Discovery of human antiquity

Last updated

The discovery of human antiquity was a major achievement of science in the middle of the 19th century, and the foundation of scientific paleoanthropology. The antiquity of man, human antiquity, or in simpler language the age of the human race, are names given to the series of scientific debates it involved, which with modifications continue in the 21st century. These debates have clarified and given scientific evidence, from a number of disciplines, towards solving the basic question of dating the first human being.

Contents

Controversy was very active in this area in parts of the 19th century, with some dormant periods also. A key date was the 1859 re-evaluation of archaeological evidence that had been published 12 years earlier by Boucher de Perthes. It was then widely accepted, as validating the suggestion that man was much older than had previously been believed, for example than the 6,000 years implied by some traditional chronologies.

In 1863 T. H. Huxley argued that man was an evolved species; and in 1864 Alfred Russel Wallace combined natural selection with the issue of antiquity. The arguments from science for what was then called the "great antiquity of man" became convincing to most scientists, over the following decade. The separate debate on the antiquity of man had in effect merged into the larger one on evolution, being simply a chronological aspect. It has not ended as a discussion, however, since the current science of human antiquity is still in flux.

Contemporary formulations

Modern science has no single answer to the question of how old humanity is. What the question now means indeed depends on choosing genus or species in the required answer. It is thought that the genus of man has been around for ten times as long as our species. Currently, fresh examples of (extinct) species of the genus Homo are still being discovered, so that definitive answers are not available. The consensus view is that human beings are one species, the only existing species of the genus. With the rejection of polygenism for human origins, it is asserted that this species had a definite and single origin in the past. (That assertion leaves aside the point whether the origin meant is of the current species, however. The multiregional hypothesis allows the origin to be otherwise.) The hypothesis of recent African origin of modern humans is now widely accepted, and states that anatomically modern humans had a single origin, in Africa.

The genus Homo is now estimated to be about 2.3 to 2.4 million years old, with the appearance of H. habilis ; [1] meaning that the existence of all types of humans has been within the Quaternary.

The spread of Homo sapiens, from the red area, over the last 100,000 years, represented with geographical areas for Neanderthals (ocher) and early hominids (yellow). H. sapiens replaced other species of the genus Homo, over a long period of time. Spreading homo sapiens la.svg
The spread of Homo sapiens, from the red area, over the last 100,000 years, represented with geographical areas for Neanderthals (ocher) and early hominids (yellow). H. sapiens replaced other species of the genus Homo, over a long period of time.

Once the question is reformulated as dating the transition of the evolution of H. sapiens from a precursor species, the issue can be refined into two further questions. These are: the analysis and dating of the evolution of Archaic Homo sapiens, and of the evolution from "archaic" forms of the species H. sapiens sapiens . The second question is given an answer in two parts: anatomically modern humans are thought to be about 300,000 years old, [2] with behavioral modernity dating back to 40,000 [3] or 50,000 years ago. The first question is still subject to debates on its definition.

Historical debates

Discovering the age of the first human is one facet of anthropogeny, the study of human origins, and a term dated by the Oxford English Dictionary to 1839 and the Medical Dictionary of Robert Hooper. Given the history of evolutionary thought, and the history of paleontology, the question of the antiquity of man became quite natural to ask at around this period. It was by no means a new question, but it was being asked in a new context of knowledge, particularly in comparative anatomy and palaeontology. The development of relative dating as a principled method allowed deductions of chronology relative to events tied to fossils and strata. This meant, though, that the issue of the antiquity of man was not separable from other debates of the period, on geology and foundations of scientific archaeology.

The first strong scientific arguments for the antiquity of man as very different from accepted biblical chronology were certainly also strongly controverted. Those who found the conclusion unacceptable could be expected to examine the whole train of reasoning for weak points. This can be seen, for example, in the Systematic Theology of Charles Hodge (1871–3). [4]

For a period, once the scale of geological time had become clear in the 19th century, the "antiquity of man" stood for a theory opposed to the "modern origin of man", for which arguments of other kinds were put forward. The choice was logically independent of monogenism versus polygenism; but monogenism with the modern origin implied time scales on the basis of the geographical spread, physical differences and cultural diversity of humans. The choice was also logically independent of the notion of transmutation of species, but that was considered to be a slow process.

William Benjamin Carpenter wrote in 1872 of a fixed conviction of the "modern origin" as the only reason for resisting the human creation of flint implements. [5] Henry Williamson Haynes writing in 1880 could call the antiquity of man "an established fact". [6]

Theological debates

The Biblical account included

These points were debated by scholars as well as theologians. Biblical literalism was not a given in the medieval and early modern periods, for Christians or Jews.

Human origins and the "universal deluge" debated

The Flood could explain extinctions of species at that date, on the hypothesis that the Ark had not contained all species of animal. A Flood that was not universal, on the other hand, had implications for the biblical theory of races and Noah's sons. The theory of catastrophism, which was as much secular as theological in attitude, could be used in analogous ways.

Noah's Ark, a stained glass window of the earlier 17th century, Church of Saint-Etienne-du-Mont, in Paris. Arche Noe Vaisseau Eglise.jpg
Noah's Ark, a stained glass window of the earlier 17th century, Church of Saint-Étienne-du-Mont, in Paris.

There was interest in matters arising from modification of the biblical narrative, therefore, and it was fuelled by the new knowledge of the world in early modern Europe, and then by the growth of the sciences. One hypothesis was of people not descended from Adam. This hypothesis of polygenism (no unique origin of humans) implied nothing on the antiquity of man, but the issue was implicated in counter-arguments, for monogenism.

La Peyrère and the completeness of the Biblical account

Isaac La Peyrère appealed in formulating his Preadamite theory of polygenism to Jewish tradition; it was intended to be compatible with the biblical creation of man. It was rejected by many contemporary theologians. [7] [8] This idea of humans before Adam had been current in earlier Christian scholars and those of unorthodox and heretical beliefs; La Peyrère's significance was his synthesis of the dissent. [9] Influentially, he revived the classical idea of Marcus Terentius Varro, preserved in Censorinus, of a three-fold division of historical time into "uncertain" (to a universal flood), "mythical", and "historical" (with certain chronology). [10]

Debate on race

The biblical narrative had implications for ethnology (division into Hamitic, Japhetic and Semitic peoples), and had its defenders, as well as those who felt it made significant omissions. Matthew Hale wrote his Primitive Origination of Mankind (1677) against La Peyrère, it has been suggested, in order to defend the propositions of a young human race and universal Flood, and the Native Americans as descended from Noah. [11] Anthony John Maas writing in the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia commented that pro-slavery sentiment indirectly supported the Preadamite theories of the middle of the 19th century. [8] The antiquity of man found support in the opposed theories of monogenism of this time that justified abolitionism by discrediting scientific racism.

Already in the 18th century polygenism was applied as a theory of race (see Scientific racism#Blumenbach and Buffon). A variant racist Preadamism was introduced, in particular by Reginald Stuart Poole (The Genesis of the Earth and of Man, London, 1860) and Dominic M'Causland (Adam and the Adamite, or the Harmony of Scripture and Ethnology, London, 1864). They followed the views of Samuel George Morton, Josiah C. Nott, George Gliddon, and Louis Agassiz; and maintained that Adam was the progenitor of the Caucasian race, while the other races descended from Preadamite ancestry. [8]

James Cowles Prichard, English Quaker ethnologist and defender of biblical monogenism. James Cowles Prichard.jpg
James Cowles Prichard, English Quaker ethnologist and defender of biblical monogenism.

James Cowles Prichard argued against polygenism, wishing to support the account drawn from the Book of Genesis of a single human origin. In particular he argued that humans were one species, using the interfertility criterion of hybridity. [12] By his use of a form of natural selection to argue for change of human skin colour as a historical process, he also implied a time scale long enough for such a process to have produced the observed differences. [13]

Incompatible views of chronology

The Early Christian Church contested claims that pagan traditions were older than that of the Bible. Theophilus of Antioch and Augustine of Hippo both argued against Egyptian views that the world was at least 100,000 years old. This figure was too high to be compatible with biblical chronology. [14] One of La Peyrère's propositions, that China was at least 10,000 years old, gained wider currency; [15] Martino Martini had provided details of traditional Chinese chronology, from which it was deduced by Isaac Vossius that Noah's Flood was local rather than universal. [16]

One of the considerations detected in La Peyrère by Otto Zöckler was concern with the Antipodes and their people: were they pre-Adamites, or indeed had there been a second "Adam of the Antipodes"? [17] In a 19th-century sequel, Alfred Russel Wallace in an 1867 book review pointed to the Pacific Islanders as posing a problem for those holding both to monogenism and a recent date for human origins. In other words, he took migration from an original location to remote islands that are now populated to imply a long time scale. [18] A significant consequence of the recognition of the antiquity of man was the greater scope for conjectural history, in particular for all aspects of diffusionism and social evolutionism. [19]

Creation of man in a world not ready

While extinction of species came with the development of geology to be widely accepted in the early 19th century, there was resistance on theological grounds to extinctions after the creation of man. It was argued, in particular in the 1820s and 1830s, that man would not be created into an "imperfect" world as far as design of its collection of species was concerned. This reasoning cut across that which was conclusive for the science of the antiquity of man, a generation later. [20]

Archaeological context

The late 18th century was a period in which French and German caves were explored, and remains taken for study: [21] caving was in fashion, if speleology was only in its infancy, and the St. Beatus Caves, for example, attracted many visitors. Caves were a theme of the art of the time, also. [22]

Waterfall seen from a cave in Solothurn, Switzerland; engraving of the later 18th century. Chute d'Eau pres du Rocher de Balm.jpg
Waterfall seen from a cave in Solothurn, Switzerland; engraving of the later 18th century.

Cave remains proved of great importance to the science of the antiquity of man. Stalagmite formation was a clearcut mechanism of formation of fossils, and its stratigraphy could be understood. Other sites of importance were associated with alluvial deposits of gravel and clay, or peat. The early example of the Gray's Inn Lane Hand Axe was from gravel in a bed of a tributary of the River Thames, but remained isolated for about a century.

Palaeolithic pierced baton spear thrower from Kesslerloch cave, Thayngen, Switzerland. Kesslerloch Lochstab Gravierung.jpg
Palaeolithic pierced baton spear thrower from Kesslerloch cave, Thayngen, Switzerland.

The three-age system was in place from about 1820, in the form given to it by Christian Jürgensen Thomsen in his work on the collections that became the National Museum of Denmark. He published his ideas in 1836. [13] Postulating cultural change, in itself and without explaining a rate of change, did not generate reasons to revise traditional chronology. [23] But the concept of Stone Age artifacts became current. Thomsen's book in Danish, Ledetraad til Nordisk Oldkyndighed, was translated into German (Leitfaden zur Nordischen Alterthumskunde, 1837), and English (Guide to Northern Archæology, 1848). [24] [25]

John Frere's 1797 discovery of the Hoxne handaxe [26] helped to initiate the 19th century debate, [27] but it started in earnest around 1810. [28] There were then a number of false starts relating to different European sites. William Buckland misjudged what he had found in 1823 with the misnamed Red Lady of Paviland, and explained away the mammoth remains with the find. [29] He also was dismissive of the Kent's Cavern findings of John MacEnery in the later 1820s. In 1829 Philippe-Charles Schmerling discovered a Neanderthal fossil skull (at Engis). At that point, however, its significance was not recognised, and Rudolf Virchow consistently opposed the theory that it was very old. The 1847 book Antiquités Celtiques et Antediluviennes by Boucher de Perthes about Saint-Acheul was found unconvincing in its presentation, until it was reconsidered about a decade later.

Page showing flint implements from Guide to Northern Archaeology (1848), English translation by Francis Egerton, 1st Earl of Ellesmere, from the Danish Ledetraad til Nordisk Oldkyndighed (1836) of Christian Jurgensen Thomsen. Flint implements in Thomsen (Egerton).jpg
Page showing flint implements from Guide to Northern Archæology (1848), English translation by Francis Egerton, 1st Earl of Ellesmere, from the Danish Ledetraad til Nordisk Oldkyndighed (1836) of Christian Jürgensen Thomsen.

The debate moved on only in the context of

It was this combination, "extinct faunal remains" + "human artifacts", that provided the evidence that came to be seen as crucial. A sudden acceleration of research was seen from mid-1858, when the Geological Society set up a "cave committee". Besides Hugh Falconer who had pressed for it, the committee comprised Charles Lyell, Richard Owen, William Pengelly, Joseph Prestwich, and Andrew Ramsay. [30]

Debate on uniformity and change

On the one hand, lack of uniformity in prehistory is what gave science traction on the question of the antiquity of man; and, on the other hand, there were at the time theories that tended to rule out certain types of lack of regularity. John Lubbock outlined in 1890 the way the antiquity of man had in his time been established as derived from change in prehistory: in fauna, geography and climate. [31] The hypotheses required to establish that these changes were facts of prehistory were themselves in tension with the uniformitarianism that was held to by some scientists; therefore the protean concept "uniformitarianism" was adjusted to accommodate the past changes that could be established.

Zoological uniformity on earth was debated already in the early eighteenth century. George Berkeley argued in Alciphron that the lack of human artifacts in deeper excavations suggested a recent origin of man. [32] Evidence of absence was, of course, seen as problematic to establish. Gottfried Leibniz in his Protogaea produced arguments against identification of a species via morphology, without evidence of descent (having in mind a characterisation of humans by possession of reason); and against the discreteness of species and their extinction. [33]

Uniformitarianism held the field against the competitor theories of Neptunism and catastrophism, which partook of Romantic science and theological cosmogony; it established itself as the successor of Plutonism, and became the foundation of modern geology. Its tenets were correspondingly firmly held. Charles Lyell put forward at one point views on what were called "uniformity of kind" and "uniformity of degree" that were incompatible with what was argued later. Lyell's theory, in fact, was of a "steady state" geology, which he deduced from his principles. This went too far in restricting actual geological processes, to a predictable closed system, if it ruled out ice ages (see ice ages#Causes of ice ages), as became clearer not long after Lyell's Principles of Geology appeared (1830–3). [34] [35] Of Lubbock's three types of change, the geographical included the theory of migration over land bridges in biogeography, which in general acted as an explanatory stopgap, rather than in most cases being one supported by science. Sea level changes were easier to justify.

Glacial conditions

The Grindelwald Glacier in Switzerland, 1774 painting by Caspar Wolf. Unterer Grindelwaldgletscher.jpg
The Grindelwald Glacier in Switzerland, 1774 painting by Caspar Wolf.

The identification of ice ages was important context for the antiquity of man because it was accepted that certain mammals had died out with the last of the ice ages which were clearly marked in the geological record. Georges Cuvier's Recherches sur les ossements fossiles de quadrupèdes (1812) had accepted facts of the extinctions of mammals that were to be relevant to human antiquity. The concept of an ice age was proposed in 1837 by Louis Agassiz, and it opened the way to the study of glacial history of the Quaternary. William Buckland came to see evidence of glaciers in what he had taken to be remains of the biblical Flood. It seemed adequately proved that the woolly mammoth and woolly rhinoceros were mammals of the ice ages, and had ceased to exist with the ice ages: they inhabited Europe when it was tundra, and not afterwards. In fact such extinct mammals were typically found in diluvium as it was then called (distinctive gravel or boulder clay).

Glacial and interglacial cycles as represented by atmospheric CO2, measured from ice core samples going back 800,000 years. Co2 glacial cycles 800k.png
Glacial and interglacial cycles as represented by atmospheric CO2, measured from ice core samples going back 800,000 years.

Given that the animals were associated with these strata, establishing the date of the strata could be by geological arguments, based on uniformity of stratigraphy; and so the animals' extinction was dated. An extinction can still strictly only be dated on assumptions, as evidence of absence; for a particular site, however, the argument can be from local extinction.

Neither Agassiz nor Buckland adopted the new views on the antiquity of man.

Acceptance of human association with extinct animal species

Boucher de Perthes had written up discoveries in the Somme valley in 1847. Joseph Prestwich and John Evans in April 1859, and Charles Lyell with others also in 1859, made field trips to the sites, and returned convinced that humans had coexisted with extinct mammals. In general and qualitative terms, Lyell felt the evidence established the "antiquity of man": that humans were much older than the traditional assumptions had made them. [36] His conclusions were shared by the Royal Society and other British learned institutions, as well as in France. It was this recognition of the early date of Acheulean handaxes that first established the scientific credibility of the deep antiquity of humans. [37]

Flint implements found 1861/2 at Aurignac in the French Pyrenees by Edouard Lartet. Lame Aurignac Lartet global NdegII.jpg
Flint implements found 1861/2 at Aurignac in the French Pyrénées by Édouard Lartet.

This debate was concurrent with that over the book On the Origin of Species , published in 1859, and was evidently related; but was not one in which Charles Darwin initially made his own views public. Consolidation of the "antiquity of man" required more work, with stricter methods; and this proved possible over the next two decades. The discoveries of Boucher de Perthes therefore motivated further researches to try to repeat and confirm the findings at other sites. Significant in this were excavations by William Pengelly at Brixham Cavern, and with a systematic approach at Kents Cavern (1865–1880). [38] Another major project, which produced quicker findings, was that of Henry Christy and Édouard Lartet. Lartet in 1860 had published results from a cave near Massat (Ariège) claiming stone tool cuts on bones of extinct mammals, made when the bones were fresh. [39]

List of key sites for the 19th century debate

SiteDate(s)InvestigatorsFindings and contemporary viewImage
Kingsbridge, London, England1671 John Conyers Gray's Inn Lane Hand Axe, mammoth teeth; theories about Roman elephants, not accepted by Conyers
Gray's Inn Lane Hand Axe.jpg
Hoxne, Suffolk, England1797 John Frere Handaxes. Published by the Society of Antiquaries, but the bones and shells remained unidentified. [26] [40]
Goat's Hole Cave, Gower Peninsula, Wales1823 William Buckland "Red Lady of Paviland", mammoth remains
Red Lady of Paviland from head.jpg
Kents Cavern, Devon, England1824 Thomas Northmore; John MacEnery; William Pengelly
British Pleistocene Mammalia (1866) Wolf Cranium.png
Bize-Minervois, France1827 Paul Tournal Paul Tournal (1805–1872), who became a pharmacist, investigated cave deposits in the Narbonne area. He used the neologism anté-historique. [41] He found human remains with those of extinct animals, communicated with Georges Cuvier, and was met with incomprehension. [42]
Machoire de renne Paul Tournal. MHNT PRE 2010.0.93.1.jpg
Pondres, Gard, France1828 Jules de Christol [43] Jules de Christol (1802–1861) found caves filled with mud and gravel, containing bones of hyaena, rhinoceros and humans. The contemporary deposition of bones was not accepted, by a commission under Cuvier; and pottery was found lower. [44]
Engis, Belgium1829 Philippe-Charles Schmerling
Saint-Acheul, Amiens, France1847 Boucher de Perthes Acheulean handaxes
Biface de St Acheul MHNT.jpg
Brixham Cave, Devon, England1858 William Pengelly
Aurignac, France1860 Édouard Lartet
Grattoir a museau plat sur lame LARTET.jpg
Vézère valley, Dordogne, France1863Édouard Lartet, Henry Christy
Baton Lartet MHNT PRE .2010.0.1.2 Global noir.jpg

Further issues

Antiquity of man in the New World

Tertiary Man

When the science was considered reasonably settled as to the existence of "Quaternary Man" (humans of the Pleistocene), there remained the issue as to whether man had existed in the Tertiary, a now obsolete term used for the preceding geological period. The debate on the antiquity of man resonated in the later debate over eoliths, which were supposed proof of the existence of man in the Pliocene (during the Neogene). In this case the sceptical view won out. [45]

Publications

Publications of the central years of the debate

Publications of the latter stages of the debate

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Charles Lyell</span> Scottish geologist (1797–1875)

Sir Charles Lyell, 1st Baronet, was a Scottish geologist who demonstrated the power of known natural causes in explaining the earth's history. He is best known today for his association with Charles Darwin and as the author of Principles of Geology (1830–33), which presented to a wide public audience the idea that the earth was shaped by the same natural processes still in operation today, operating at similar intensities. The philosopher William Whewell dubbed this gradualistic view "uniformitarianism" and contrasted it with catastrophism, which had been championed by Georges Cuvier and was better accepted in Europe. The combination of evidence and eloquence in Principles convinced a wide range of readers of the significance of "deep time" for understanding the earth and environment.

<i>On the Origin of Species</i> 1859 book on evolution by Charles Darwin

On the Origin of Species is a work of scientific literature by Charles Darwin that is considered to be the foundation of evolutionary biology. It was published on 24 November 1859. Darwin's book introduced the scientific theory that populations evolve over the course of generations through a process of natural selection although Lamarckism was also included as a mechanism of lesser importance. The book presented a body of evidence that the diversity of life arose by common descent through a branching pattern of evolution. Darwin included evidence that he had collected on the Beagle expedition in the 1830s and his subsequent findings from research, correspondence, and experimentation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Catastrophism</span> Geological theory of abrupt, severe change

In geology, catastrophism is the theory that the Earth has largely been shaped by sudden, short-lived, violent events, possibly worldwide in scope. This contrasts with uniformitarianism, according to which slow incremental changes, such as erosion, brought about all the Earth's geological features. The proponents of uniformitarianism held that the present was "the key to the past", and that all geological processes throughout the past resembled those that can be observed today. Since the 19th-century disputes between catastrophists and uniformitarians, a more inclusive and integrated view of geologic events has developed, in which the scientific consensus accepts that some catastrophic events occurred in the geologic past, but regards these as explicable as extreme examples of natural processes which can occur.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Timeline of paleontology</span>

Timeline of paleontology

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Theistic evolution</span> Views that religion is compatible with science

Theistic evolution, alternatively called evolutionary creationism, is a view that God acts and creates through laws of nature. Here, God is taken as the primary cause while natural causes are secondary, positing that the concept of God and religious beliefs are compatible with the findings of modern science, including evolution. Theistic evolution is not in itself a scientific theory, but includes a range of views about how science relates to religious beliefs and the extent to which God intervenes. It rejects the strict creationist doctrines of special creation, but can include beliefs such as creation of the human soul. Modern theistic evolution accepts the general scientific consensus on the age of the Earth, the age of the universe, the Big Bang, the origin of the Solar System, the origin of life, and evolution.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Antediluvian</span> Dealing about the time period before the flood

The antediluvian period is the time period chronicled in the Bible between the fall of man and the Genesis flood narrative in biblical cosmology. The term was coined by Thomas Browne. The narrative takes up chapters 1–6 of the Book of Genesis. The term found its way into early geology and science until the late Victorian era. Colloquially, the term is used to refer to any ancient and murky period.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Flood geology</span> Pseudoscientific attempt to reconcile geology with the Genesis flood narrative

Flood geology is a pseudoscientific attempt to interpret and reconcile geological features of the Earth in accordance with a literal belief in the Genesis flood narrative, the flood myth in the Hebrew Bible. In the early 19th century, diluvial geologists hypothesized that specific surface features provided evidence of a worldwide flood which had followed earlier geological eras; after further investigation they agreed that these features resulted from local floods or from glaciers. In the 20th century, young-Earth creationists revived flood geology as an overarching concept in their opposition to evolution, assuming a recent six-day Creation and cataclysmic geological changes during the biblical flood, and incorporating creationist explanations of the sequences of rock strata.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Progressive creationism</span> Belief that God created life gradually

Progressive creationism is the religious belief that God created new forms of life gradually over a period of hundreds of millions of years. As a form of old Earth creationism, it accepts mainstream geological and cosmological estimates for the age of the Earth, some tenets of biology such as microevolution as well as archaeology to make its case. In this view creation occurred in rapid bursts in which all "kinds" of plants and animals appear in stages lasting millions of years. The bursts are followed by periods of stasis or equilibrium to accommodate new arrivals. These bursts represent instances of God creating new types of organisms by divine intervention. As viewed from the archaeological record, progressive creationism holds that "species do not gradually appear by the steady transformation of its ancestors; [but] appear all at once and "fully formed."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of creationism</span>

The history of creationism relates to the history of thought based on the premise that the natural universe had a beginning, and came into being supernaturally. The term creationism in its broad sense covers a wide range of views and interpretations, and was not in common use before the late 19th century. Throughout recorded history, many people have viewed the universe as a created entity. Many ancient historical accounts from around the world refer to or imply a creation of the earth and universe. Although specific historical understandings of creationism have used varying degrees of empirical, spiritual and/or philosophical investigations, they are all based on the view that the universe was created. The Genesis creation narrative has provided a basic framework for Jewish and Christian epistemological understandings of how the universe came into being – through the divine intervention of the god, Yahweh. Historically, literal interpretations of this narrative were more dominant than allegorical ones.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pre-Adamite</span> Belief that humans existed before the biblical character Adam

The pre-Adamite hypothesis or pre-Adamism is the theological belief that humans existed before the biblical character Adam. Pre-Adamism is therefore distinct from the conventional Abrahamic belief that Adam was the first human. "Pre-Adamite" is used as a term, both for those humans believed to exist before Adam, and for believers or proponents of this hypothesis.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Evolution and the Catholic Church</span> Attitude of the Catholic Church to evolution theory

The Catholic Church holds no official position on the theory of creation or evolution, leaving the specifics of either theistic evolution or literal creationism to the individual within certain parameters established by the Church. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, any believer may accept either literal or special creation within the period of an actual six-day, twenty-four-hour period, or they may accept the belief that the earth evolved over time under the guidance of God. Catholicism holds that God initiated and continued the process of his creation, that Adam and Eve were real people, and that all humans, whether specially created or evolved, have and have always had specially created souls for each individual.

Geological Evidences of the Antiquity of Man is a book written by British geologist, Charles Lyell in 1863. The first three editions appeared in February, April, and November 1863, respectively. A much-revised fourth edition appeared in 1873. Antiquity of Man, as it was known to contemporary readers, dealt with three scientific issues that had become prominent in the preceding decade: the age of the human race, the existence of ice ages, and Charles Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection. Lyell used the book to reverse or modify his own long-held positions on all three issues. The book drew sharp criticism from two of Lyell's younger colleagues – paleontologist Hugh Falconer and archaeologist John Lubbock – who felt that Lyell had used their work too freely and acknowledged it too sparingly. It sold well, however, and helped to establish the new science of prehistoric archaeology in Great Britain.

Polygenism is a theory of human origins which posits the view that the human races are of different origins (polygenesis). This view is opposite to the idea of monogenism, which posits a single origin of humanity. Modern scientific views find little merit in any polygenic model due to an increased understanding of speciation in a human context, with the monogenic "Out of Africa" hypothesis and its variants being the most widely accepted models for human origins. Polygenism has historically been heavily used in service of white supremacist ideas and practices, denying a common origin between European and non-European peoples. It can be distinguished between Biblical polygenism, describing a Pre-Adamite or Co-Adamite origin of certain races in the context of the Genesis narrative of Adam and Eve, and scientific polygenism, attempting to find a taxonomic basis for ideas of racial science.

Isaac La Peyrère (1596–1676), also known as Isaac de La Peyrère or Pererius, was a French-born theologian, writer, and lawyer. La Peyrère is best known as a 17th-century predecessor of the scientific racialist theory of polygenism in the form of his Pre-Adamite hypothesis, which offered a challenge to traditional Abrahamic understandings of the descent of the human races as derived from the Book of Genesis. In addition to this, La Peyrère anticipated Zionism, advocating a Jewish return to Palestine, within the context of premillennialist Messianic theology. He moved in prominent circles and was known for his connections to the Prince of Condé and the abdicated Queen Christina of Sweden. Born to a Huguenot family, possibly of Portuguese Jewish converso or Marrano heritage, La Peyrère was pressured to renounce his views and publicly converted to the Catholic Church towards the end of his life, though the sincerity of this conversion has been questioned.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Josiah C. Nott</span> American physician (1804–1873)

Josiah Clark Nott was an American surgeon, anthropologist and ethnologist. He is known for his studies into the etiology of yellow fever and malaria, including the theory that they are caused by germs, and for his espousal of scientific racism.

Monogenism or sometimes monogenesis is the theory of human origins which posits a common descent for all human races. The negation of monogenism is polygenism. This issue was hotly debated in the Western world in the nineteenth century, as the assumptions of scientific racism came under scrutiny both from religious groups and in the light of developments in the life sciences and human science. It was integral to the early conceptions of ethnology.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of paleontology</span>

The history of paleontology traces the history of the effort to understand the history of life on Earth by studying the fossil record left behind by living organisms. Since it is concerned with understanding living organisms of the past, paleontology can be considered to be a field of biology, but its historical development has been closely tied to geology and the effort to understand the history of Earth itself.

Scriptural geologists were a heterogeneous group of writers in the early nineteenth century, who claimed "the primacy of literalistic biblical exegesis" and a short Young Earth time-scale. Their views were marginalised and ignored by the scientific community of their time. They "had much the same relationship to 'philosophical' geologists as their indirect descendants, the twentieth-century creationists." Paul Wood describes them as "mostly Anglican evangelicals" with "no institutional focus and little sense of commonality". They generally lacked any background in geology, and had little influence even in church circles.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Timothy H. Heaton</span>

Timothy H. Heaton is a professor of earth sciences at The University of South Dakota (USD), Vermillion, specializing in archaeological geology. Much of Heaton's work is focused on the Great Basin as well as on forming chronologies for the extinction of many Ice Age animals. He is most widely known for his work at On Your Knees Cave located in Prince of Wales Island in southeast Alaska where early humans remains ca. 10,300 years old were found. This find is one of the oldest human genetic samples recovered in the Americas. The site record further supports the possibility the first people into the Americas south of the ice sheets traveled along the Alaskan coast by boat rather than overland through central Canada. He also discovered a new species of fossil skunk (Brachyprotoma) at Crystal Ball Cave, Utah.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Missing link (human evolution)</span> Non-scientific term for a transitional fossil

"Missing link" is a hypothetical or recently-discovered transitional fossil. It is often used in popular science and in the media for any new transitional form. The term originated to describe the hypothetical intermediate form in the evolutionary series of anthropoid ancestors to anatomically modern humans (hominization). The term was influenced by the pre-Darwinian evolutionary theory of the Great Chain of Being and the now-outdated notion (orthogenesis) that simple organisms are more primitive than complex organisms.

References

Citations
  1. James C. Kaufman, Robert J. Sternberg, The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity (2010), p. 280; Google Books.
  2. Armitage, S. J.; Jasim, S. A.; Marks, A. E.; Parker, A. G.; Usik, V. I.; Uerpmann, H. P. (2011). "Hints of Earlier Human Exit from Africa". Science. 331 (6016). Science News: 453–6. doi:10.1126/science.1199113. PMID   21273486. S2CID   20296624. Archived from the original on 3 October 2012. Retrieved 1 May 2011.
  3. "'Modern' Behavior Began 40,000 Years Ago In Africa", Science Daily, July 1998
  4. Systematic Theology, vol. 2 § 3. Antiquity of Man.
  5. Wikisource-logo.svg "Man as the Interpreter of Nature" in Popular Science Monthly .
  6. Wikisource-logo.svg "The Fossil Man" in Popular Science Monthly .
  7. Such as the Catholic Hebraist Richard Simon, the Calvinists Samuel Maresius, Johannes Hoornbeek, and Gisbertus Voetius, and the Lutherans Abraham Calovius, Johannes Andreas Quenstedt, and David Hollazius.
  8. 1 2 3 Herbermann, Charles, ed. (1913). "Preadamites"  . Catholic Encyclopedia . New York: Robert Appleton Company.
  9. Giordano Bruno, Jacob Palaeologus, Paracelsus, Gabriel de Foigny, and possibly Thomas Harriot and Christopher Marlowe; with some Familists, Ranters and Diggers. Philip C. Almond, Adam and Eve in Seventeenth-century Thought (1999), pp. 49–52; Google Books.
  10. William Poole, The World Makers: Scientists of the Restoration and the Search for the Origins of the Earth (2009), p. 29; Google Books.
  11. Philip C. Almond, Adam and Eve in Seventeenth-century Thought (1999), p. 58; Google Books.
  12. Augstein, H. F. "Prichard, James Cowles". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/22776.(Subscription or UK public library membership required.)
  13. 1 2 Grahame Clark, The Identity of Man: as seen by an archaeologist (1983), p. 48; Internet Archive.
  14. Edward P. Mahoney, Philosophy and Humanism: Renaissance essays in honor of Paul Oskar Kristeller (1976), p. 51; Google Books.
  15. Richard Henry Popkin, Isaac La Peyrère (1596-1676): his life, work, and influence (1987), p. 85; Google Books.
  16. Richard Henry Popkin (editor), The Columbia History of Western Philosophy (2005), p. 413; Google Books.
  17. Richard Henry Popkin, Isaac La Peyrère (1596-1676): his life, work, and influence (1987), p. 30; Google Books.
  18. The Polynesians and Their Migrations
  19. Sturtevant, William C. (1978). Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 4: History of Indian-White Relations. Government Printing Office. pp. 541–. ISBN   978-0-16-004583-7 . Retrieved 1 March 2013.
  20. A. Bowdoin Van Riper, Men among the Mammoths: Victorian science and the discovery of human prehistory (1993), p. 174; Google Books.
  21. Nicholas A. Rupke, Caves, Fossils, and the History of the Earth, p. 242, in Andrew Cunningham and Nicholas Jardine, Romanticism and the Sciences (2009).
  22. Theodore Ziolkowski, German Romanticism and Its Institutions (1992), p. 23; Google Books.
  23. Grahame Clark, Archaeology and Society: reconstructing the prehistoric past (1967), p. 32; Google Books.
  24. Dermot Anthony Nestor, Cognitive Perspectives on Israelite Identity (2010), p. 48; Google Books.
  25. Bruce G. Trigger, A History of Archaeological Thought (2000), pp. 78.
  26. 1 2 Frere, John, Wikisource-logo.svg "Account of Flint Weapons Discovered at Hoxne in Suffolk" ., in Archaeologia, v. 13 (London, 1800): 204–205
  27. Richard B. Lee, Richard Heywood Daly, The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Hunters and Gatherers (1999), p. 7; Google Books.
  28. Donald K. Grayson, The Establishment of Human Antiquity (1983), p. 3.
  29. John G. Evans, The Environment of Early Man in the British Isles (1975), p. 68; Google Books.
  30. A. Bowdoin Van Riper, Men among the Mammoths: Victorian science and the discovery of human prehistory (1993), pp. 82–3; Google Books.
  31. John Lubbock, Pre-historic times, as illustrated by Ancient Remains, and the Manners and Customs of Modern Savages (1890), p. 420; Google Books.
  32. Charles Lyell, Principles of Geology, Volume 2 (1991 reprint), p. 270; Google Books.
  33. Justin E. H. Smith, Divine Machines: Leibniz and the Sciences of Life (2011), p. 257; Google Books.
  34. Charles Lyell, Principles of Geology, Volume 1 (1990 reprint), p. xiv; Google Books.
  35. Joe D. Burchfield, Lord Kelvin and the Age of the Earth (1990), p. 191; Google Books.
  36. Jack Morrell, John Phillips and the Business of Victorian Science, p. 361; Google Books.
  37. Henrika Kuklick, New History of Anthropology (2009), p. 263; Google Books.
  38. "Pengelly, William"  . Dictionary of National Biography . London: Smith, Elder & Co. 1885–1900.
  39. Winfried Henke, Thorolf Hardt, Handbook of Paleoanthropology, Volume 1 (2007), p. 20; Google Books.
  40. Bruce G. Trigger, A History of Archaeological Thought (2000), pp. 88–9.
  41. Peter Bogucki, The Origins of Human Society (1999), p. 3; Google Books.
  42. (in French) Eric Dellong, Narbonne et le narbonnais (2003), p. 62; Google Books.
  43. Christol, Jules de - La France savante XVIIe-XXe
  44. Marianne Sommer, Bones and Ochre: the curious afterlife of the Red Lady of Paviland (2007), p. 88; Google Books.
  45. Marianne Sommer, Bones and Ochre: the curious afterlife of the Red Lady of Paviland (2007), p. 202; Google Books.
  46. Encyclopedia of Virginia Biography
Sources