万物简史英文版_比尔·布莱森-第86章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


arrier　and　to　thrive　in　the　lands　beyond。

and　that；　i鈥檓　afraid；　is　where　all　agreement　ends。　what　happened　next　in　the　history　ofhuman　development　is　a　matter　of　long　and　rancorous　debate；　as　we　shall　see　in　the　nextchapter。

but　it　is　worth　remembering；　before　we　move　on；　that　all　of　these　evolutionary　jostlingsover　five　million　years；　from　distant；　puzzled　australopithecine　to　fully　modern　human；produced　a　creature　that　is　still　98。4　percent　genetically　indistinguishable　from　the　modernchimpanzee。　there　is　more　difference　between　a　zebra　and　a　horse；　or　between　a　dolphin　anda　porpoise；　than　there　is　between　you　and　the　furry　creatures　your　distant　ancestors　left　behindwhen　they　set　out　to　take　over　the　world。

w锛穡銆倄iaoshuo　txt锛�



29　　　　THE　RESTLESS　APESOME

灏�*璇�**t*xt**澶�*鍫�
time　about　a　million　and　a　half　years　ago；　some　forgotten　genius　of　the　hominidworld　did　an　unexpected　thing。　he　（or　very　possibly　she）　took　one　stone　and　carefully　used　itto　shape　another。　the　result　was　a　simple　teardrop…shaped　hand　axe；　but　it　was　the　world鈥檚first　piece　of　advanced　technology。

it　was　so　superior　to　existing　tools　that　soon　others　were　following　the　inventor鈥檚　lead　andmaking　hand　axes　of　their　own。　eventually　whole　societies　existed　that　seemed　to　do　littleelse。　鈥渢hey　made　them　in　the　thousands；鈥潯�says　ian　tattersall。　鈥渢here　are　some　places　inafrica　where　you　literally　can鈥檛　move　without　stepping　on　them。　it鈥檚　strange　because　they　arequite　intensive　objects　to　make。　it　was　as　if　they　made　them　for　the　sheer　pleasure　of　it。鈥�

from　a　shelf　in　his　sunny　workroom　tattersall　took　down　an　enormous　cast；　perhaps　a　footand　a　half　long　and　eight　inches　wide　at　its　widest　point；　and　handed　it　to　me。　it　was　shapedlike　a　spearhead；　but　one　the　size　of　a　stepping…stone。　as　a　fiberglass　cast　it　weighed　only　afew　ounces；　but　the　original；　which　was　found　in　tanzania；　weighed　twenty…five　pounds。　鈥渋twas　pletely　useless　as　a　tool；鈥潯�tattersall　said。　鈥渋t　would　have　taken　two　people　to　lift　itadequately；　and　even　then　it　would　have　been　exhausting　to　try　to　pound　anything　with　it。鈥�

鈥渨hat　was　it　used　for　then？鈥�

tattersall　gave　a　genial　shrug；　pleased　at　the　mystery　of　it。　鈥渘o　idea。　it　must　have　had　somesymbolic　importance；　but　we　can　only　guess　what。鈥�

the　axes　became　known　as　acheulean　tools；　after　st。　acheul；　a　suburb　of　amiens　innorthern　france；　where　the　first　examples　were　found　in　the　nineteenth　century；　and　contrastwith　the　older；　simpler　tools　known　as　oldowan；　originally　found　at　olduvai　gorge　intanzania。　in　older　textbooks；　oldowan　tools　are　usually　shown　as　blunt；　rounded；　hand…sizedstones。　in　fact；　paleoanthropologists　now　tend　to　believe　that　the　tool　part　of　oldowan　rockswere　the　pieces　flaked　off　these　larger　stones；　which　could　then　be　used　for　cutting。

now　here鈥檚　the　mystery。　when　early　modern　humans鈥攖he　ones　who　would　eventuallybee　us鈥攕tarted　to　move　out　of　africa　something　over　a　hundred　thousand　years　ago；acheulean　tools　were　the　technology　of　choice。　these　early　homo　sapiens　loved　theiracheulean　tools；　too。　they　carried　them　vast　distances。　sometimes　they　even　took　unshapedrocks　with　them　to　make　into　tools　later　on。　they　were；　in　a　word；　devoted　to　the　technology。

but　although　acheulean　tools　have　been　found　throughout　africa；　europe；　and　western　andcentral　asia；　they　have　almost　never　been　found　in　the　far　east。　this　is　deeply　puzzling。

in　the　1940s　a　harvard　paleontologist　named　hallum　movius　drew　something　called　themovius　line；　dividing　the　side　with　acheulean　tools　from　the　one　without。　the　line　runs　in　asoutheasterly　direction　across　europe　and　the　middle　east　to　the　vicinity　of　modern…daycalcutta　and　bangladesh。　beyond　the　movius　line；　across　the　whole　of　southeast　asia　andinto　china；　only　the　older；　simpler　oldowan　tools　have　been　found。　we　know　that　homosapiens　went　far　beyond　this　point；　so　why　would　they　carry　an　advanced　and　treasured　stonetechnology　to　the　edge　of　the　far　east　and　then　just　abandon　it？

鈥渢hat　troubled　me　for　a　long　time；鈥潯�recalls　alan　thorne　of　the　australian　nationaluniversity　in　canberra。　鈥渢he　whole　of　modern　anthropology　was　built　round　the　idea　thathumans　came　out　of　africa　in　two　waves鈥攁　first　wave　of　homo　erectus；　which　became　javaman　and　peking　man　and　the　like；　and　a　later；　more　advanced　wave　of　homo　sapiens；　whichdisplaced　the　first　lot。　yet　to　accept　that　you　must　believe　thathomo　sapiens　got　so　far　withtheir　more　modern　technology　and　then；　for　whatever　reason；　gave　it　up。　it　was　all　verypuzzling；　to　say　the　least。鈥�

as　it　turned　out；　there　would　be　a　great　deal　else　to　be　puzzled　about；　and　one　of　the　mostpuzzling　findings　of　all　would　e　from　thorne鈥檚　own　part　of　the　world；　in　the　outback　ofaustralia。　in　1968；　a　geologist　named　jim　bowler　was　poking　around　on　a　long…dried　lakebedcalled　mungo　in　a　parched　and　lonely　corner　of　western　new　south　wales　when　somethingvery　unexpected　caught　his　eye。　sticking　out　of　a　crescent…shaped　sand　ridge　of　a　type　knownas　a　lunette　were　some　human　bones。　at　the　time；　it　was　believed　that　humans　had　been　inaustralia　for　no　more　than　8；000　years；　but　mungo　had　been　dry　for　12；000　years。　so　whatwas　anyone　doing　in　such　an　inhospitable　place？

the　answer；　provided　by　carbon　dating；　was　that　the　bones鈥櫋�owner　had　lived　there　whenlake　mungo　was　a　much　more　agreeable　habitat；　a　dozen　miles　long；　full　of　water　and　fish；fringed　by　pleasant　groves　of　casuarina　trees。　to　everyone鈥檚　astonishment；　the　bones　turnedout　to　be　23；000　years　old。　other　bones　found　nearby　were　dated　to　as　much　as　60；000　years。

this　was　unexpected　to　the　point　of　seeming　practically　impossible。　at　no　time　sincehominids　first　arose　on　earth　has　australia　not　been　an　island。　any　human　beings　who　arrivedthere　must　have　e　by　sea；　in　large　enough　numbers　to　start　a　breeding　population；　aftercrossing　sixty　miles　or　more　of　open　water　without　having　any　way　of　knowing　that　aconvenient　landfall　awaited　them。　having　landed；　the　mungo　people　had　then　found　their　waymore　than　two　thousand　miles　inland　from　australia鈥檚　north　coast鈥攖he　presumed　point　ofentry鈥攚hich　suggests；　according　to　a　report　in　the　proceedings　of　the　national　academy　ofsciences；　鈥渢hat　people　may　have　first　arrived　substantially　earlier　than　60；000　years　ago。鈥�

how　they　got　there　and　why　they　came　are　questions　that　can鈥檛　be　answered。　according　tomost　anthropology　texts；　there鈥檚　no　evidence　that　people　could　even　speak　60；000　years　ago；much　less　engage　in　the　sorts　of　cooperative　efforts　necessary　to　build　ocean…worthy　craft　andcolonize　island　continents。

鈥渢here鈥檚　just　a　whole　lot　we　don鈥檛　know　about　the　movements　of　people　before　recordedhistory；鈥潯�alan　thorne　told　me　when　i　met　him　in　canberra。　鈥渄o　you　know　that　whennineteenth…century　anthropologists　first　got　to　papua　new　guinea；　they　found　people　in　thehighlands　of　the　interior；　in　some　of　the　most　inaccessible　terrain　on　earth；　growing　sweetpotatoes。　sweet　potatoes　are　native　to　south　america。　so　how　did　they　get　to　papua　newguinea？　we　don鈥檛　know。　don鈥檛　have　the　faintest　idea。　but　what　is　certain　is　that　people　havebeen　moving　around　with　considerable　assuredness　for　longer　than　traditionally　thought；　andalmost　certainly　sharing　genes　as　well　as　information。鈥�

the　problem；　as　ever；　is　the　fossil　record。　鈥渧ery　few　parts　of　the　world　are　even　vaguelyamenable　to　the　long…term　preservation　of　human　remains；鈥潯�says　thorne；　a　sharp…eyed　manwith　a　white　goatee　and　an　intent　but　friendly　manner。　鈥渋f　it　weren鈥檛　for　a　few　productiveareas　like　hadar　and　olduvai　in　east　africa　we鈥檇　know　frighteningly　little。　and　when　youlook　elsewhere；　often　wedo　know　frighteningly　little。　the　whole　of　india　has　yielded　just　oneancient　human　fossil；　from　about　300；000　years　ago。　between　iraq　and　vietnam鈥攖hat鈥檚　adistance　of　some　5；000　kilometers鈥攖here　have　been　just　two：　the　one　in　india　and　aneandertal　in　uzbekistan。鈥潯�he　grinned。　鈥渢hat鈥檚　not　a　whole　hell　of　a　lot　to　work　with。　you鈥檙eleft　with　the　position　that　you鈥檝e　got　a　few　productive　areas　for　human　fossils；　like　the　greatrift　valley　in　africa　and　mungo　here　in　australia；　and　very　little　in　between。　it鈥檚　notsurprising　that　paleontologists　have　trouble　connecting　the　dots。鈥�

the　traditional　theory　to　explain　human　movements鈥攁nd　the　one　still　accepted　by　themajority　of　people　in　the　field鈥攊s　that　humans　dispersed　across　eurasia　in　two　waves。　thefirst　wave　consisted　of　homo　erectus；　who　left　africa　remarkably　quickly鈥攁lmost　as　soon　asthey　emerged　as　a　species鈥攂eginning　nearly　two　million　years　ago。　over　time；　as　they　settledin　different　regions；　these　early　erects　further　evolved　into　distinctive　types鈥攊nto　java　manand　peking　man　in　asia；　and　homo　heidelbergensis　and　finally　homo　neanderthalensis　ineurope。

then；　something　over　a　hundred　thousand　years　ago；　a　smarter；　lither　species　of　creature鈥攖he　ancestors　of　every　one　of　us　alive　today鈥攁rose　on　the　african　plains　and　began　radiatingoutward　in　a　second　wave。　wherever　they　went；　according　to　this　theory；　these　new　homosapiens　displaced　their　duller；　less　adept　predecessors。　quite　how　they　did　this　has　alwaysbeen　a　matter　of　disputation。　no　signs　of　slaughter　have　ever　been　found；　so　most　authoritiesbelieve　the　newer　hominids　simply　outpeted　the　older　ones；　though　other　factors　may　alsohave　contributed。　鈥減erhaps　we　gave　them　smallpox；鈥潯�suggests　tattersall。　鈥渢here鈥檚　no　real　wayof　telling。　the　one　certainty　is　that　we　are　here　now　and　they　aren鈥檛。鈥�

these　first　modern　humans　are　surprisingly　shadowy。　we　know　less　about　ourselves；curiously　enough；　than　about　almost　any　other　line　of　hominids。　it　is　odd　indeed；　as　tattersallnotes；　鈥渢hat　the　most　recent　major　event　in　human　evolution鈥攖he　emergence　of　our　ownspecies鈥攊s　perhaps　the　most　obscure　of　all。鈥潯�nobody　can　even　quite　agree　where　trulymodern　humans　first　appear　in　the　fossil　record。　many　books　place　their　debut　at　about120；000　years　ago　in　the　form　of　remains　found　at　the　klasies　river　mouth　in　south　africa；but　not　everyone　accepts　that　these　were　fully　modern　people。　tattersall　and　schwartzmaintain　that　鈥渨hether　any　or　all　of　them　actually　represent　our　species　still　awaits　definitiveclarification。鈥�

the　first　undisputed　appearance　of　homo　sapiens　is　in　the　eastern　mediterranean；　aroundmodern…day　israel；　where　they　begin　to　show　up　about　100；000　years　ago鈥攂ut　even　therethey　are　described　（by　trinkaus　and　shipman）　as　鈥渙dd；　difficult…to…classify　and　poorlyknown。鈥潯�neandertals　were　already　well　established　in　the　region　and　had　a　type　of　tool　kitknown　as　mousterian；　which　the　modern　humans　evidently　found　worthy　enough　to　borrow。

no　neandertal　remains　have　ever　been　found　in　north　africa；　but　their　tool　kits　turn　up　allover　the　place。　somebody　must　have　taken　them　there：　modern　humans　are　the　onlycandidate。　it　is　also　known　that　neandertals　and　modern　humans　coexisted　in　some　fashionfor　tens　of　thousands　of　years　in　the　middle　east。　鈥渨e　don鈥檛　know　if　they　time…shared　thesame　space　or　actually　lived　side　by　side；鈥潯�tattersall　says；　but　the　moderns　continued　happilyto　use　neandertal　tools鈥攈ardly　convincing　evidence　of　overwhelming　superiority。　no　lesscur