RESUMEN

The idea that Neanderthals were brutish and unintelligent is often traced back to Marcellin Boule, a French paleontologist who examined the specimen known as the Old Man in the first decades of the 20th century. This article examines the work of Boule's predecessors and aggregate a variety of literature to underline an argument that this idea has much earlier origins and is rooted in the first recognized specimen discovered in the Neander Valley in 1856. Reorienting our understanding of the brutish Neanderthal to account for its 19th-century origins, allows for a reexamination of the factors in 19th-century culture, science, and society which contributed to this caricature, especially the concepts of race and species' extinction. Such a reexamination dismantles the narrative of Boule's error while providing a new vantage point to think about Neanderthals in the present.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The announcement of a fossilized child's skull discovered in a quarry in 1924 sub-Saharan Africa might not have seemed destined to be a classic paper. This contribution focuses on anatomist Raymond Dart's 1925 paper in which he designated the Taungs skull the type specimen of Australopithecus africanus. We combine an account of Dart's training and experience, with a telling of the fossil's discovery, analysis, the initial response of a mostly skeptical community, and a review of subsequent discoveries that consolidated the case Dart made for a hitherto unknown human close relative. Dart's paper presented evidence that confirmed the prescience of Charles Darwin's prediction that Africa was the birthplace of modern humans. The Taungs skull's unique mix of great ape and human attributes eventually led to a paradigm shift in our understanding of human evolution.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The extinct human relatives known as Neanderthals (Homo neanderthalensis) have long been described as brutish and dumb. This conception is often traced to paleontologist Marcellin Boule (1861-1942), who published a detailed analysis on a Neanderthal skeleton in the early twentieth century. The conventional historical narrative claims that Boule made an error in his analysis, causing the Neanderthals to be considered brutish. This essay challenges the narrative of "Boule's error," arguing instead that the brutish Neanderthal concept originated much earlier in the history of Neanderthal research and was, in fact, an invention of the earliest analyses of the first specimen recognized as a Neanderthal in the mid-nineteenth century. I argue that temporally relocating this conception of Neanderthals allows for a better understanding of the interconnected nature of the study of fossil humans and the science of living human races during the nineteenth century. This new view of the brutish Neanderthal sheds light on the earliest phases of the science that became paleoanthropology, while examining the racial, cultural, and political attitudes about race and extinction that accompanied the science at that time. By inspecting the ways in which the Neanderthals' image was a product of a particular time and place, we gain a perspective that provides a new basis for thinking about the conceptions of hominin fossil species.

RESUMEN

The fossilized primate skull known as the Taungs Baby, discovered in South Africa, was put forward in 1925 as a controversial 'missing link' between humans and apes. This essay examines the controversy generated by the fossil, with a focus on practice and the circulation of material objects. Viewing the Taungs story from this perspective provides a new outlook on debates, one that suggests that attention to the importance of place, particularly the ways that specific localities shape scientific practices, is crucial to understanding such controversies. During the 1920s, the fossil itself did not move or circulate from its South African location, a fact that raised methodological concerns in understanding its significance and drew immense criticism from a range of experts. Examining the criticisms regarding the fossil's failure to circulate draws attention to the importance of centers of accumulation in the analysis of hominid fossils. Diverging from existing histories that primarily emphasize the role of theory in paleoanthropological debates, then, this article argues that scientific practice played an important role in the Taungs fossil controversy. Examining this dimension of the debates has broader implications for revealing the underlying imperial assumptions that guided hominid paleontology during the early twentieth century.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Fossils are crucial pieces of evidence that illuminate the past. In the case of paleoanthropology, the discipline that studies human evolution, fossils are tangible objects that shape the ways we understand ourselves and our history. But how, exactly, do fossils find their way into these narratives, and into scientific journals and museums? How do they become pieces of evidence? The Forbes skull reveals a fossil that struggled to become a noteworthy piece of evidence. It was twice lost, first in a library cabinet on the Rock of Gibraltar, and later, in a London museum storeroom. The Forbes fossil's story reminds us that science takes place in particular times and places, and that the ways we think about human origins are contingent on those circumstances.

RESUMEN

A fossilized skeleton discovered in 1856 presented naturalists with a unique challenge. The strange, human-looking bones of the first recognized Neanderthal confronted naturalists with a new type of object for which they had no readily available interpretive framework. This paper explores the techniques and approaches used to understand these bones in the years immediately following the discovery, in particular 1856-1864. Historians have previously suggested that interpretations and debates about Neanderthals hinged primarily on social, political and cultural ideologies. In this paper, I will argue that much of the scientific controversy surrounding the first recognized Neanderthal centred on questions of methodology and practice, and will demonstrate this through an exploration of the tools and approaches naturalists utilized in their examinations of the fossils. This will contribute to a growing historical recognition of the complex exchange between disciplines including geology, archaeology and comparative anatomy in the early study of fossil hominins, and provide a future framework for histories of Neanderthal debates in the twentieth century.

Asunto(s)