, not all, returned home as the weather warmed up. Therefore, the birds fly to nest in the North, also home, like people. In Kenya, where they have been digging so enthusiastically since the discovery of "Lucy", there are simply unique conditions in the form of a shift in the continental plate. They dig not where they "lost", but under the "lantern". All these remains of the "ancient ancestors of man" may well have nothing to do with us. By the way, genetic analysis already knocked the Neanderthal man out of the pack of Darwinoids, and how they only recently imposed him on us as uterine brothers! Africa, as the ancestral home of mankind, was apparently chosen for reasons of parity of civilizations and political correctness. Most likely, there were still several Adams, "of the same type." Six basic mutations, out of 200 known today, are supposedly present in all men of the Earth. But does this testify to a common ancestor or to the conditions of their occurrence common to all? And are these markers of mutations? It is possible that this is indeed a "registration sheet", but what and why? I can not accept the explanation that nature has created a worthless zone, not in her tradition. Maybe 6 matches is the registration index of our " post office"Earth? Ha-ha!

Answer

In fact, if you look at the maps placed in the article under discussion, you can clearly see that "something is happening" in the African region, and the intensity of this something decreases as you move away from the center (i.e. Africa). However, this phenomenon can be explained in several ways, and the simplest of them (in accordance with Occam's principle) is that some MODERN geophysical phenomenon takes place in the "epicenter", which is reflected in biological processes, in particular, in the frequency of human mutations. genome.

This hypothesis is elementarily verified - it is enough to do the same "temporal scanning" of genes not only in humans, but also in other species that lived in Africa with him and have approximately the same distribution on the planet. If a similar picture is observed in them, it means that the matter is in geophysical processes, but if only in humans, then either the hypothesis is incorrect, or additional factors must be taken into account.

On the other hand, the molecular clock, although it does not give the exact time of the appearance of a mutation, but like it or not, it shows the SEQUENCE of mutations. Those. if this mutation does not exist in Africa YET, but it ALREADY exists in Asia, then the mutation appeared AFTER this species appeared in Asia, and it is difficult to argue here. As far as I understand, it was precisely judging by the SEQUENCE of a number of mutations that we came to the conclusion that we originated from Africa. Political correctness has nothing to do with it - roughly speaking, it's just counting on the fingers.

Personally, what annoys me in all discussions about the origin of man is the fact that the conversation is conducted exclusively around the structure of the skull, skeleton or chromosomes, i.e. around what can be dug up, measured, disassembled and weighed. It's like judging a man's intelligence by the size and style of his clothes. More than 50 size - reasonable, less - no. There is a breast pocket - sapiens, no - a monkey.

Intelligence is primarily an INFORMATION phenomenon. And the ability to process information is NOT reflected in the skeleton, NOR in the structure of the skull, NOR in the currently known features of the genome structure. Although biologists have already understood that the genetic sequence itself does not mean anything yet - the important thing is HOW the genes "interact" in the process of the work of a LIVING organism, and one cannot even dream of judging this from fossil DNA. So at the moment the whole "genetic history" of intelligence is not worth a penny. It just gives a rather rough picture of who after whom appeared in this world.

If we judge the appearance of this INFORMATION ABILITY (intelligence) in people by the ONLY reliable (but, unfortunately, indirect) material sign - objects of material culture, tools and rock paintings, then it turns out that the mind arose SIMULTANEOUSLY on the WHOLE planet about 40- 50 thousand years ago, i.e. ALL people who at that time were settled in an area thousands of kilometers from Africa to Australia. If we admit this fact, then all the "scientific" theories of the appearance of people instantly go down the drain, and we face a very unpleasant choice - the intervention of "higher powers" or an alien mind.?discuss=430541), I proposed a "reasonable compromise" - "accidental "Viral introduction of" mind genes ", but it also does not look very convincing. Although, from my point of view, this is the best that can be offered at the moment, if one firmly adheres to the materialistic point of view.

Answer

• That's right, the count is just on the fingers, more precisely on point mutations of the non-gene zone of the Y chromosome. But there is one thing! If, say, Egypt, the Middle East or Southern Europe are taken as the conditional point of origin of the "most ancient mutation" - M168, then the strategic plan for the capture of the planet Earth by progressive humanity in the form of arrows on the map is also drawn correctly. The fact is, for example, that 10-15% of non-Africans do not have the M89 (Arabian) mutator. And if we take as a basis the "exodus" through the Red Sea to the Arabian Peninsula, then everyone should have this "snip". The genetic base at the time of the study included only about 50 thousand data, from, as you understand, 3 billion men on earth. Is this a sufficient sample? Do not know. I think no. But already it shows that the version of the thousand-year swim through the Red Sea is not accurate. The Aborigines of Australia have the last mutation M9, i.e. for almost 40 thousand years there were simply no others. The Indians still have M3 and also silence. How, then, can the route of movement in time be described from the assumption - one snip for 5 thousand years. All of these studies are conducted only in the United States. The United States is the ideologue of globalism. The most important principle of globalism is "all men are brothers". It is also important that there is no elder among them. More ideal than Africa, only Australia, Antarctica, and Atlantis would fit. But it won't stick. And who suggested the idea to place the ancestral home of man in Africa? Yes, the same Mr. Darwin. "Monophilist", damn it. Neanderthal man (nomo sapiens) was included in the linear chain of development of modern man (nomo sapiens sapiens) as a progenitor, generally speaking. This is recorded in the Bol.Sov.Ents. black, damn it, "in Russian."

  Answer

Write a comment

Lecture text.

The first event that historical science studies is the appearance of man himself. The question immediately arises: what is a person? The answer to this question is given by different sciences, such as biology. Science proceeds from the fact that man appeared as a result of evolution from the animal kingdom.

Biologists since the time of the famous Swedish scientist of the XVIII century. Carl Linnaeus refers man, including his now extinct early species, to the order of higher mammals - primates. Together with humans, the order of primates includes modern and extinct monkeys. Man has certain anatomical characteristics that distinguish him from other primates, in particular great apes. However, it is not at all easy to distinguish the remains of early human species from the remains of the great apes living at the same time by anatomical features. Therefore, there are disputes between scientists about the origin of man, and approaches to solving this issue are constantly being refined as new archaeological finds appear.

Archeology is of paramount importance for the study of the primitive period, as it allows scientists to get at their disposal objects made by the ancient inhabitants of our planet. It is the ability to manufacture such items that should be considered main feature that distinguishes humans from other primates.

It is no coincidence that archaeologists divide history into stone, bronze and iron age. The Stone Age, according to the features of the tools of labor of an ancient person, is divided into ancient (Paleolithic), middle (Mesolithic) and new (Neolithic). In turn, the Paleolithic is divided into early (lower) and late (upper). The Early Paleolithic consists of periods - Olduvai, Acheulean, Mousterian.

In addition to tools, excavations of dwellings and places of settlement of people, as well as their burials, are of the utmost importance.

On the origin of man anthropogenesis - there are several theories. Great fame in our country labor theory, formulated in the 19th century. F. Engels. According to this theory, labor activity, which human ancestors had to resort to, led to a change in their appearance, which was fixed in the course of natural selection, and the need for communication in the labor process contributed to the emergence of language and thinking. Labor theory is based on the teachings of Charles Darwin on natural selection.

Modern genetics holds a slightly different opinion about the reasons for the evolution of living beings. Genetics denies the possibility of fixing the qualities acquired in the course of life activity in the body, if their appearance is not associated with mutations. Currently, there are different versions of the causes of anthropogenesis. Scientists noticed that the region where anthropogenesis took place (East Africa) is a zone of increased radioactivity.

An increased level of radiation is the strongest mutagenic factor. Perhaps it was exposure to radiation that caused anatomical changes, which ultimately led to the appearance of man.

At present, we can talk about the following scheme of anthropogenesis. The remains of the common ancestors of monkeys and humans, found in East Africa and the Arabian Peninsula, are 30 - 40 million years old. In East and South Africa, the remains of the most probable human ancestor were found - australopithecine(age 4 - 5.5 million years). Australopithecus, most likely, could not make stone tools, but in their appearance they resembled the first creature that created such tools. Australopithecus also lived in the savannas, moved on its hind limbs and had little hair. The skull of Australopithecus was larger than that of any modern great ape.

The oldest man-made stone tools (about 2.6 million years old) were found by archaeologists in the area of ​​Kada Gona in Ethiopia. Almost equally ancient artifacts have been found in a number of other regions of East Africa (in particular, in the Olduvai Gorge (Oldowai) in Tanzania). In the same places, fragments of the remains of their creators were also excavated. This most ancient species of man is named by scientists skillful person ( Homo habilis ). A skilled man outwardly did not differ much from Australopithecus (although his brain volume was somewhat larger), but he can no longer be considered an animal. A skilled man lived only in East Africa.

According to archaeological periodization, the time of the existence of a skilled person corresponds to the Olduvai period. The most characteristic implements of Homo habilis are pebbles (hoppers and choppers) chipped on one or both sides.

From the moment of its appearance, the main occupation of man has been hunting, including hunting for rather large animals (fossil elephants). Even the "dwellings" of Homo habilis were found in the form of a fence of large stone blocks, folded in a circle. From above, they may have been covered with branches and skins.

There is no consensus among scientists about the relationship between Australopithecus and Homo habilis. Some consider them two successive steps, others believe that Australopithecus was a dead end branch. It is known that these two species coexisted for some period.

Among scholars there is no consensus on the issue of continuity between Nomo Habilis and Noto egectus (upright man). The oldest find of the remains of Homo egectus near Lake Turkan in Kenya dates back to 17 million years ago. For some time, Homo erectus coexisted with Homo habilis. In appearance, Homo egestus was even more different from a monkey: its growth was close to the growth of a modern person, the volume of the brain was quite large.

According to archaeological periodization, the time of the existence of a walking man corresponds to the Acheulean period.

Homo egectus was destined to be the first human species to leave Africa. The oldest finds of the remains of this species in Europe and Asia are dated to approximately 1 million years ago. Also in late XIX v. E. Dubois found on the island of Java the skull of a creature he called Pithecanthropus (monkey-man). At the beginning of the XX century. in the Zhoukoudian cave near Beijing, similar skulls of Sinanthropes (Chinese people) were unearthed. Several fragments of the remains of Nomo egestus (the most ancient find is a jaw from Heidelberg in Germany, 600 thousand years old) and many of its products, including traces of dwellings, have been discovered in a number of regions of Europe.

Nomo egestus died out about 300 thousand years ago. He was replaced Noto sieps. According to modern ideas, there were originally two subspecies of Homo sapiens. The development of one of them led to the appearance of about 130 thousand years ago Neanderthal man (Homo sapiens neanderthaliensis). Neanderthals populated all of Europe and much of Asia. At the same time, there was another subspecies, which is still little studied. It may have originated in Africa. It is the second subspecies that some researchers consider the ancestor modern man- Noto sapies. Homo sarins finally formed 40 - 35 thousand years ago. This scheme of the origin of modern man is not shared by all scientists. A number of researchers do not classify the Neanderthal as Homo sapiens. There are also adherents to the previously prevailing point of view that Homo sariens originated from the Neanderthal as a result of its evolution.