Were Humans Eating Each Other Over One and a Half Million Years Ago?

Were Humans Eating Each Other Over One and a Half Million Years Ago? 

This past week a new paper came out in “Scientific Reports” by lead author Dr. Briana Pobiner, detailing the possible evidence of early cannibalism, or consumption of meat of some kind, of an early hominin, by another hominin, nearly 1.5 million years ago. It is a fascinating paper that I think people are overthinking, which is being misunderstood by the public, partly thanks to how mass media informs on it. So I would like to take a moment to correct some of the thinking I am seeing so that this paper and its implications are better understood. So, let’s put our paleoanthropology hats on, step back into our time machines, and travel to the African savannahs of modern-day Koobi Fora, Kenya.  

At this time during our history, we, like our cousins today, were a part of the African landscape, we were not at the top of the food chain, and in many cases during the Pleistocene, we see our taxa being predated upon by many other carnivores. We have solid evidence that hominins were preyed upon by various big cats and other predators during this time, just as we sometimes find ourselves today. We can tell this in a few ways; one is the direct tooth marks of a predator on the bones of a hominin that is found, often in a den of some sort, among many other bones of the victims of the predators that called that area home, likely for millennia. While we may be at the top of the food chain now, it is relatively new in our history, and we should keep that in mind. 

So during this time, we had more than one type of “Human,” and even those less related to us, walking around the Turkana/Koobi Fora area of Kenya 1.45 million years ago, the period to which the fossil we will be talking about comes from. During this period, four known hominins are walking around, on two feet even! Paranthropus boisei, Homo habilis, Homo rudolfensis, and Homo erectus. All very capable hominins, of course, in their ways, all known to be possible stone tool users. So if we were to find a fossil with tool marks, can we be sure who made them? Not, which is partly what makes this new paper so fascinating. Is wondering who made these marks and why, but I think the fascinating thing about this, as you will see, is, in fact, important because those cut marks were found on the leg bone of another hominin.  

Is this a case of early Cannibalism? Is that even what is the most crucial factor to consider here? Let’s take a brief moment to review. 

1.45 million years ago, during the Pleistocene, a leg bone of an unknown hominin species showed cut marks made from a stone tool, which could have only been either another individual of the same species, or another hominin species, are found on this bone. They showed that the flesh was removed and most likely eaten. We cannot tell whether this individual was hunted down, seen as a scavenged item, or a victim of cannibalism. 

While it would be exciting if these were some of the first signs of cannibalism among our kind, I think it would be far more exciting and insightful if this showed that one hominin species was hunting and even eating another hominy species. So not cannibalism, but predation of one hominin species over another. This brings a new idea of how some of our earliest ancestors may have hunted, eaten, and operated. Imagine one group of hominins, whether habilis or erectus; it is essential to think of one of them, following, tracking, and deciding that this creature, this animal that in so many ways seems similar to itself, to eat its flesh. What drives this decision? There are many possibilities, and we need real-time machines to know the truth, but we can research and figure out as much as possible. 

Figure 6.  Close up photos of three fossil fauna specimens from archaeological surface finds and excavations in the Okote Member of Koobi Fora ­ (Pobiner47), showing similar cut marks to those found on KNM-ER 741. (a) FwJj14B 5097, a bovid size 3 mandible with cut marks on the inferior margin, found in situ (b) FwJj14A 1016- 97, a bovid size 3 radius midshaft with cut marks, found on the surface (c) GaJj14 1056, a large mammal scapula with cut marks along scapular margin, found on the surface. Scale =1 cm.

What I want you all to learn from this paper is that if this is a case of cannibalism. It is one of the earliest signs, then that is what matters to anthropologists, the fact that this might be a “first” of activity in Human behavior, which makes us all so excited! Beyond that, if this is another species of hominin hunting down or scavenging another hominin, I think the potential cultural implications are far more critical to our understanding of what this find may mean. 

I encourage you all to read the paper, which is Open-Access and is a pretty easy read, there are some out there, such as the New York Times, that are making claims this is nothing more than clickbait, but that is from a severe lack of understanding on their part, as well as the commenters, of this find, and its implications. 

With that, I will leave you to read and find out the special meaning of this find on your own! 

Read the paper here: