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！
finally； but perhaps above all； human nature is a factor in all this。 scientists have a naturaltendency to interpret finds in the way that most flatters their stature。 it is a rare paleontologistindeed who announces that he has found a cache of bones but that they are nothing to getexcited about。 or as john reader understatedly observes in the book missing links； 鈥渋t isremarkable how often the first interpretations of new evidence have confirmed thepreconceptions of its discoverer。鈥�
all this leaves ample room for arguments； of course； and nobody likes to argue more thanpaleoanthropologists。 鈥渁nd of all the disciplines in science； paleoanthropology boasts perhapsthe largest share of egos；鈥潯ay the authors of the recent java man 鈥攁 book； it may be noted；that itself devotes long； wonderfully unselfconscious passages to attacks on the inadequaciesof others； in particular the authors鈥櫋ormer close colleague donald johanson。 here is a smallsampling：
in our years of collaboration at the institute he ＇johanson＇ developed a well…deserved； if unfortunate； reputation for unpredictable and high…decibel personalverbal assaults； sometimes acpanied by the tossing around of books orwhatever else came conveniently to hand。
so； bearing in mind that there is little you can say about human prehistory that won鈥檛 bedisputed by someone somewhere； other than that we most certainly had one； what we thinkwe know about who we are and where we e from is roughly this：
for the first 99。99999 percent of our history as organisms； we were in the same ancestralline as chimpanzees。 virtually nothing is known about the prehistory of chimpanzees； butwhatever they were； we were。 then about seven million years ago something major happened。
a group of new beings emerged from the tropical forests of africa and began to move abouton the open savanna。
these were the australopithecines； and for the next five million years they would be theworld鈥檚 dominant hominid species。 （austral is from the latin for 鈥渟outhern鈥潯nd has noconnection in this context to australia。） australopithecines came in several varieties； someslender and gracile； like raymond dart鈥檚 taung child； others more sturdy and robust； but allwere capable of walking upright。 some of these species existed for well over a million years；others for a more modest few hundred thousand； but it is worth bearing in mind that even theleast successful had histories many times longer than we have yet achieved。
the most famous hominid remains in the world are those of a 3。18…million…year…oldaustralopithecine found at hadar in ethiopia in 1974 by a team led by donald johanson。
formally known as a。l。 （for 鈥渁far locality鈥潱�288鈥�1； the skeleton became more familiarlyknown as lucy； after the beatles song 鈥渓ucy in the sky with diamonds。鈥潯ohanson has neverdoubted her importance。 鈥渟he is our earliest ancestor； the missing link between ape andhuman；鈥潯e has said。
lucy was tiny鈥攋ust three and a half feet tall。 she could walk； though how well is a matterof some dispute。 she was evidently a good climber； too。 much else is unknown。 her skull wasalmost entirely missing； so little could be said with confidence about her brain size； thoughskull fragments suggested it was small。 most books describe lucy鈥檚 skeleton as being 40percent plete； though some put it closer to half； and one produced by the americanmuseum of natural history describes lucy as two…thirds plete。 the bbc television series ape man actually called it 鈥渁 plete skeleton；鈥潯ven while showing that it was anythingbut。
a human body has 206 bones； but many of these are repeated。 if you have the left femurfrom a specimen； you don鈥檛 need the right to know its dimensions。 strip out all the redundantbones； and the total you are left with is 120鈥攚hat is called a half skeleton。 even by this fairlyacmodating standard； and even counting the slightest fragment as a full bone； lucyconstituted only 28 percent of a half skeleton （and only about 20 percent of a full one）。
in the wisdom of the bones； alan walker recounts how he once asked johanson how hehad e up with a figure of 40 percent。 johanson breezily replied that he had discounted the106 bones of the hands and feet鈥攎ore than half the body鈥檚 total； and a fairly important half；too； one would have thought； since lucy鈥檚 principal defining attribute was the use of thosehands and feet to deal with a changing world。 at all events； rather less is known about lucythan is generally supposed。 it isn鈥檛 even actually known that she was a female。 her sex ismerely presumed from her diminutive size。
two years after lucy鈥檚 discovery； at laetoli in tanzania mary leakey found footprints leftby two individuals from鈥攊t is thought鈥攖he same family of hominids。 the prints had beenmade when two australopithecines had walked through muddy ash following a volcaniceruption。 the ash had later hardened； preserving the impressions of their feet for a distance ofover twenty…three meters。
the american museum of natural history in new york has an absorbing diorama thatrecords the moment of their passing。 it depicts life…sized re…creations of a male and a femalewalking side by side across the ancient african plain。 they are hairy and chimplike indimensions； but have a bearing and gait that suggest humanness。 the most striking feature ofthe display is that the male holds his left arm protectively around the female鈥檚 shoulder。 it is atender and affecting gesture； suggestive of close bonding。
the tableau is done with such conviction that it is easy to overlook the consideration thatvirtually everything above the footprints is imaginary。 almost every external aspect of thetwo figures鈥攄egree of hairiness； facial appendages （whether they had human noses or chimpnoses）； expressions； skin color； size and shape of the female鈥檚 breasts鈥攊s necessarilysuppositional。 we can鈥檛 even say that they were a couple。 the female figure may in fact havebeen a child。 nor can we be certain that they were australopithecines。 they are assumed to beaustralopithecines because there are no other known candidates。
i had been told that they were posed like that because during the building of the dioramathe female figure kept toppling over； but ian tattersall insists with a laugh that the story isuntrue。 鈥渙bviously we don鈥檛 know whether the male had his arm around the female or not；but we do know from the stride measurements that they were walking side by side and closetogether鈥攃lose enough to be touching。 it was quite an exposed area； so they were probablyfeeling vulnerable。 that鈥檚 why we tried to give them slightly worried expressions。鈥�
i asked him if he was troubled about the amount of license that was taken in reconstructingthe figures。 鈥渋t鈥檚 always a problem in making re…creations；鈥潯e agreed readily enough。 鈥測ouwouldn鈥檛 believe how much discussion can go into deciding details like whether neandertalshad eyebrows or not。 it was just the same for the laetoli figures。 we simply can鈥檛 know thedetails of what they looked like； but we can convey their size and posture and make somereasonable assumptions about their probable appearance。 if i had it to do again； i think i might have made them just slightly more apelike and less human。 these creatures weren鈥檛 humans。
they were bipedal apes。鈥�
until very recently it was assumed that we were descended from lucy and the laetolicreatures； but now many authorities aren鈥檛 so sure。 although certain physical features （theteeth； for instance） suggest a possible link between us； other parts of the australopithecineanatomy are more troubling。 in their book extinct humans； tattersall and schwartz point outthat the upper portion of the human femur is very like that of the apes but not of theaustralopithecines； so if lucy is in a direct line between apes and modern humans； it meanswe must have adopted an australopithecine femur for a million years or so； then gone back toan ape femur when we moved on to the next phase of our development。 they believe； in fact；that not only was lucy not our ancestor； she wasn鈥檛 even much of a walker。
鈥渓ucy and her kind did not loote in anything like the modern human fashion；鈥潯nsis