- We have been evolving
for 3.7 billion years since life began on earth. For most of that time, our ancestors are unrecognizable to us. Single cells, fish that
scooched along, early mammals, they're all beautiful in their own way. They're all a completely necessary step in the evolution of us,
but they're not human. Eventually though, after
a huge span of time, we start to see ourselves in the fossils. About six million years ago,
our ancestors, hominins, split from our last common
ancestor with chimpanzees. Three to four million years ago, we find the fossils of upright
walking hominins like Lucy across Eastern and Southern Africa. And by one million years ago, we can certainly see the
humanity in our ancestors. In many ways, it was
still a different world, but I do believe we
can truly see ourselves in these distant ancestors of ours. We can empathize with them, understand their decisions,
their needs, their lifestyles. So looking at nine sites
from across the world, let's see what humanity was up to roughly one million years ago, give or take a few hundred thousand years. (upbeat music) This video is sponsored by KiwiCo. Why do humans do any of the things we're
gonna discuss today? It's curiosity. Curiosity drives us. Curiosity just comes naturally to us. And I really want to cultivate and encourage that sense
of curiosity in my kids, which is why I absolutely love KiwiCo. My kids love it too. It's the best. It's really the best. KiwiCo make these absolutely
fantastic activities that will really engage your kid. You can literally see the
cogs turning in their brain. - [my little kid] Wow. - It's so fun to see them get creative, use their imagination, play together, which is hard as any parent will tell you. There's so many gizmos and gadgets and electronic things that
can steal kids' attention, steal adults' attention, let's be honest, but I really wanna keep
my kids away from that as much as possible. I want them to use their imagination. Each box comes with everything you need. They're super well made,
lots of wood and metal. You can go to kiwico.com to get one of their fantastic crates or you can sign up for a
subscription like I have. My kids are young, so
we get this koala crate and I even get an optional
extra of a book too. So we play in the day, get a
new thing to play in the day and then a new book to read at night. It's great and I pay for
that with my own money. They didn't send me that
because I'm doing the advert. I think I wouldn't be allowed
to say that if it wasn't true because of advertising disclosure. Yeah, I just love it. If your kids aren't as young as mine, they've got stuff for all ages to keep them entertained,
engaged, curious. If you go to kiwico.com/stefan, you'll get 50% off your first month if you want to do those monthly crates and you won't regret it. You won't regret it. Your kids will love it. Let's get back to this video and see what people were
up to a million years. Oldupai Gorge in Tanzania really is one of the most
special archeological sites in the entire world. So many fossils and tools
have been found here. roughly 1.3 million years ago. It was home to this
robust Australopithecus also known as Paranthropus boisei. Australopithecines of various
forms had roamed Africa since about four million years ago. They were extremely successful. They probably produced
the earliest stone tools. They may have even left Africa judging from stone tools found in Jordan, they were fantastic. An incredibly important
step in our evolution. By one million years ago though, it seems that the time
australopiths and Paranthropus was drawing to a close. These teeth, this leg, perhaps belong to the last
Paranthropus we have ever found. The extinction of a species can be a long, drawn out, complex process. And, of course, animals evolve. Some populations of australopithecine slowly evolved into later
hominins like Homo habilis. Some of them was certainly
our direct ancestors, but not this one. We don't have any evidence that Paranthropus was our direct ancestor. Para means near or beside and anthropus means man. They were beside man. As you can see, Paranthropus had huge jaws and the males had massive sagittal crests along the top of their skull to hold these chewing muscles. Kind of similar to a gorilla except we're confident
Paranthropus walked upright. They were definitely hominins. There is evidence to suggest that their diet included a lot of grasses and similar plants. Whether the grass themselves
or the seeds or the tubers, we can't say. But apparently, they love nothing more
than munching on grasses. However, they may have also
supplemented their diet with meat. There is some interesting evidence that they may have been amongst the earliest stone tool makers. Early older one style stone tools have been found alongside their big, robust teeth at Nyayanga in Kenya and Swartkrans in South Africa. It's tricky to say how
much meat they consumed, but it does seem their love of grasses contributed to their demise. Around one million years
ago in East Africa, grass lands were contracting. Forests were growing, which no doubt led to
increased competition amongst animals that eat grass. This could have been a major
factor in their demise. The end of Paranthropus though might have been hastened by the evolution of large-brained hominins
too like Homo erectus. One of the most famous
examples being Turkana Boy who roamed Africa roughly
1.5 million years ago. The interaction between
australopithecines and early Homo is basically unknown. Did they compete over the same resources? Did they basically ignore each other? It's really impossible to say
with the evidence we have. At Drimolen Cave in South Africa, there's good evidence for
Australopithecus, Paranthropus, and Homo erectus, occupying
the site at roughly, very roughly the same time. As I said, some populations
of Australopiths, of course, had slowly
evolved into later Homo, but Paranthropus, it seems, did not. And by one million years ago, the sun was setting on the
last of the australopithecines, Paranthropus, and they disappeared from
the archeological record. One advantage bigger-brained hominins might have had over Paranthropus was their ability to hunt big game. We're still at Oldupai Gorge, but this time looking at the
site of Juma's Korongo 2, which dates to between 1.1
and 0.8 million years ago. This is an incredibly rich site with 24,962 bones recovered by anthropologists, a huge data set, which gives
us an equally huge opportunity to assess life so long ago. These were big animals too, like hippos. Big animals. Some animal bones have cut marks on them. Some animal bones were
clearly nibbled by carnivores and some were butchered and nibbled. But who got to the animals
first were our ancestors, mainly scavengers or hunters. In cases where bones had
been chewed and butchered, the cut marks are on the
shafts of the long bones, but the teeth marks of carnivores are restricted to the ends of the bones. So it seems from this site
that we got the nutritious bit, other animals got the worst bit. Other animals were scavenging. Ancient humans were
seemingly a major factor in the accumulation of
the bones found here. All of this suggests that
it was humans, hominins, probably a Homo erectus-like population that were hunting these animals, hunting large animals like hippos. That really says so
much about their ability to cooperate and hunt as a team. Hunting a hippo is no
easy feat, no easy task. Access to all this meat,
access to more nutrition likely played a big role
in our growing brains. and as our brains expanded, so did our ability to
shape the world around us. One million years ago, Hominins were producing
a variety of tools, but the defining tool of the period are called Acheulean hand axes. These tools are worked on both sides and probably had a variety of purposes. One of the best places to see
the development of these tools is Konso in modern Ethiopia. Here, the exceptional
preservation of key layers allows us to see the
evolution of this technology. At 1.75 million years ago, we can see hominins making simple tools, but they're still worked on both sides. They are clearly aiming to
make a symmetrical tool. By 1.6 million years ago, the shape starts to get more refined. By 1.25 million years ago, the classic Acheulean shape is emerging, and by 850,000 years ago, they're even smaller and more refined. It's really incredible to see the slow, but steady evolution of human
capabilities through time. Creating these tools required
the removal of perhaps 50, 60 even more flakes. This really shows that humans
at this time were very capable of visualizing their goal, planning for the future
form this tool would take. It makes you wonder what
other areas of their lives could they imagine into the future? Could they project into the future? How far did they plan ahead
when it came to gathering and hunting food or preparing
for a change of season and moving through the landscape? How far ahead did they
plan for these events? Another really interesting
point to consider when discussing Acheulean hand axes is the fact that you probably
could not just pick up a rock and create such slim and
uniformly shaped tools on your first attempt. So how was the ability to create hand axes passed on to younger members
from generation to generation? Was there some degree
of teaching involved? Was there even some element of rudimentary language involved? It's so difficult to speak about the earliest development of
language with any certainty because words just don't get preserved in the archeological record. All we have are these subtle
clues from archeology, a gradual increase in
sophistication of our tools. It's certainly possible that there was some
rudimentary language involved in the making of these objects. Hand axes probably had
a variety of functions, but some excavated at Peninj in Tanzania might give us a good clue
to one of their main roles. Here, hand axes and the soils
around them were analyzed for phytoliths. Small pieces of plant matter. The phytoliths found in the soil were associated with grasses. No big surprise. The phytoliths found on the
edges of the tool though are a much better match for
wood, particularly Acacia. So the researchers hypothesize
that this is evidence of these tools being used for woodworking. The fact that wood
decomposers is without a doubt the biggest gap in the
archeological record when we're talking deep in
time, deep into human evolution. The oldest wooden artifacts found so far date to about 400,000 years ago, the famous Schoningen Spears. They were found amongst the remains of a herd of butchered horses, the leftovers of an ambush
by early Neanderthals. Although this is 600,000 years
younger than our timeframe, there's good evidence to believe humans one million years ago
were capable of similar feats. They had to use something to hunt hippos. That's not an easy job. When you consider the fact that humans were certainly working
stone in complex ways, they must have been working
wood in similar ways too, using it to dig for tubers. As I said, get grubs out of trees. It's just a big bias in
the archeological record that stone tools survive and
the bones of animals survive. But ancient humans were
no doubt using wood for all sorts of purposes. This hand axe from Peninj may be the earliest evidence
we have of our ancestors practicing a spot of carpentry With these technologies,
hunting abilities, cooperation, and just general increase in brain size came a much wider global presence. Our ancestors may have left Africa as early as 2 million years ago, but definitely by 1.8 million years ago, judging from the remains
at Dmanisi in Georgia, by one million years ago, they
had been living across Asia for hundreds of thousands of years. Such a large geographical spread created a lot of variation
in hominin populations. And there's a big debate as to whether all of these
hominins across Africa and Eurasia should be
considered one species or not. One million years ago, modern
Yinyang in Central China was home to this Homo erectus. For Homo erectus to have
traveled from Africa all the way to China shows just how adaptable
our ancient ancestors were at this time. Of course, it did not
happen in one generation, but still so many rivers
had to have been crossed, mountain valleys traversed, different prey to adapt
to, storms to weather. There's truly no better evidence of the adaptability of early hominins. Although they may be different
to us in a lot of ways, they were definitely very intelligent, great problem solvers. Whilst over in China,
they may have reunited with a very, very distant
ape relative of ours. This is a tooth of Gigantopithecus,
a rather mysterious ape. We don't have a lot of remains from them. You can probably tell by
the name Gigantopithecus that this ape was a big chap. Although we've only found the
teeth and jaws of this animal, their size alone leads
researchers to believe that ape could have perhaps
been over three meters tall. Absolute units, bigger
than a modern gorilla. Genetics has revealed them
to be a distant relative of orangutans. And I can't help but wonder
what our very distant ancestors, Homo erectus, thought of them. Did they lie awake at night terrified as the forest echoed to the grunts and snapping branches of Gigantopithecus? Did they hunt them perhaps? We have no direct evidence of that, but Homo erectus was certainly
capable of hunting large, dangerous animals. Or was Gigantopithecus like
their cousins, the orangutans? Key being a low profile, kind of shy, likes to hide away from these
strange upright walking apes. Until we find more remains,
we cannot say for sure. All we can say is that
hominins and Gigantopithecus were in the same region at some time and the rest is up to our imagination. One hominin that might
have wanted to steer clear of big old Gigantopithecus
is tiny Homo floresiensis. This small hominin lived
on the island of Flores, way down at the bottom
of island Southeast Asia. Although the famous Homo
floresiensis specimen, LB1, dates to around 74,000 years ago, stone tools found on the island suggest hominins have been living here for one million years. Was Homo floresiensis a
descendant of Homo erectus that gradually became smaller and smaller through a process called island dwarfism, or were they the descendants of an even earlier migration out of Africa by early Homo like Homo habilis? It's still highly debated. We truly do not know where they fit on our evolutionary tree, but it does seem that they
arrived in this region about a million years ago. As far back as the 1940s even, stone tools were found on
the island of Sulawesi. At the minute, we just can't say much about the creators of these tools, but the fact that they're
even here is incredible. Sulawesi, Flores, these islands were almost
certainly not attached to the Southeast Asian mainland. All of them sit on the other
side of the Wallace Line, which is our name for a series
of very deep water channels. These have been a hard barrier
for many plants and animals. On the one side, you have plants
and animals native to Asia, and on the other side, the plants and animals native
to the Australian realm like marsupials. So the fact that these ancient hominins are found across the region by
around one million years ago is great evidence for some kind of
deliberate water crossing. They crossed a barrier
few other animals can. I'm not saying they built boats or rafts, but were they smart enough
to notice wood floats? Were they smart enough to cling onto logs and make their way to new territory, or were they just swept
out to sea in a storm and lucky enough to grab hold of a log? Again, impossible to say
with the evidence we have, but I can't help but think
if it was possible here. Did any reach Sahul, the ancient landmass that connected modern Papua and Australia? interesting to think about, but as yet, we have no direct evidence. So that's just speculation
for another day. (ambient music) One million years ago, it
wasn't just tropical climates that humans called home. They had made it as far as
the Eastern shore of Britain. Although at that time,
Britain was not an island. So no sea crossing required. Here in Happisburgh, yes,
that is how it's pronounced. I know, I'm sorry. On behalf of England, I'm sorry. Here though, the eroding coast exposed a series of footprints dating to between one million
and 700,000 years ago. We can tell so much from these footprints based on the sizes of the feet and the length of their strides. Their height is estimated
to be between 93 centimeters and 173 centimeters,
suggesting a mixed age group. Now, the site is on the coast, but when these humans lived here, it was the muddy banks of a river. They were headed south, perhaps
on the hunt for mammoths or elk or horses that lived
along the river banks. One million years ago,
the climate of Britain was colder than today. Then Southern Britain's climate would be more like Scandinavia,
Southern Scandinavia. Pretty chilly. Pretty chilly. Does this mean that humans
had already developed some form of rudimentary clothing? We know they're not sewing as such because sewing needles don't appear in the archeological record
until around 45,000 years ago. But could they have draped furs and skins of dead animals over themselves to keep the cold north
wind off their skin? I find it hard to believe
that they wouldn't. During the cold nights, they also probably made
whatever shelters they lived in more comfortable by piling up bedding, piling up grasses, skins, again. Although we don't have
direct evidence for this, it's hard to imagine living
in a climate like that without some form of clothing and bedding. The urge to create some form
of bed is extremely ancient. It predates humans. Gorillas make nests out
of leaves and branches. Chimpanzees like to make
beds or nests as well. So many animals do that. It's hard to imagine that our ancestors would lack that sense for some reason, especially in the cold. I like to imagine them huddled
together under their furs, keeping each other warm, bonding. Humans, even very ancient
ones are social beings. At some point, they probably
had caring family moments. One technology that may
have helped our ancestors survive in cooler climates was fire. Finding the origins of
fire has been a tricky task for archeology. By around 400,000 years ago,
the evidence for fire use can be found at many
sites around the world. However, even at this later date, the record is still patchy. There are archeological sites with tons and tons of
evidence of human activity, but no evidence of fire at all, suggesting that some human
groups, even by this late stage, were not habitually using fire. The development of a new technology can be a long drawn out process though, especially something
as complicated as fire, which requires an understanding of heat and air and fuel. It's basically our first
attempt at chemistry in a way. But are there places where the preservation
conditions are just right, where we can see the subtle traces of the development of this technology? While at Wonderwerk Cave in South Africa, we might just have it. Stratum 10 of the cave dates to around one million years ago. In this layer, quite far from
the entrance of this cave, a full 30 meters inside the cave, archeologists found tiny
pieces of burnt grass alongside tiny fragments of bone, some of which were seemingly
heated to 500 degrees C. And there are stone tools too. Humans were definitely
living there at that time. This is one of the earliest and most promising leads in
the search for human fire use, but there are so many
unanswered questions still. Were humans at this time capable of igniting fire themselves, or are they taking
advantage of natural fires and bringing them inside the cave, trying to keep them going
as long as possible? It's basically impossible to say for sure. One thing that's important to say about humanity
one million years ago is that despite the evidence for technological innovation
at this moment in time, we have no evidence for art or anything even approaching art. It is possible that the hominins
that lived at this time, the humans that lived at this
time had beliefs and practices and symbolism that have left absolutely
no archeological trace. None whatsoever. That is entirely possible,
but whatever it is within us that leads us to create big works of art, big obvious displays of symbolism had not evolved by one million years ago. The earliest trace of anything
even approaching a doodle is about 500,000 years old and consists of just a few lines scratched on a shell from Java. We don't have obvious
evidence of symbolic thinking until maybe 170,000 years ago
from Bruniquel Cave in France where stalagmites were arranged
in a circle by Neanderthals or 100,000 years ago in Southern Africa where we see the first signs of painting. At one million years ago, we seemingly were not doing
anything like this at all, and that is perhaps one
of the biggest differences between you and I and a human that lived
a million years ago. Life for infants and young at this time was probably very, very risky. And there's no better example
of the risks they faced than at Atapuerca in Northern Spain. The site of Gran Dolina,
the great sinkhole, dates to at least 800,000 years ago, maybe up to one million years ago. Now, it is one of the most important archeological sites in Europe, but back then it was seemingly
home to a group of hominins. All six layers are full of the
remains of butchered animals, particularly deer. But the second most butchered
animal on site was humans. Human remains were recovered from all six layers at the site, resulting in a minimum of 11 individuals. Six children younger than
nine, three between 10 and 15, and two young adults. From all six layers, the humans
seem to have been butchered. One problem when discussing
cannibalism in prehistory is that there are many situations that could result in the exact
same archeological evidence. Cannibalism could have
been caused by starvation. Just pure hunger could
have been caused by warfare or these people could have
been truly cared for and loved, and this is a subtle trace of
some form of mortuary ritual. After 800,000 years in the
ground, it's impossible for us to say for certain what happened. The human remains don't show any signs of different treatment
compared to the animal remains. So perhaps they were not
part of a mortuary ritual. But again, we have to keep in mind that these hominins may have
had beliefs and practices which haven't left an
archeological traits. In fact, I am 100% certain
they had beliefs and practices that haven't left an archeological trace. However, the demographic
of all of these people, the young age of all of these hominins does provide an interesting comparison to our distant cousins, chimpanzees. When chimpanzee groups patrol
their area, their territory, they of course occasionally
run into other chimpanzees, rival groups. Sometimes these groups
consist of just young females with their children. When that happens, the attacking
group often takes advantage of a relatively defenseless
target and eats the young. The benefit of this is
that it reduces the numbers of a rival group in a
relatively risk-free way, whilst potentially increasing
the availability of resources and mates for the attacking group. Could this have been the same at Atapuerca all those years ago? Could roaming groups of prehistoric humans have opportunistically seized the moment to get a meal to reduce the
numbers of a rival group? It's certainly possible and a reasonable explanation
for why only the remains of young hominins are found. However, as with most of the
things we've discussed today, coming to concrete
conclusions is very difficult, if not impossible. It is just one of many possibilities. Atapuerca though is a fantastic reminder that hominins, prehistoric humans, ancient humans may have been similar to us in many, many ways, but they may also have
behaved very differently too. And despite all the
innovations in technology and the evolution of
larger and larger brains that could overcome many difficulties, they probably lived very,
very hard challenging lives. That's kind of a bummer to end on. (ambient music)
