theuniversity of amsterdam and for the next two decades refused to let anyone examine hisprecious fossils again。 he died in 1940 an unhappy man。
meanwhile； and half a world away； in late 1924 raymond dart； the australian…born head ofanatomy at the university of the witwatersrand in johannesburg； was sent a small butremarkably plete skull of a child； with an intact face； a lower jaw； and what is known asan endocast鈥攁 natural cast of the brain鈥攆rom a limestone quarry on the edge of the kalaharidesert at a dusty spot called taung。 dart could see at once that the taung skull was not of ahomo erectus like dubois鈥檚 java man； but from an earlier； more apelike creature。 he placedits age at two million years and dubbed it australopithecus africanus； or 鈥渟outhern ape man ofafrica。鈥潯n a report to nature； dart called the taung remains 鈥渁mazingly human鈥潯nd suggested the need for an entirely new family； homo simiadae （鈥渢he man…apes鈥潱弧oacmodate the find。
the authorities were even less favorably disposed to dart than they had been to dubois。
nearly everything about his theory鈥攊ndeed； nearly everything about dart； it appears鈥攁nnoyed them。 first he had proved himself lamentably presumptuous by conducting theanalysis himself rather than calling on the help of more worldly experts in europe。 even hischosen name； australopithecus； showed a lack of scholarly application； bining as it didgreek and latin roots。 above all； his conclusions flew in the face of accepted wisdom。
humans and apes； it was agreed； had split apart at least fifteen million years ago in asia。 ifhumans had arisen in africa； why； that would make us negroid； for goodness sake。 it wasrather as if someone working today were to announce that he had found the ancestral bones ofhumans in； say； missouri。 it just didn鈥檛 fit with what was known。
dart鈥檚 sole supporter of note was robert broom； a scottish…born physician andpaleontologist of considerable intellect and cherishably eccentric nature。 it was broom鈥檚habit； for instance； to do his fieldwork naked when the weather was warm； which was often。
he was also known for conducting dubious anatomical experiments on his poorer and moretractable patients。 when the patients died； which was also often； he would sometimes burytheir bodies in his back garden to dig up for study later。
broom was an acplished paleontologist； and since he was also resident in south africahe was able to examine the taung skull at first hand。 he could see at once that it was asimportant as dart supposed and spoke out vigorously on dart鈥檚 behalf； but to no effect。 forthe next fifty years the received wisdom was that the taung child was an ape and nothingmore。 most textbooks didn鈥檛 even mention it。 dart spent five years working up a monograph；but could find no one to publish it。 eventually he gave up the quest to publish altogether（though he did continue hunting for fossils）。 for years； the skull鈥攖oday recognized as one ofthe supreme treasures of anthropology鈥攕at as a paperweight on a colleague鈥檚 desk。
at the time dart made his announcement in 1924； only four categories of ancient hominidwere known鈥攈omo heidelbergensis； homo rhodesiensis； neandertals； and dubois鈥檚 javaman鈥攂ut all that was about to change in a very big way。
first； in china； a gifted canadian amateur named davidson black began to poke around ata place； dragon bone hill； that was locally famous as a hunting ground for old bones。
unfortunately； rather than preserving the bones for study； the chinese ground them up tomake medicines。 we can only guess how many priceless homo erectus bones ended up as asort of chinese equivalent of bicarbonate of soda。 the site had been much denuded by thetime black arrived； but he found a single fossilized molar and on the basis of that alone quitebrilliantly announced the discovery of sinanthropus pekinensis； which quickly became knownas peking man。
at black鈥檚 urging； more determined excavations were undertaken and many other bonesfound。 unfortunately all were lost the day after the japanese attack on pearl harbor in 1941when a contingent of u。s。 marines； trying to spirit the bones （and themselves） out of thecountry； was intercepted by the japanese and imprisoned。 seeing that their crates held nothingbut bones； the japanese soldiers left them at the roadside。 it was the last that was ever seen ofthem。
in the meantime； back on dubois鈥檚 old turf of java； a team led by ralph von koenigswaldhad found another group of early humans； which became known as the solo people from thesite of their discovery on the solo river at ngandong。 koenigswald鈥檚 discoveries might havebeen more impressive still but for a tactical error that was realized too late。 he had offeredlocals ten cents for every piece of hominid bone they could e up with； then discovered tohis horror that they had been enthusiastically smashing large pieces into small ones tomaximize their ine。
in the following years as more bones were found and identified there came a flood of newnames鈥攈omo aurignacensis； australopithecus transvaalensis； paranthropus crassidens；zinjanthropus boisei；and scores of others； nearly all involving a new genus type as well as anew species。 by the 1950s； the number of named hominid types had risen to fortably overa hundred。 to add to the confusion； individual forms often went by a succession of differentnames as paleoanthropologists refined； reworked； and squabbled over classifications。 solopeople were known variously as homo soloensis； homo primigenius asiaticus； homoneanderthalensis soloensis； homo sapiens soloensis； homo erectus erectus； and； finally； plainhomo erectus 。
in an attempt to introduce some order； in 1960 f。 clark howell of the university ofchicago； following the suggestions of ernst mayr and others the previous decade； proposedcutting the number of genera to just two鈥攁ustralopithecus and homo 鈥攁nd rationalizingmany of the species。 the java and peking men both became homo erectus。 for a time orderprevailed in the world of the hominids。
2it didn鈥檛 last。
after about a decade of parative calm； paleoanthropology embarked on another periodof swift and prolific discovery； which hasn鈥檛 abated yet。 the 1960s produced homo habilis；thought by some to be the missing link between apes and humans； but thought by others not tobe a separate species at all。 then came （among many others） homo ergaster； homolouisleakeyi； homo rudolfensis； homo microcranus； and homo antecessor； as well as a raft ofaustralopithecines： a。afarensis； a。 praegens； a。 ramidus； a。 walkeri； a。 anamensis； and stillothers。 altogether； some twenty types of hominid are recognized in the literature today。
unfortunately； almost no two experts recognize the same twenty。
some continue to observe the two hominid genera suggested by howell in 1960； but othersplace some of the australopithecines in a separate genus called paranthropus ； and still othersadd an earlier group called ardipithecus。 some put praegens into australopithecus and someinto a new classification； homo antiquus； but most don鈥檛 recognize praegens as a separatespecies at all。 there is no central authority that rules on these things。 the only way a namebees accepted is by consensus； and there is often very little of that。
a big part of the problem； paradoxically； is a shortage of evidence。 since the dawn of time；several billion human （or humanlike） beings have lived； each contributing a little geneticvariability to the total human stock。 out of this vast number； the whole of our understandingof human prehistory is based on the remains； often exceedingly fragmentary； of perhaps fivethousand individuals。 鈥測ou could fit it all into the back of a pickup truck if you didn鈥檛 mind2humans are put in the lamely homimdae。 its members； traditionally called hominids； include any creatures（including extinct ones） that are more closely related to us than to any surviving chimpanzees。 the apes；meanwhile； are lumped together in a family called pongidae。 many authorities believe that chimps； gorillas； andorangutans should also be included in this family； with humans and chimps in a subfamily called homininae。
the upshot is that the creatures traditionally called hominids bee； under this arrangement； hominins。 （leakeyand others insist on that designation。） hominoidea is the name of the aue sunerfamily which includes us。
how much you jumbled everything up；鈥潯an tattersall； the bearded and friendly curator ofanthropology at the american museum of natural history in new york； replied when i askedhim the size of the total world archive of hominid and early human bones。
the shortage wouldn鈥檛 be so bad if the bones were distributed evenly through time andspace； but of course they are not。 they appear randomly； often in the most tantalizing fashion。
homo erectus walked the earth for well over a million years and inhabited territory from theatlantic edge of europe to the pacific side of china； yet if you brought back to life everyhomo erectus individual whose existence we can vouch for； they wouldn鈥檛 fill a school bus。
homo habilis consists of even less： just two partial skeletons and a number of isolated limbbones。 something as short…lived as our own civilization would almost certainly not be knownfrom the fossil record at all。
鈥渋n europe；鈥潯attersall offers by way of illustration； 鈥測ou鈥檝e got hominid skulls in georgiadated to about 1。7 million years ago； but then you have a gap of almost a million years beforethe next remains turn up in spain； right on the other side of the continent； and then you鈥檝e gotanother 300；000…year gap before you get a homo heidelbergensis in germany鈥攁nd none ofthem looks terribly much like any of the others。鈥潯e smiled。 鈥渋t鈥檚 from these kinds offragmentary pieces that you鈥檙e trying to work out the histories of entire species。 it鈥檚 quite atall order。 we really have very little idea of the relationships between many ancient species鈥攚hich led to us and which were evolutionary dead ends。 some probably don鈥檛 deserve to beregarded as separate species at all。鈥�
it is the patchiness of the record that makes each new find look so sudden and distinct fromall the others。 if we had tens of thousands of skeletons distri