All language subtitles for Ancient Origins Extraordinary Evidence - 2022

[bright upbeat music]

- [Presenter] A
modern-looking skeleton

discovered by
German scientist,

Hans Reck, in Olduvai
Gorge, Tanzania,

in 1913, was controversially
claimed to date to

1.15 to 1.7
million years ago.

This made it the oldest

anatomically-modern human
skeleton ever discovered.

Later, carbon dating
by Reiner Protsch,

a professor at
Frankfurt University,

found the fossil
to be much younger.

However, Protsch was
subsequently dismissed

from the University,

and some researchers
dispute his findings

upholding the
original dating.

Over 30 miles long and
about 300 feet deep,

Olduvai Gorge is an ancient
site in the Great Rift
Valley,

in the Eastern Serengeti
plain, Northern Tanzania.

Deposits exposed in
the sides of the gorge

cover a vast period,

beginning around 2.1
million years ago

and ending about
15,000 years ago.

The deposits have produced
the fossil remains

of more than 60
human ancestors,

thus providing the most
continuous known record

of human evolution,

over the past
2 million years.

The site has yielded
abundant animal fossils

and stone artifacts

preserved in the well-dated
stratigraphic sequence.

Olduvai Gorge was made famous
by paleoanthropologists,

Louis and Mary Leakey,

who conducted numerous
digs at the site

in the mid-20th century.

The couple's fossil
discoveries at the site

prove that human
beings were far older

than had been
previously believed,

and that human evolution
was centered in Africa

rather than in Asia

as earlier research
had suggested.

Long before the Leakeys,

Olduvai first became known
to the scientific world

in 1911, when a German
entomologist professor,

Kattwinkle, who was
collecting butterflies in the
area,

discovered the
gorge accidentally.

He came upon various
fossils in the gorge,

including teeth of hipparion,

and took them back to Berlin,

where they stimulated a
great deal of interest.

He gave the site
the name, Oldoway,

later to be changed by
the English to Olduvai.

The finds were
believed so significant

that a German expedition

on behalf of the universities
of Berlin and Munich,

and under the leadership of
geologist and paleontologist,

Professor Hans Reck,

was sent to Tanzania in 1913

and spent three
months at Olduvai.

The most spectacular find
from these 1913 excavations

was a modern-looking skeleton
found embedded in rock

on an east-facing
slope of Olduvai Gorge.

Reck claimed this
skeleton was about

half a million years old,

the age of the deposits in
which it had been discovered.

This was the first discovery
of prehistoric human remains

in the gorge,

which was to become the
scene of major discoveries

in later years.

With Reck's training
as a paleontologist,

he was used to
working with fossils.

The fact that the
bones he discovered

were in a highly
compacted deposit,

persuaded him that they
were of great antiquity.

In fact, the
deposit was so hard

that the bones had to be
removed with hammers and
chisels.

This belief in the apparent
antiquity of the find

was supported by his analysis
of the geological sequence

in the gorge.

The skeleton, which lay
in the crouch position,

typical of late
stone age burials

he had seen in east
Africa and elsewhere,

was removed from what
he had labeled Bed II,

which he dated to over
150,000 years ago.

The skeletal remains
discovered by Reck

included a complete
but damaged skull,

containing 36 teeth
rather than the usual 32.

Reck understood
this as a primitive,

and therefore, early
feature of the skeleton.

Fossils of an extinct
elephant were also discovered

in the sediments below
the level of the skeleton,

which led Reck to conclude

that the deposit was dated to
the Middle Pleistocene
period,

now known as Chibanian,

between 770,000 and
126,000 years ago.

Reck knew that the
discovery of Homo sapiens

remains in a
deposit of this date

would be extremely
controversial.

So, he attempted to establish
whether the skeleton

could have belonged
to a later burial.

In the end, he was unable
to discover evidence

for a dug hole
into the layer,

at a later period,

that might have
been a grave cut.

Reck's skeleton, now
called Oldoway Man

or the Oldoway
Human Skeleton,

soon became notorious
throughout the scientific
world

as its age could not be
satisfactorily verified.

Reck was unable to
return to the site

due to the 1914-18 war

which put a stop to any
further work at Olduvai,

as the gorge was in
German East Africa,

where fierce
fighting took place

between the British
and German forces.

It was partly due
to the controversy

surrounding Reck's discovery,

that the young Louis Leakey

became fascinated with
the Olduvai Gorge.

Although initially skeptical

of Reck's controversial
assertions,

when Leakey visited
the site with Reck,

he was soon persuaded
to agree with him.

The pair, then
co-authored a letter

to the British
journal "Nature"

reporting the new evidence,

which apparently supported
Reck's original theory.

As late as 1931,

reports were circulating

that it was almost
beyond question

that the skeleton of a human
being found by Reck in 1913

was the oldest known
authentic skeleton

of Homo sapiens.

However, from the
very beginning,

there were many
academics who disagreed

with Reck's dating
of the skeleton.

Their main objection
was that his work

was undertaken at Olduvai,

without any understanding of
archeological stratigraphy.

In 1932, English
geologist, P.G.H. Boswell,

carried out heavy mineral
analysis of Bed II

and of the deposit
near the skeleton,

and came to the conclusion
that the skeleton was a
burial

and intrusive to Bed II.

Although the deposit in
which the skeletal remains

were discovered, was indeed
of Middle Pleistocene date.

Geological analysis
of the material

surrounding the skeleton,

showed it to contain red
pebbles and limestone chips.

Such material is
not found in Bed II,

but occurs higher
up in the sequence,

which indicates that
it is later than that.

This would make it certain
that the skeleton was
intrusive

in that layer.

In other words,

the skeleton lay in a grave
cut down from a higher layer.

Eventually, Reck himself came
to accept the explanation.

The case for a much
more modern date

for the Oldoway Man Skeleton
appeared to be closed,

when in the 1970s,

radiocarbon dating
of the remains

showed them to be no
older than 19,000 BC.

This apparently proved

that the remains belonged
to a post-ice age man

of the capstone culture,

and that they had become
embedded in layers

dating from the
early Pleistocene.

The radiocarbon dates
were apparently obtained

by German anthropologist,

Professor Reiner
Protsch Von Zieten,

of the University
of Frankfurt.

Unfortunately,
in February 2005,

it was revealed that
the 30-year long career

of this
distinguished academic

had come to an abrupt end,

due to the fact that he had
been systematically
falsifying

the dates on numerous
Stone Age relics.

Thomas Terberger,
the archeologist who
discovered the fraud

said, "Anthropology is going
to have to completely revise

its picture of modern man,

between 40,000 and
10,000 years ago."

Professor Protsch's work
appeared to prove that,

anatomically, modern humans
and Neanderthals had
coexisted,

and perhaps even had
children together.

This now appears
to be rubbish.

The academic scandal
was only discovered

when the professor was
caught trying to sell

his department's entire
chimpanzee skull collection

in the United States.

Further inquiries
later established

that he had also authorized
fake fossils as real

and had plagiarized
other scientist's work.

An important Hamburg
skull fragment,

which once believed
to have come from

the world's oldest German,

a Neanderthal, was actually
only 7,500 thousand years
old,

according to Oxford
University's Radiocarbon
Dating Unit.

The unit also established

that other skulls dated by

Professor Reiner
Protsch von Zieten

had been wrongly dated.

Some of the professor's other
hoaxes were more extreme.

One of his more sensational
finds, Binshof-Speyer Woman,

was dated by him to
21,300 years ago.

But, in fact,
lived in 1,300 BC.

While Paderborn-Sande Man,

date by the professor to
an incredible 27,600 BC,

only died a couple of
hundred years ago in 1750.

Professor Ulrich Brand,

who led the investigation
into the nefarious activity

said "It's deeply
embarrassing."

"Of course, the university
feels very bad about this."

"The professor
refused to meet us,

but we had 10 sittings
with 12 witnesses."

"Their stories about him
were increasingly bizarre,

after a while, it was hard
to take it seriously."

"You had to laugh, it
was just unbelievable."

"At the end of the day,
what he did was incredible."

Investigators also
discovered that some of the

12,000 skeletons stored

in the university
department's bone cellar

were missing their heads,

apparently sold by the
professor to friends in the
US,

and various dentists.

The professor, who lived
Mainz with his wife,
Angelina,

refused to answer
questions by reporters.

Merely saying that he was
the victim of an intrigue

and that, "All the
disputed fossils

are my personal property."

So, where does this
leave Oldoway Man?

The radiocarbon
dating by the remains

by Professor Protsch
cannot be taken seriously,

until full proof of
radiocarbon dating is
performed

on the skeleton,

Reck's original hypotheses

that he had
discovered the remains

of the oldest known skeleton

of Homo sapiens

cannot be dismissed
out of hand.

[bright triumphant music]

A skeleton dubbed
Little Foot,

discovered in South
Africa in the 1990s,

is claimed to be the most
complete ancient hominin

in the fossil record.

The results of recent
analysis into the skeleton

have caused controversy,

as researchers claim
that Little Foot

actually lived some
3.67 million years ago,

about a million years
earlier than previous claims.

And that the fossil
probably represents

a previously unknown species

related to humans.

In 1994, Ronald Clark,

a paleoanthropologist at the
University of Witwatersrand

in Johannesburg,
South Africa,

was examining boxes of
fossils at a field laboratory

at the Sterkfontein Caves,

about 25 miles northwest
of Johannesburg.

The collection had
previously been thought

to contain nothing but
ancient monkey bones.

When he came upon a group of
small bones in the
collection,

he immediately realized
that they belonged

to an early hominin.

Clark later established
that the bones

seemed to have belonged
to an ancient species

of ape-like hominins

that were present in Africa

between about 4 million
and 2 million years ago,

before the human genus,
Homo, became dominant.

In 1997, Clark came
up on more bones

from the skeleton at a
nearby medical school,

and decided he would
search for more

of the Little Foot skeleton,

in the cave itself.

But it was to take until 2012

to locate and remove all
traces of Little Foot

from the cave.

Study researcher,
Robin Crompton,

a musculoskeletal biologist
at the University of
Liverpool,

in the United Kingdom,

said that the excavations
proved much more difficult

than at first thought.

This was mainly because
the bones themselves

were softer than the
rock surrounding them.

Once in possession of
the remains though,

even more difficult
work lay ahead,

Clark said of the
recovery of the skeleton,

"We used very small tools,
like needles, to excavate it,

that's why it took so long."

"It was like excavating a
fluffy pastry out of
concrete."

In December 2018,

it was finally revealed that
after 20 years of excavating

in South Africa,

researchers had
completely recovered

and cleaned the most
complete skeleton

of an approximately 3.67
million year old hominin

nicknamed, Little Foot.

Initial theories were that
the Little Foot fossil

is a female who exhibited
some of the earlier signs

of human-like
bipedal walking.

Fascinatingly, she may also
belong to a distinct species

that most researchers haven't
previously recognized.

The nickname, Little Foot,

came from the small
size of the foot bones

that were among the first
parts of the skeleton

to be discovered.

The newly discovered
Little Foot specimen

is more than 90% complete,

which far exceeds
the amount of remains

of its more famous
cousin, Lucy,

whose skeleton is
about 40% complete.

The skeleton's
relatively small build

and certain skull features

suggested to the researchers

that it was probably a
female of advanced age,

with a brain size of about
408 cubic centimeters,

about 1/3 the size of
modern human brains.

The woman seemed to have
suffered a forearm injury

early in life

and her comparatively long
legs in proportion to her
arms

means that she had
similar proportions

to those of modern humans.

Little Foot is the
oldest known hominin

to have this feature,

which suggests that she
probably walked upright

more than she swung
through trees.

Researchers stated that
Little Foot was probably 4"3'
tall

and also vegetarian.

According to Robin Compton,

"My analysis of her skeleton

shows that she,

and the rest of the local
population of her species

at that time,

were under active
natural selection

for an ability to
walk efficiently,

fully upright, on the ground
over medium to long
distances."

Examination of the skeleton
remains showed that Little
Foot

had sustained an arm
injury early in life.

However, this injury
had healed long before

she fell into the cave

where she was found and died.

"The fatal fall may have
been during a struggle

with a large monkey,

as the skeleton
of one was found

very close to her."
said Crompton.

Based in part on the
examination of her teeth and
hips,

researchers believe Little
Foot represents a new
species.

The name had previously
been given to

a hominin skull fragment
found in South Africa in
1948,

but it was withdrawn
after researchers decided

that the skull
probably belonged

to an unusual africanus.

However Lee Berger,

an archeologist at the
University of Witswatersrand,

who was not involved
with the latest research

into the skeleton,

but is working on
publications about Little
Foot,

stated that if Little
Foot is actually

a newly identified species,

which he is far from
convinced is the case,

then she should have
a new species name

and not reuse an old
undefined one, but Compton
disagreed.

After the Australopithecus
africanus specimen

was properly named,

Clark began using that
name for the bone fragments

found in the cave.

He said on the naming issue,

"It's a bad practice

and against the
International Code

of Zoological Nomenclature

to create new names where a
valid name already exists."

"A no-good argument
for separation

into a different
species exists."

So, as Professor Clark
did not have evidence

that Little Foot

was part of a
different species,

and he continued to use
that name for the fossils

in the published
scientific literature,

it was entirely appropriate

that he used the
existing and valid name.

Berger is also concerned
about the lack of solid
information

in the recently
published papers

on the Little Foot skeleton.

He believes there should be
more detailed measurements

of the fossil bones.

For instance,
there's no data.

"There are almost no
measurements of the
fossils." he says.

Berger hopes, one day, to
provide the missing data

in his own publications.

Although, he is still at an
early stage of the analysis.

The researchers suggest
that these specimens

are potentially an ancestor
of a group of hominins

called the Paranthropus four,

which coexisted with
early Homo species

for about a million years.

Much more controversy
has arisen

over the dating of the
Little Foot fossil,

based on the age of the
sediments around the fossil,

the researchers have
dated Little Foot

to around 3.67
million years ago,

about a million years earlier

than previous dates
for the skeleton.

This would mean
Little Foot was alive

about 500,000 years
before Lucy in Ethiopia.

The date would mean that
our ancient ancestors

were almost certainly
scattered across Africa.

Some researchers are
unconvinced that the skeleton
itself

is as old as the sediments
in which it was found.

Fred Grine, a
paleoanthropologist at
Stony Brook, New York,

quote, "We buried a dead
squirrel in our backyard

in November, 2014,

but I think the
sand surrounds it

dates back to the last
glacial retreat on Long
Island."

He argues that millions of
years after the sand crystals

washed into the cave,

a larger opening
could have formed

allowing an ancient human
ancestor to fall in.

Darryl Granger, however, is
aware of the dating problems,

"Dating cave sediments and
their fossils is difficult."

"We know so much about the
timing of hominid evolution

in East Africa,

because there are many
dateable volcanic ashes

associated with
the fossil sites."

"In places like South Africa,

there are no volcanic
ashes to date."

"The cave sediments
themselves can be very
complicated,

with sediment falling
into multiple entrances,

collapsing into lower
sections, and overlapping each
other."

In March, 2020, it was
reported in the media

that a high resolution
micro-CT scanning

of the skull of Little Foot

has revealed some aspects of
how this species used to live

more than 3
million years ago.

The work was undertaken by

University of
Witswatersrand team,

which included lead
researcher, Dr. Amelie
Beaudet.

By comparing the Little
Foot with other fossils

from South and East Africa,

as well as living
humans and chimpanzees,

the team showed

that it was capable
of head movements

that differ from
modern humans.

In the summary of the paper,

the doctor states,

"In particular, the nearly
complete atlas of Little Foot

has the potential to
provide new insights

into the evolution
of head mobility

and the arterial supply to
the brain in the human
lineage."

"Our study shows that it was
capable of head movements

that differ from us."

"This could be explained by
the greater ability of them

to climb and move in trees."

"However, a Southern
African specimen

younger than Little Foot,

probably younger by
about a million years,

may have partially
lost this capacity

and spent more time on the
ground, like us today."

One aspect of the new
research appears to

contradict to some extent

earlier conclusions about
Little Foot's movement.

The new study found that
the overall dimensions

and shape of the atlas,

the topmost bone, sitting
just below the skull

of Little Foot

are similar to
living chimpanzees.

More specifically, the
ligament insertions

and the morphology of the
facet joints linking the head

and the neck,

all suggests that Little Foot
was moving regularly in trees

rather than mainly
on the ground

as was previously believed.

[bright triumphant music]

A spectacular recent
find from Kenya,

by Meave Leakey,

of the National Museum of
Kenya and her colleagues,

has caused controversy
in the scientific world.

The find, a damaged but
almost complete skull and
face,

is claimed to be 3.5
million years old

and belonged to an entirely
new breed of early human.

However, many
scientists have objected

to this identification

due to apparent
damage to the fossil.

And the debate over whether
it is indeed a new species

is still continuing.

Born on the 28th of
July, 1942, in London,

English paleoanthropologist,
Dr. Meave Leakey,

is part of a family
that has gained

worldwide renown for decades,

of pioneering hominin
research in Eastern Africa.

She is the daughter in-law
of Louis and Mary Leakey,

and wife of Richard Leakey,

the famous paleontologists

who have made several
significant hominid finds

in the last 50 years.

In 2002, Meave Leakey,
along with her daughter,

Louise, was named an
Explorer-in-Residence,

by the National
Geographic Society.

In 2007, Leakey was a
lead author of a study

in the journal "Nature"

that went against
the predominant view

of the ancestral
lineage of Homo sapiens.

Namely, that the
species Homo habilis

evolved into Homo erectus,

in linear succession.

Currently, Dr. Leakey
is a research professor

in the Department of
Anthropology, Stony
Brook University,

New York, Director of
Plio-Pleistocene research

at the Turkana Basin
Institute, Kenya.

Explorer-in-Residence at the
National Geographic Society,

and co-leader
with her daughter,

Louise, of the Koobi Fora
Research Project, the KFRP.

In 2001, Meave and her
daughter, Louise, and
colleagues,

reported on the discovery of
a 3.5 million year old skull

that they believed belonged
to a previously unknown
hominin

genus and species,
the Kenyan Flat-face.

Research assistant,
Justus Erus,

had made the find
two years earlier

while working with members
of the Leakey family,

near the Lomekwi River
in northern Kenya,

the almost complete skull
was battered and weathered,

but for the Leakeys,

cleverly represented a
new breed of early human.

It is the oldest near
complete human skull ever
found.

For the previous two decades,

scientists had believed that

a species better
known as Lucy,

named after the partial
Ethiopian skeleton

discovered in 1974,

was our single
common ancestor.

Meave and Louise's discovery

apparently demonstrated
that humans

did not descend from Lucy

and that, rather than
a neat ancestral line

linking us to chimps,

there were likely numerous
species of hominids

living at the same time.

According to Meave,

"The find was significant

because it showed us
that the situation

was a lot more complex
than we thought."

Whilst Lucy was able
to walk upright,

she had an ape-like
projecting mouth and heavy
brow.

The newly discovered skull,

the only one of its
kind so far identified,

however, has a
much flatter face

and raised cheek bones.

The brow is smaller

and teeth are intermediate,

between typical human
and typical ape forms,

with fairly small molars

compared to Lucy and
her later relatives.

Dr. Leakey said, of the
huge importance of the find,

"This shows persuasively

that at least two
lineages existed

as far back as 3.5
million years."

"The early stages
of human evolution

are more complex than
we previously thought."

Kenyan Flat-face Man
still had a long way to go

in terms of brain power.

However, possessing
a brain cage,

no bigger than
a modern chimp.

The new find is said to come
from a completely new genius.

Though this new group may,

according to some
researchers, already have two
members.

They have noted that
the features exhibited

look very similar to those of
a skull discovered in 1972,

on the Eastern shore
of Lake Turkana,

in the Kenyan Rift Valley

by Meave Leakey's
husband, Richard.

The skull, named 1470 Man,

had a very human-like face,

flat rather than
protruding like an ape,

and with small teeth.

The age of 1470 Man was
controversial for many years,

it's believed by most
researchers to be around

1.8 million years old,

and is assigned to the
species Homo rudolfensis,

usually regarded as a
very primitive member

of our own lineage.

However, a few people
believe the skull

should not be attributed
to Homo rudolfensis

and needs to be reexamined.

In Leakey's studies of the
finds published in 2012,

she stated that the
specimen from Lake Turkana

is a different species from
the early Homo varieties

previously known to
have inhabited the area.

These were Homo
habilis, handy man,

the assumed tool user,

conventionally seen as the
earliest known Homo species,

and Homo erectus,

the upright man,

thought to be a direct
ancestor of our own species.

According to Leakey,

"With these new fossils,

we can definitely say there
are two groups of non-erectus

living side by side

at Lake Turkana."

"As opposed to other
species of Homo,

which had rather
protruding faces,

what would've struck you

was how flat and
broad the face was."

"Their brain case
is beginning to get

a little bit of a forehead

because it's quite a
big brain in there,

but nothing like the
brain of Homo erectus,

which likely arose later."

The study team wanted to
avoid the previously proposed
names

for the flat-face
species, Homo rudolfensis,

as the relationships
between the fossil specimens

and the species names
is still uncertain.

The study team wanted to
avoid the previously proposed
name

for the flat-face
species, Homo rudolfensis,

as the relationships
between the fossil specimens

and the species names

is still uncertain.

One fascinating question

is how the three early
humans would've coexisted

without friction over food
supplies, for example,

existing between them.

According to physical
anthropologist, William
Kimbel,

given the facts that they
were all terrestrial bipeds,

of one sort or another,

differences in how the
three species made a living,

and where they chose to live,

would've come down to diet

as opposed to say
climbing ability.

Perhaps it may just be

that these early
human species

simply had no problems
getting along with each
other.

"Modern primates are
generally very good

at living together."
Leaky commented.

"You can see
troops of monkeys

composed to at least two
species, if not more."

The study of the
origins of man

is understandably a
controversial and complex
area.

Since Meave Leakey's
initial discovery,

the picture has
been complicated

even more by the
identification in 2000,

of a hominin now called
Orrorin tugenensis.

This creature could represent

an entirely new
group of hominids,

and is claimed to be the
oldest human-like creature

known to science,

taking our lineage back

to an astonishing 6
million years ago.

In 2000, the research
team of Brigitte Senut

and Martin Pickford

discovered fossil material

consisting of a partial
humorous, femur, and
mandible,

a distant thumb
bone, and some teeth

in the Tugen Hills of Kenya.

The molars were covered
with thick enamel,

like those of later hominins,

and were small, like our own.

The discovery was nicknamed
at the time, Millennium Man,

due to its discovery date,

and was dated to 6
million years ago,

and given the taxonomic
classification
Orrorin tugenensis,

Original Man from
the Tugen Hills.

Initially,
paleoanthropologists were
skeptical of the find

with many remaining
so to this day,

especially as the fossils
were not made available

to the scientific community.

Although there is still a
heated debate over the
fossil,

it is increasingly presented
in published texts as
hominin.

Millennium Man lived
around the time when

genetic analysis suggest,

our oldest hominin ancestor

split from the oldest
ancestor of the great apes.

This means there's a chance
that Orrorin tugenensis

could be the fabled
missing link,

or at least one of them.

In March 2003,

paleontologist, Tim White,

of the University of
California, Berkeley

questioned the heritage
of Meave Leakey's find.

He argued, that
it was more likely

to be a Kenyan
variant of Lucy.

White based his
assertion on the fact

that the cranium

was cracked and distorted
when discovered,

making it possible

that some of its
apparently unique features,

including its flat face

and tall vertically-oriented
cheek bones,

could have been caused
by geological processes.

Fred Spoor of the
University College, London,

who was part of
the team that found

the Kenyan Flat
-face Man fossil,

disputed such objections

and made a new detail
study of the skull.

From examining computed
tomography scans,

Spoor concluded
that the upper jaw

had suffered much
less distortion

than the rest of the cranium.

So, he focused his
studies on that bone

correcting for the
distortion present,

and concluded that
Leakey and her colleagues

had been correct

in designating the fossil

a new species.

[bright upbeat music]

Ancient hominin in bones
discovered in Northern
Spain's

Atapuerca Mountains have
pushed back the arrival

of humans in Europe

to roughly 1.2
million years ago,

around 500,000 years
earlier than once believed.

Fascinatingly, only about
1/10 of the site's total area

has been excavated,

which means there
may be many more

important
discoveries in store.

One mystery of the site,

the archeologists have so
far been unable to solve,

is how the remains of 32
individuals accumulated

at the bottom of a
narrow cave shaft

at the site.

The discovery of Atapuerca,

Atapuerca is the site

of a number of
limestone caves

near Burgos in
Northern Spain,

known for the
abundant fossil record

of the earliest human
beings in Europe,

dating back almost
1 million years.

The sites at Atapuerca

have been known since the
end of the 19th century,

but it was not
until the 1950s

that any details of
the site became known

when the Edelweiss
Caving Club,

ECC of Burgos,
Northern Spain,

began to catalog and map
Cueva Mayor at Atapuerca.

In 1962, ECC members reported
fossils in the railway
cutting

to the local authorities.

A decade later,

the ECC discovered
the Gallery of Flint.

And in 1976, they
located hominid skulls

in the Pit of Bones.

Paleontologist,
Emiliano Aguirre,

began investigating sites at
Atapuerca soon afterwards.

And in 1978,

put together a
research project

for the first
excavations there,

which he led until 1991,

when he retired and
handed over the leadership

of the Atapuerca
Research Project.

In March, 2008,

it was announced that
Spanish paleontologists

had unearthed the remains
of a 1.2 million year old

human-like inhabitant

of Western Europe,

in the caves at Atapuerca.

According to the researcher,

the fossil find demonstrates

that members of
our genus, Homo,

colonized this region

far earlier than
previously believed.

The primitive hominin

is represented by a
fragment of jawbone

bearing a few teeth.

Although stone tools
of a similar age to
the fossil jawbone

from about 1.2 to 1.5
million years old,

had previously been
discovered in France, Italy,
and Spain.

This is the first verifiable
human material of this date.

This lends support
to the theory

that the tools found
in the vicinity

were made by
primitive humans.

According to Chris Stringer,

of the Natural History
Museum in London,

when combined with the
emerging archeological
evidence,

it suggests that Southern
Europe began to be colonized

from Western Asia,

not long after humans
had emerged from Africa.

Something which many
of us would've doubted

even five years ago.

One of the sites that
Atapuerca, Gran Dolina,

contains human remains

which have been dated to
about 800,000 years ago,

as well as some of
the earliest tools

ever found in Western Europe.

But perhaps the most
fascinating discovery at
Atapuerca

was a cave called
the Pit of Bones,

where 43 feet down

more than 1,600
human fossils,

including several nearly
complete skulls were found.

The materials in the pit

dates back to between
600,000 and 300,000 years,

and represents
about 28 individuals

whose brain sizes
are within the range

of both Neanderthals
and modern humans.

This represents the
world's largest collection

in any one place of
ancient human fossils.

Compared to modern humans,

these people were short,
stocky, and had smaller
brains.

It has been estimated

males were about 5"7' tall

and weighed
around 170 pounds.

Whereas females
stood around 5"2'

and weighed 125 pounds.

The skeleton's exhibit a
number of characteristics

unique to Neanderthals,

including a
projecting mid-face,

long and narrow pubic bones,

and thick finger bones.

However, unlike
later Neanderthals,

they do not fully express

the characteristic
Neanderthal form.

The site also contained
a 430,000 year old
fractured skull,

which has been interpreted

as the earliest evidence of
interpersonal violence in
Homo.

Also discovered in the pit

were the bones of cave bears,

it's believed that the bears

fell down the
shaft by accident,

probably while seeking
places to hibernate.

But what the human
bones were doing there

can only be imagined,

no signs of tool butchery

or other food remains
were discovered.

And a single stone hand ax

was the only tool
discovered in the pit,

fashioned from
a type of stone

not known in the area.

Researchers have proposed
various hypotheses

to explain how the
fossils got there.

According to one theory,

the bodies may have
been purposely dropped

by their relatives

in some kind of
ritual burial.

This would push back the
origin of mortuary practices

in humans substantially.

Thus far, the earliest
accepted burials

only occur after
130,000 years ago,

among Neanderthals
and Homo sapiens.

However, other
researchers believe

it is more than
likely that the bodies

were deliberately dropped
there after meeting violent
ends.

The hominins may also have
been dragged there by
carnivores,

carried by flood waters,
or even being trapped

after venturing too far.

In August, 2016,

a study of the human remains
from the Pit of Bones

was published in the "Journal
of Archaeological Science."

It identified trauma on
eight skulls from the pits.

Part of the abstract
to the study reads,

"The fractures found
in 17 crania from SH

display a postmortem
fracturation pattern,

which occurred in
the dry bone stage

and is compatible with
collective burial
assemblages."

"Nevertheless, in addition
to the postmortem fractures,

eight crania also display
some typical perimortem
traumas."

"Interpersonal
violence as a cause

for the perimortem fractures

can be confirmed for
one of the skulls,

cranium 17, and also
probable for cranium five,

and cranium 11."

"For the rest of crania,

although other causes cannot
be absolutely ruled out,

the violence-related traumas

are the most
plausible scenario

for the perimortem
fractures."

"If this hypothesis
is confirmed,

we could interpret that
interpersonal violence

was a recurrent behavior

in this population from
the Middle Pleistocene."

It would appear from the
results of this study

that at least some
of those in the pit

suffered a violent end

at the hands of other members
of the population in the
area.

However, this still
doesn't explain how

and why the dead bodies were
taken into the cave chamber.

Perhaps the perpetrators
wanted to hide their victims

or maybe relatives interred
the corpses in the pit,

we shall probably
never know for sure.

In December, 2013,

it was revealed that a thigh
bone from the Pit of Bones

had yielded 400,000
year old DNA,

by far the oldest human
DNA ever sequenced.

Previously, the oldest
human DNA sequenced

came from bones that were
less than 120,000 years old.

Astonishingly, the results
suggested that the thigh bone

belonged to a previously
unknown human species,

which some
researchers believe

may even be a missing
link between Neanderthals

and their mysterious
cousins, the Denisovans.

Paleontologists
believe this result

brings us nearer
than ever before

to understanding who
our own common ancestor

within Neanderthals was.

According to Chris Stringer,

the genomes we
have up until now

are really very recent.

This takes us at least a few
hundred thousand years back

towards our common ancestor
with other hominins.

The researchers had
expected the DNA

to resemble Neanderthal,

but it proved to
be quite distinct,

most closely resembling that
of the mysterious Denisovans,

a species known only
from a finger bone

and two teeth discovered
in a Siberian cave.

Stringer admitted that
they were somewhat baffled

by this result.

And there is no evidence
that the Denisovans ranged

anywhere near Atapuerca.

One possibility considered
by the researchers

is that the fossils belong
to the common ancestor

of Neanderthals
and Denisovans,

and some of their descendants
later traveled east

and became the Denisovans.

The genome recovered
from the Pit of Bones

is particularly relevant

as it is from a period

that is extremely close to
the origin of our human line.

The archeological
evidence indicates

that these early humans
were developing important

new ways of behaving.

Though, they were still using
fairly primitive stone tools

like the crafted hand ax,

which researchers have
nicknamed, Excalibur,

that was found in the pit.

But the bones also suggest
more sophisticated traits.

One of these traits
is the use of the pit

as an early burial site,

part of a very
simple funeral rite.

Chris Stringer has even
suggested that Excalibur

may have been some kind
of tribute to the dead.

The discovery in the pits of
the deformed skull of a girl,

who lived to be
about 12 years old,

also reiterates this
more modern behavior,

suggesting that the
tribe cared for her.

"There's a hint of
something human,

caring for the
disabled." says Stringer.

In March, 2016,

a paper was published
in the journal "Nature",

describing a DNA study

which, to the
surprise of many,

identified the remains of
the pit bones as Neanderthal.

Using this information,

the researchers were able
to push back the date

when the separation
between our family branch

and that of Neanderthals

to some time between 550,000

and almost 800,000 years ago.

In 2019, a comparative
study was published

of the dental evolution of
a number of human species,

including the Neanderthals
of the Pit of Bones,

these results revealed
that the divergence

between modern humans
and Neanderthals

must have occurred at
least 800,000 years ago.

- [Narrator] A woman's skull,

the oldest known human
remains ever found in
Antarctica,

discovered lying
on Yamana Beach,

at Cape Sheriff, in
Antarctica's South Shetland
Islands

has become one of the
continent's biggest
mysteries.

No surviving documents
have ever been discovered

to explain how or why

a young woman came to be an
Antarctica during this era.

But now, new evidence may
have finally been found

to solve the case.

Antarctica is about 5.5
million square miles in size

and thick ice covers
about 98% of the land.

The continental ice sheet

contains about 7 million
cubic miles of ice,

making up about 90%
of the world's ice

and 80% of its fresh water.

Although Antarctica has
a fascinating history

of human activity
in the region,

it extends back only
about 200 years.

Indeed, the majority of what
is known about Antarctica

has been discovered in
the last few decades.

Remote, inaccessible,
and hostile,

Antarctica was the last
continent to be discovered

and acknowledges the
south polar region

was collected slowly.

The real nature of Antarctica

was shown for the first time,

as long as the 18th century,

by the second voyage of
the English navigator,

Captain James Cook.

Mariners who followed Cook
into high southern latitudes

of the icy continent,

did so because of his
reports of huge numbers

of whales and seals.

On the 16th and 17th
of November, 1820,

American seal hunter,

Nathaniel Brown Palmer,

then 21 years old,

commanded the 47 foot
long sloop, Hero,

which entered the
Orleans Strait

and came very close to
the Antarctic Peninsula.

Palmer and his men became
the first Americans

and the third group of people

to discover the
Antarctic Peninsula.

While there, Palmer
met Russian captain,

Thaddeus Bellingshausen, on
a major national expedition

that circumnavigated
Antarctica eastward.

The highly controversial
question of

who was first to site
land in Antarctica

has never been resolved.

British, Russian, and US
ships were all present

in the Antarctic Peninsula
area in the early 1820s,

when the first
sightings occurred.

However, the first documented
landing of the continent

was not until decades later,

on January 24th, 1895,

when the Norwegian
whaling ship, Antarctic,

landed a party at Cape Adare
on the northern Ross Sea.

From the late 18th

to the mid-20th century,

whalers and sealers
operated in the rich seas

surrounding the continent.

From the mid-20th
century onwards,

scientific investigation
replaced whaling and sealing

as the primary year-round
human activity in Antarctica.

These days, around
1,200 people

spend the winter
in Antarctica.

All of these are scientists
and their support staff.

Yamana Beach is
an ice-free beach

located on the west
coast of Cape Sheriff,

in the north extremity of the
Ioannes Paulus II Peninsula,

Livingston Island in the
South Shetlands of
Antarctica.

Sometime in 1985,

human remains were
discovered by chance

the remote Antarctic beach,

by Chilean biologist,
Dr. Daniel Torres.

According to Torres,

"On the afternoon
of January 7, 1985,

I was doing a
census of mammals

and also collecting
marine refuse

on Cape Sheriff,
Livingston island."

"On the beach, I saw a
big plastic container

and an enormous
plastic orange buoy."

"I went to the buoy
first to collect it,

and as I headed
along the beach,

I noticed that among the
very dark volcanic stones,

there was one
very white stone."

"But when I got closer,

I saw that on the
surface of the stone,

there was a series of lines
that looked like a human
skull."

"Obviously, I stopped
and went up closer

and I was able to establish
that it was a human cranium,

half buried in this very
thick, volcanic sand,

40 meters away
from the shore."

"I started very slowly
separating the pebbles

until I could pull out the
top part of the cranium,

and as the upper jaw
bones were missing,

I was looking for the other
remains until I found them."

Subsequent analysis
of the skull

at the Chilean
Antarctic Institute,

revealed that it belongs
to a young woman of 21

at the most.

But who was she?

And what was she doing
in this remote spot?

In January, 1987,

part of a human femur was
found inland from Yamana
beach.

And in January, 1991,

another part of a femur
was found close proximity

to the site of the
earlier 1987 find.

It was later revealed

that the remains were
of an indigenous female

from Southern Chile,

who's believed to have
died between 1819 and 1825.

This makes the woman's bones,

the oldest known human
remains ever found in
Antarctica,

but how did she get there?

The traditional canoes of
the indigenous Chileans

could not possibly have
managed such a long voyage

through extremely rough seas.

Fascinatingly,
the girls' dates

match up with the first
known landings on Antarctica.

Though, the location of
the discovery was unusual,

at a beach camp
made by sealers,

female sealers were
absolutely unheard of at the
time.

One theory is that the girl
was an indigenous guide,

translator, or navigator
to the sealers traveling

from the Northern Hemisphere

to the Antarctic islands.

But women taking part
in such expeditions

to the far south in the early
19th century was unlikely,

though, not impossible.

Another much darker theory

is that the girl was taken
by force from her home,

in what is now Southern
Chile, by sealers

and abandoned in the area

where her remains were
found 175 years later.

Perhaps we will never know,

there are no surviving
documents explaining how or
why

this young Chilean woman

came to be an
Antarctica at this time.

Her bones marked the start of
human activity on Antarctica,

and were a hugely significant
discovery for archeology,

but they are also
of vital importance

to the history of
Antarctica as a whole,

as they could be
proof that Chile,

which lies about 620 miles
away from Antarctica,

made the first known
landings on Antarctica.

It must be added that this
is disputed in some quarters.

Some researchers
believe that in 1819,

officers,
soldiers, and seamen

of the storm-damaged
Spanish ship, San Telmo,

the flagship of a Spanish
Naval squadron bound for
Peru,

may have been the first
people to land on Antarctica.

If any crew members survived

the initial sinking
of the San Telmo,

north of Livingston Island,

and managed to
get to Antarctica,

they would've been the
first humans in history

to reach the continent.

Indeed, some remnants
and signs of wreckage

were later said to have been
found on Livingston Island

in the South
Shetland Islands,

by the English
Captain William Smith

on board of brig, Williams,

who arrived at the
island of Livingston

in October of the same year.

The Antarctic Treaty System
was first signed in 1959,

but in 1998,

a protocol on environmental
protection was added,

stating that Antarctica is
to be a natural reserve,

devoted to peace in science,

and forbids all activity

relating to the Antarctic
mineral resources,

except as is necessary
for scientific research.

But significantly,

this is the part
of the treaty

that could come under
some review in 2048,

50 years after it was signed.

On that date,

the prohibition on mining
resource extraction

could be changed or
scrapped completely.

According to Klaus Dodds,

Professor of Geopolitics

at Royal Holloway,
University of London,

"There is a huge
political storm coming

connected with Antarctica."

"Lots of people just
don't understand

that there's a darker
side to Antarctica."

"What we're seeing is
great power politics

play out in a space that
a lot of people think of

as just frozen wastes."

The reason 2048 looms large

is because if certain
countries feel

that the prohibition
on mineral exploitation

is no longer to be respected,

people worry that the
whole thing could unravel.

Seven nations laid
overlapping claims on
Antarctic land

when the treaty was adopted,

Argentina, Australia,
Chile, France, New Zealand,

Norway, and the UK.

The treaty holds all
these claims in place

and prohibited any new ones
from being established.

The treaty also puts any
expansions to territorial
claims

to Antarctica on hold.

But the big players,

usually China and Russia,

are thinking about
this particular episode

around 2048 and
planning ahead.

Of course, when human
remains like the Chilean girl

or objects are
found in the ice,

it ignites feelings of
territorial naturalism.

If Chile could use these
remains to demonstrate

that it had people
living in Antarctica

earlier than other nations
making land claims,

well, then they would be

in a much stronger
position in negotiations.

A number of countries
are now subtly trying

to help their claims in
Antarctica in differing ways,

such as financing
scientific research,

historical investigation, and
constructing research bases

around the continent.

It looks like the future of
this remote, icy continent

may be more complicated
and controversial

than anyone could
have ever imagined.

[bright upbeat music]

- [Presenter] Randy Haas,

an anthropologist from the
University of California,

was working with his
colleagues at a high altitude
site

in the area

known as Wilamaya Patjxa,

in Southern Peru,

when they found six burials

dating back almost
9,000 years,

which contains the remains
of six individuals.

During their work,

the team collaborated with
the local Aymara community.

Teenage female huntress
buried with her tools.

One burial pit was
not like the others,

based on the hunting toolkit
found with the deceased,

the team initially
thought that the burial

was of a male hunter.

However, the bones of
a very slender, light,

and appeared to be
those of a female.

Science quotes one
of the team members,

bioarcheologist, Jim
Watson as saying,

"I think your hunter
might be female."

Indeed, the grave contains
the remains of a young woman

who died between the
ages of 17 and 19.

Her gender and age
were determined

based on an analysis of
proteins in her teeth.

Anthropologist, Randy Haas,

has told Sky News that the
female hunter had been buried

with "Stone projectile points
for felling large animals,

a knife, and flakes of rock
for removing internal organs,

and tools for scraping
and tanning hides."

The stone points would've
been attached to shafts

and used to spear throwers,

and hurled at animals
with great force.

A pigment chunk was
also found with her,

which was used in the
treatment of hides.

Was the discovery an outlier?

The female hunter was found
near the grave of a male

who was also buried
with a hunting toolkit.

The team of researchers
also found evidence

of animal bones in the
sediment of the burial
ground,

including Andean
deer and vicuna.

Haas told "Science
News", these two animals

"Were the main targets
of ancient hunters

in that part of the Andes."

However, many believed
that the find was a one-off

and that the female big-game
hunter was an outlier.

"Science" quotes Meg Conkey,

an archeologist who didn't
take part in the study,

as stating that, "Skeptics
may say it's a one-off."

Moreover, the presence of
hunting gear in a grave

does not necessarily mean
that the deceased was a
hunter.

Haas and his team
set out to prove

that there had once been
other female hunters

in the Americas.

Haas and his colleagues
were prepared for this

and conducted an exhaustive
study of the research
literature

on 107 burial sites
in the Americas,

all of these sites are
between 6 and 12,500 years
old.

In total, the researchers
found 10 women

who had been buried
with hunting toolkits.

Their research has
led them to conclude

that women routinely
participated in big-game
hunts.

The researchers wrote in
"Science Advances" that,

"The findings are consistent

with non-gendered
label practices,

in which early
hunter-gatherer females

were big-game hunters."

Based on their study
of other sites,

the research team
believes that

"Females accounted
for between 30 and 50%

of ancient American
big-game hunters."

reports "Science News."

They're convinced that
the evidence is strong

for their theory.

The researchers also
consider that archeologists

did not recognize that
females were big-game hunters

in the past,

because of sexism.

"Gizmodo" quotes the
researchers are saying that,

"Modern gender constructs

often do not
reflect past ones."

In other words, just because
women in the recent past

were not big-game hunters,

this does not mean that
there weren't any female

big-game hunters in the
Americas 9,000 years ago.

Up until recently,

the, man the hunter,
hypothesis was widely
accepted.

according to "Science."

This held that women
did women's work,

and that males
engaged in activities

such as hunting,

and as a result were
the dominant gender.

This was based, in part,

on modern studies of
hunter-gatherer groups,

such as the
Hadza of Tasmania.

Inspired by their
groundbreaking discovery in
Peru,

the researchers argue

that this was not the case.

Big game hunting would've
required teamwork,

a group of people
working together,

and a great deal of labor.

Therefore, women would've had
to have cooperated with men

to ensure success in
hunting expeditions.

Quoted in "Gizmodo",

the researchers argue that,

"There was a broad
participation

from both females and males

in the hunting of big-game."

Ashley Smallwood of the
University of Louisville,

in Kentucky, tells
"Science News,"

"That it's time to stop
thinking of ancient female

large-game hunters
as outliers."

The discovery of the ancient
female huntress in Peru

could transform our knowledge
of gender roles in the past.

If women hunted,

this would imply that
there was more equality

between the genders

in prehistoric societies.

However, some have argued
against these findings

and state that the
researchers cannot prove
their arguments

about female hunters

because the sample
that they investigated

is simply too small.

However, the research is
aligned with recent
discoveries

that challenge the
traditional assumptions

about gender roles
in prehistory.

Archeologists have
found evidence

of a 5,000 year old female
warrior in California,

while other finds suggests

that there were
female fighters

in both Mongolian and Viking
societies in the distant
past.

A team of Spanish
researchers theorizes,

based on grooves and nicks
on the teeth of Neanderthals,

the gender roles
among that species

was similar to gender roles
of modern Homo sapiens.

Neanderthal men prepared the
cutting tools and weapons,

while women saw to the
leather garments and
clothing.

But there was at
least one duty

that men and women
may have shared,

Neanderthal women,

these researchers think,

hunted big-game with the men.

Almudena Estalrrich,
a researcher

at the Spanish National
Museum of Natural Sciences,

said, "We believe that the
specialization of labor

by sex of the individuals

was probably limited
to a few tasks,

as it is possible that
both men and women

participated equally in the
hunting of big animals."

Another researcher on the
project, Antonio Rosas,

along with the
museum, told phys.org,

"The study of Neanderthals

has provided numerous
discoveries in recent years."

"We have moved from
thinking of them as

little evolved beings

to know that they took
care of the sick people,

buried their
deceased, ate seafood,

and even had different
physical features than
expected:

there were redheaded
individuals,

and with light
skin and eyes."

"So far, we thought that
the sexual division of labor

was typical of
sapien societies,

but apparently
that's not true."

A study of ancient DNA
by other researchers

showed a mutation that may
have resulted in red hair

and light skin
among Neanderthals,

according to the Smithsonian
Museum of Natural History.

An article on the
Smithsonian's website

says two Neanderthals,

one from Spain and
one from Italy,

had a mutation in a gene
controlling skin and hair
color.

The mutation changes
an amino acid,

making the resulting
protein less efficient.

Modern humans have
other MCR1 variants

that are also less
active resulting,

in red hair and pale skin.

The less active
Neanderthal mutation

probably also resulted in
red hair and pale skin,

as in modern humans.

Phys.org says that,

one of the main
conclusions of a study of

99 incisors and canines of

19 Neanderthal people

showed that their communities
divided work according to
sex.

The study, by the Spanish
National Research Council,

was published in the
"Journal of Human Evolution."

The Neanderthal's teeth came
from sites at El Sidran:

Asturias, Spain:
Spy, Belgium,

and L'Hortus, France.

The study said grooves
in the teeth of women

appeared to follow
the same pattern,

the pattern of the
grooves in women's teeth

differed from that in men's.

Analysis shows that
all Neanderthals,

regardless of age, had
grooves in their teeth.

"This is due to the
custom of these societies

to use the mouth
as a third hand,

as in some current
populations,

for tasks, such as
preparing the furs,

for chopping meat,
for instance."

The researchers found that
the grooves in men's teeth

were longer than women's,

and made the
assumption from this,

that the tasks the two
sectors performed differed.

Also, they found tiny nicks
in the enamel and dentin

of the upper teeth of men,

and in the lower
teeth of women.

Researchers are unable to
make rock solid conclusions

about which tasks
men performed,

and which tasks
women performed.

But they said in modern
hunter-gatherer society,

women typically prepare
furs and other garments,

and men retouched the
edges of stone tools.

They say this

may have been how it was

among the Neanderthals
they studied.

[bright upbeat music]