The Human Cranium from the Peştera Cioclovina Uscată, Romania

Soficaru, Andrei; Petrea, Catalin; Doboş, Adrian; Trinkaus, Erik

doi:10.1086/519915

Cited by 90 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, this date places the Tianyuan Cave skeleton close in age to the earliest post-50 ka BP modern humans in the western Old World, the Egyptian Nazlet Khater 1 and 2 dated to Ϸ37 ka 14 C BP (20) and the Romanian Pestera cu Oase fossils dated to Ϸ35 ka 14 C BP (21,22). It is moderately older than Hofmeyr 1 from South Africa (23); the fragmentary bones and teeth from Fa Hien, Sri Lanka (8); and the Czech and Romanian remains from Mladeč, Cioclovina, and Muierii dated to Ϸ28-31 ka 14 C BP (24)(25)(26).…”

Section: Eastern Eurasian Emh Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

An early modern human from Tianyuan Cave, Zhoukoudian, China

Shang

Tong

Zhang

et al. 2007

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

Self Cite

182

126

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Thirty-four elements of an early modern human (EMH) were found in Tianyuan Cave, Zhoukoudian, China in 2003. Dated to 42,000 -39,000 calendrical years before present by using direct accelerator mass spectrometry radiocarbon, the Tianyuan 1 skeleton is among the oldest directly dated EMHs in eastern Eurasia. Morphological comparison shows Tianyuan 1 to have a series of derived modern human characteristics, including a projecting tuber symphyseos, a high anterior symphyseal angle, a broad scapular glenoid fossa, a reduced hamulus, a gluteal buttress, and a pilaster on the femora. Other features of Tianyuan 1 that are more common among EMHs are its modest humeral pectoralis major tuberosities, anteriorly rotated radial tuberosity, reduced radial curvature, and modest talar trochlea. It also lacks several mandibular features common among western Eurasian late archaic humans, including mandibular foramen bridging, mandibular notch asymmetry, and a large superior medial pterygoid tubercle. However, Tianyuan 1 exhibits several late archaic human features, such as its anterior to posterior dental proportions, a large hamulus length, and a broad and rounded distal phalangeal tuberosity. This morphological pattern implies that a simple spread of modern humans from Africa is unlikely.Late Pleistocene ͉ Neandertals ͉ mandible ͉ postcrania ͉ paleopathology

show abstract

Section: Eastern Eurasian Emh Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

An early modern human from Tianyuan Cave, Zhoukoudian, China

Shang

Tong

Zhang

et al. 2007

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

Self Cite

182

126

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Neandertal complex of features is, however, present in its entirety on Cioclovina 1 (Fig. 3), even though its clear superior nuchal line is on (rather than below) the nuchal torus and the superomedial confluence of the semispinalis capitis insertions produces a small spine below (rather than part of) the superior nuchal lines (23). Mladeč 6 also had a small horizontal oval suprainiac fossa, but its nuchal torus extends across the occipital bone (24).…”

Section: The Morphological Mosaic Of Eemhsmentioning

confidence: 99%

European early modern humans and the fate of the Neandertals

Trinkaus

2007

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

Self Cite

188

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A consideration of the morphological aspects of the earliest modern humans in Europe (more than Ϸ33,000 B.P.) and the subsequent Gravettian human remains indicates that they possess an anatomical pattern congruent with the autapomorphic (derived) morphology of the earliest (Middle Paleolithic) African modern humans. However, they exhibit a variable suite of features that are either distinctive Neandertal traits and/or plesiomorphic (ancestral) aspects that had been lost among the African Middle Paleolithic modern humans. These features include aspects of neurocranial shape, basicranial external morphology, mandibular ramal and symphyseal form, dental morphology and size, and anteroposterior dental proportions, as well as aspects of the clavicles, scapulae, metacarpals, and appendicular proportions. The ubiquitous and variable presence of these morphological features in the European earlier modern human samples can only be parsimoniously explained as a product of modest levels of assimilation of Neandertals into early modern human populations as the latter dispersed across Europe. This interpretation is in agreement with current analyses of recent and past human molecular data.crania ͉ dentition ͉ Late Pleistocene ͉ postcrania T he evolutionary fate of the Neandertals has preoccupied paleoanthropologists with varying degrees of intensity for approximately a century, emerging with the human paleontological discoveries of the early 20th century and the resultant syntheses. Although present throughout the 20th century, considerations of the fate of the Neandertals have intensified in the past quarter-century starting with the paleontological emergence of Out-of-Africa models of modern human origins (1, 2) that combined the early appearance of modern human anatomy in Africa (2, 3) with the presence of equatorial anatomical patterns among the earliest modern Europeans (1). These interpretations were joined half a decade later by inferences from extant human molecular analyses, which rapidly polarized the field into two opposing models, best termed the Replacement (Out-of-Africa with total replacement of all other indigenous human populations) and Regional Continuity (variable regional transitions to modern human morphology among genetically interconnected human populations). † After two decades of debate, it is now recognized that these polarized models, Replacement (sensu stricto) vs. Regional Continuity (sensu stricto) are intellectually dead. Repeated attempts to refute one or the other model have shown that it is easy, on a global basis, to refute both scenarios with paleontological and/or extant human biological (both anatomical and molecular) data. It is time to move on from these models, and, particularly in the past half-decade, the emergent consensus model of modern human emergence is one of Out-of-Africa with temporally and geographically varying degrees of absorption of regional late archaic populations [the Assimilation Model (10)]. The issue is no longer whether human populations outside of the African ...

show abstract

“…Here, stratified Aurignacian sites are found close, spatially and temporally, to the multiple welldated early human remains at the Peștera cu Oase (Trinkaus et al 2003(Trinkaus et al , 2012, as well as further afield in the southeastern Carpathian Basin at Muierii and Cioclovina (Alexandrescu et al 2010;Harvati et al 2007;Soficaru et al 2006Soficaru et al , 2007Trinkaus et al 2009).…”

Section: Banat Sites and The Southeastmentioning

confidence: 68%

The Danube Corridor Hypothesis and the Carpathian Basin: Geological, Environmental and Archaeological Approaches to Characterizing Aurignacian Dynamics

Chu

2018

J World Prehist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Early Upper Paleolithic sites in the Danube catchment have been put forward as evidence that the river was an important conduit for modern humans during their initial settlement of Europe. Central to this model is the Carpathian Basin, a region covering most of the Middle Danube. As the archaeological record of this region is still poorly understood, this paper aims to provide a contextual assessment of the Carpathian Basin's geological and paleoenvironmental archives, starting with the late Upper Pleistocene. Subsequently, it compiles early Upper Paleolithic data from the region to provide a synchronic appraisal of the Aurignacian archaeological evidence. It then uses this data to test whether the relative absence of early Upper Paleolithic sites is obscured by a taphonomic bias. Finally, it reviews current knowledge of the Carpathian Basin's archaeological record and concludes that, while it cannot reject the Danube corridor hypothesis, further (geo) archaeological work is required to understand the link between the Carpathian Basin and Central and Southeastern Europe.

show abstract

The Human Cranium from the Peştera Cioclovina Uscată, Romania

Cited by 90 publications

References 23 publications

An early modern human from Tianyuan Cave, Zhoukoudian, China

An early modern human from Tianyuan Cave, Zhoukoudian, China

European early modern humans and the fate of the Neandertals

The Danube Corridor Hypothesis and the Carpathian Basin: Geological, Environmental and Archaeological Approaches to Characterizing Aurignacian Dynamics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About