What do you think?
Rate this book
The Fossil Trail: How We Know What We Think We Know About Human Evolution
Extensively revised and updated, the second edition of The Fossil How We Know What We Think We Know About Human Evolution offers a colorful history of fossil discoveries and a revealing insider's look at how these finds have been interpreted--and misinterpreted--through time. It covers the dramatic increase in the size and scope of the human fossil record as well as new techniques for analyzing and interpreting that record that have emerged in the thirteen intervening years since the first edition's publication. Author Ian Tattersall, Curator in the Division of Anthropology of the American Museum of Natural History, places the researchers and their discoveries within the context of their social and scientific milieus and reveals the many forces that shape our interpretation of fossil findings.
The Fossil Trail provides an up-to-the-minute overview of paleoanthropological thought and discovery and presents our "family tree" as it is portrayed in the Spitzer Hall of Human Origins at the American Museum of Natural History.
New to the Second Edition
*Revisions throughout bring this edition thoroughly up to date
*New Chapters 17 and 18 include a discussion of the state of paleoanthropology as the first decade of the 21st century concludes and thoughts on the future of the field
*A new gallery of maps of major fossil sites, in Western Europe, Central Europe, the Caucasus and Near East, East Asia, Northern Africa, and Southern Africa
*Updated opening timeline includes the stratigraphic ranges of twenty-three hominid species
*In addition to over 90 high quality fossil renderings, new photographs illustrate new findings in the field
The Fossil Trail provides an up-to-the-minute overview of paleoanthropological thought and discovery and presents our "family tree" as it is portrayed in the Spitzer Hall of Human Origins at the American Museum of Natural History.
New to the Second Edition
*Revisions throughout bring this edition thoroughly up to date
*New Chapters 17 and 18 include a discussion of the state of paleoanthropology as the first decade of the 21st century concludes and thoughts on the future of the field
*A new gallery of maps of major fossil sites, in Western Europe, Central Europe, the Caucasus and Near East, East Asia, Northern Africa, and Southern Africa
*Updated opening timeline includes the stratigraphic ranges of twenty-three hominid species
*In addition to over 90 high quality fossil renderings, new photographs illustrate new findings in the field
327 pages, Paperback
First published March 16, 1995
8 people are currently reading
283 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
February 11, 2016
This is a superb history of the discovery and taxonomic discussion of most of the important hominin fossils and the interpretation and integration of these fossils into the overarching narrative of human origins. Ian Tattersall has spent most, if not all, of his illustrious career carefully exploring and considering the fossil evidence and developing a logical hypothesis for the evolution of human species, which he has thoughtfully laid out in the second edition of this important book. In this book, Tattersall has also done a sterling job of incorporating and explaining the latest scientific data and information related to genetics, geochronology, paleoclimatology and paleoecology that tend to bolster his thesis and specific interpretations.
While much of this material was covered in Richard Klein's huge third edition of his The Human Career: Human Biological and Cultural Origins (2009) which I just finished reading recently, I have to say that I very much enjoyed the approach taken by Tattersall--ever the anatomist and taxonomist--in presenting and discussing the fossils in the order that they were discovered, and how they have been viewed and interpreted over time. As the book moves along, Tattersall comes back and revisits certain fossils and presents the new way of interpreting it and its proper placement in the dynamic re-telling of the story of our human origins.
Interestingly, I am actually beginning to recognize and remember many of these fossils by the catalog and/or 'nicknames' that have been given to each of them (e.g., KNM-WT 15000, also known as "Turkana Boy" a very nearly complete skeleton of a young Homo ergaster boy), and this makes reading this book, as well as other technical journal articles and books even more meaningful to me now. Additionally, this book is liberally illustrated, with superbly detailed line drawings of just about each of the fossils that are described in the book. In conclusion, this book is well worth the read, especially if you're at all interested in the history of these amazing fossil discoveries and the evolution, over time, of the interpretation of the of these extinct species and their ultimate role in the origin of anatomically modern humans--Homo sapiens.
While much of this material was covered in Richard Klein's huge third edition of his The Human Career: Human Biological and Cultural Origins (2009) which I just finished reading recently, I have to say that I very much enjoyed the approach taken by Tattersall--ever the anatomist and taxonomist--in presenting and discussing the fossils in the order that they were discovered, and how they have been viewed and interpreted over time. As the book moves along, Tattersall comes back and revisits certain fossils and presents the new way of interpreting it and its proper placement in the dynamic re-telling of the story of our human origins.
Interestingly, I am actually beginning to recognize and remember many of these fossils by the catalog and/or 'nicknames' that have been given to each of them (e.g., KNM-WT 15000, also known as "Turkana Boy" a very nearly complete skeleton of a young Homo ergaster boy), and this makes reading this book, as well as other technical journal articles and books even more meaningful to me now. Additionally, this book is liberally illustrated, with superbly detailed line drawings of just about each of the fossils that are described in the book. In conclusion, this book is well worth the read, especially if you're at all interested in the history of these amazing fossil discoveries and the evolution, over time, of the interpretation of the of these extinct species and their ultimate role in the origin of anatomically modern humans--Homo sapiens.
September 30, 2015
Subtitle: How We Know What We Think We Know about Human Evolution
Ian Tattersall has written about a dozen books on paleontology and human ancestry. This book was one of his first (1995), but he has recently returned to it (2009). A naive person might think that 14 years isn't a very long time when discussing the events of 100,000, or 1 million, years ago. However, in this case at least, a lot has changed.
What is most interesting about this book for me is that it isn't primarily about the results of paleontology, but rather about the process. In other words, while it tells its story in primarily chronological order, it's not the chronology of the human and pre-human ancestors whose fossils we have discovered, but rather the chronology of the humans who discovered them.
The advantage of this is we get to see the very human flaws and biases of the scientists who are trying to make sense of the (scarce and often more than a little fragmentary) fossils they dug up. The more incomplete the picture, the easier it is to make them tell any tale you prefer, and the harder it is to settle disagreement with any method that tends more towards empirical evidence and less towards politics.
The first half of this book takes place primarily before the author appeared on the scene, and the issues involved (e.g. is the Piltdown Man a fake or not, is the Neanderthal a different species or subspecies, or was it a diseased type of modern human) have largely been settled. The second half, though, takes us into modern discoveries, and modern controversies. Here, Tattersall does not try to hide his own opinions. For example, there is a school of thought that believes that there was, in any given time and place, only ever one species of hominid, because if there was more than one competition for the "cognitive niche" would quickly drive one to extinction. Tattersall clearly disagrees, and the recent discovery of more and more fossils that are not any of the currently known species (e.g. the "hobbits", aka Homo Floresiensis, from the island of Flores near Java) seems to him pretty conclusive vindication on this point. I am not expert enough on the topic to judge, but it is nice at least that he makes his point of view clear.
Another thing that has changed a lot between 1995 and 2009, is that fossils and stone tools are not all we have to go by any more. DNA testing (whether Y chromosome, mitocondrial, or whole genome) has shed a lot of light on questions like what happened to the Neanderthals, or how long ago we split from species such as Neanderthal or chimpanzees and bonobos. The more ancient and extinct species do not leave us any DNA intact enough to test, and we are left with comparing skull brow ridge sizes, how the spine connects to the base of the skull, etc.
Which, really, is a fairly primitive way to try to decide whether or not two fossils represent the same species, or a different one. To his credit, even though he is among the last generation of paleontologists to begin his career without genetic data to work from, Tattersall is neither dismissive nor excessively skeptical of using it as a method of answering questions such as these. Someone who has spent decades acquiring the skills to analyze fossils, may be expected to be less than overjoyed when told that these skills aren't the best way of answering questions in their own field anymore. It probably helps that so far the answers provided by genetic analysis seem to be supporting his point of view.
Which, broadly speaking, is that about 100,000-200,000 years ago, there may have been as many as four species (us, Neanderthals, H. Floresiensis, and the much older Homo Erectus) still thriving, with more probably waiting to be discovered. It makes Tolkien's idea of elves, men, hobbits, orcs, wose, and dwarves seem a little more plausible.
It also suggests, uncomfortably, that all of the other species went extinct, coincidentally, just at the time we started to develop technology more advanced than the stone hand-axe. There is, really, only one plausible answer as to why that many would go extinct just in time for our Homo Sapiens ancestors to show up in their vicinity. Maybe a few of them interbred (recent testing indicates most current humans not in sub-Saharan Africa have around 2% Neanderthal DNA), but by and large, they are gone, and we are probably the reason why.
Science is fascinating. But, not always reassuring.
Ian Tattersall has written about a dozen books on paleontology and human ancestry. This book was one of his first (1995), but he has recently returned to it (2009). A naive person might think that 14 years isn't a very long time when discussing the events of 100,000, or 1 million, years ago. However, in this case at least, a lot has changed.
What is most interesting about this book for me is that it isn't primarily about the results of paleontology, but rather about the process. In other words, while it tells its story in primarily chronological order, it's not the chronology of the human and pre-human ancestors whose fossils we have discovered, but rather the chronology of the humans who discovered them.
The advantage of this is we get to see the very human flaws and biases of the scientists who are trying to make sense of the (scarce and often more than a little fragmentary) fossils they dug up. The more incomplete the picture, the easier it is to make them tell any tale you prefer, and the harder it is to settle disagreement with any method that tends more towards empirical evidence and less towards politics.
The first half of this book takes place primarily before the author appeared on the scene, and the issues involved (e.g. is the Piltdown Man a fake or not, is the Neanderthal a different species or subspecies, or was it a diseased type of modern human) have largely been settled. The second half, though, takes us into modern discoveries, and modern controversies. Here, Tattersall does not try to hide his own opinions. For example, there is a school of thought that believes that there was, in any given time and place, only ever one species of hominid, because if there was more than one competition for the "cognitive niche" would quickly drive one to extinction. Tattersall clearly disagrees, and the recent discovery of more and more fossils that are not any of the currently known species (e.g. the "hobbits", aka Homo Floresiensis, from the island of Flores near Java) seems to him pretty conclusive vindication on this point. I am not expert enough on the topic to judge, but it is nice at least that he makes his point of view clear.
Another thing that has changed a lot between 1995 and 2009, is that fossils and stone tools are not all we have to go by any more. DNA testing (whether Y chromosome, mitocondrial, or whole genome) has shed a lot of light on questions like what happened to the Neanderthals, or how long ago we split from species such as Neanderthal or chimpanzees and bonobos. The more ancient and extinct species do not leave us any DNA intact enough to test, and we are left with comparing skull brow ridge sizes, how the spine connects to the base of the skull, etc.
Which, really, is a fairly primitive way to try to decide whether or not two fossils represent the same species, or a different one. To his credit, even though he is among the last generation of paleontologists to begin his career without genetic data to work from, Tattersall is neither dismissive nor excessively skeptical of using it as a method of answering questions such as these. Someone who has spent decades acquiring the skills to analyze fossils, may be expected to be less than overjoyed when told that these skills aren't the best way of answering questions in their own field anymore. It probably helps that so far the answers provided by genetic analysis seem to be supporting his point of view.
Which, broadly speaking, is that about 100,000-200,000 years ago, there may have been as many as four species (us, Neanderthals, H. Floresiensis, and the much older Homo Erectus) still thriving, with more probably waiting to be discovered. It makes Tolkien's idea of elves, men, hobbits, orcs, wose, and dwarves seem a little more plausible.
It also suggests, uncomfortably, that all of the other species went extinct, coincidentally, just at the time we started to develop technology more advanced than the stone hand-axe. There is, really, only one plausible answer as to why that many would go extinct just in time for our Homo Sapiens ancestors to show up in their vicinity. Maybe a few of them interbred (recent testing indicates most current humans not in sub-Saharan Africa have around 2% Neanderthal DNA), but by and large, they are gone, and we are probably the reason why.
Science is fascinating. But, not always reassuring.
November 11, 2018
One of the best books out there for literature review of the known human fossil record (up to 2008). However, if you have not been keeping up with the last decade it might give you some wrong ideas about things that are now common knowledge (e.g. Tattersall argues that hybrids between neanderthals and sapiens are just a non-sense impossibility. This view is of course, wrong, and comes from the really splitter views presented by the author).
October 10, 2019
Despite the book’s age, it’s very informative on what we know about human evolution, it’s history, and what we’ve gathered. It mentions multiple sources of information and the information it presented was formatted in a way which was easy to digest.
February 7, 2024
A book that opened my eyes on paleoanthropology. Ian Tattersall is a great author and this makes me want to read his other works. This does not just explain what we know, but the painful and embarrassing mistakes we made before we got to the present.
Read
March 24, 2008Basically a history of paleoanthropology, this book begins by describing our curiosity about our origins; the Christian creation story was all we had at one point. It told us God had created the world and all living things in seven days, and that the world was created for humans. People understood from Bible chronology that the world was about 6,000 years old.
But in the 19th century, geologists started telling us that the earth must be older than a literal reading of the Bible would lead us to believe. The discovery of extinct plants and animals was troubling: didn't God create the world just as it should be? Naturalists started recognizing that humans seemed to have more in common with the natural world than one would think, had everything been created separately. When Neandertals were discovered, paleoanthropology was born, even though no one, including its practitioners knew it yet. The Neandertals were thought to be deformed people, or perhaps members of some degenerate race. People tried mightily to reconcile the evidence in their hands with what they thought they must believe as Christians. A recent poll shows this struggle continuing; it reports that only 50% of Americans believe in evolution.
A major theme in this book is the battle between those who regard people as a "goal" of evolution and those who think it just happened to work out that way, so far. Tattersall laments the "parochialism" of paleoanthropology and wishes it's practitioners were as objective as paleontologists of other species, such as lemurs, his specialty. The idea that the universe is "trying" to create humans shows up in several ways.
The lumping of too many human characteristics onto the first bipedal hominid.
"Oh! He's standing up! That's because he's smart! And because he wants to "free up" his hands so he can take food back to his wife. And that food is the meat of some mighty animal he hunted, because as soon as he stood up, he became the most powerful predator in the world." Actually it seems that he was just another ape who got around a little differently.
The one-species hypothesis
"Only one species of hominid can exist at once, because we're so special. Culture is our niche, and only one species can occupy that space at a time." There seem to have been many species of hominid in existence at many points in our history, including the Neandertals as late as 30,000 year ago. Anatomically modern humans seem to have coexisted with them for at least 50,000 years.
The multiregional hypothesis
"The races of today, africans, asians, europeans, and australians, are descendents of different subspecies. Skeletal characteristics of modern people in, say, China, can be seen in hominid fossils found there. There was just enough interbreeding of subspecies to keep us from diverging into separate species". This pisses Tattersall off. He says,"This viewpoint does seem to me to illustrate, better than any other current example, the extreme parochiality with which paleoanthropology is cursed." He thinks that new hominid species replaced older ones rather than thinking the entire population of homo erectus, say, evolved gradually into homo sapiens. He regard this theory as sort of a disguise for "parallel evolution" toward the "goal" of modern humans.
As I read this book, I kept feeling the desire to look at all these fossils to see for myself.
But in the 19th century, geologists started telling us that the earth must be older than a literal reading of the Bible would lead us to believe. The discovery of extinct plants and animals was troubling: didn't God create the world just as it should be? Naturalists started recognizing that humans seemed to have more in common with the natural world than one would think, had everything been created separately. When Neandertals were discovered, paleoanthropology was born, even though no one, including its practitioners knew it yet. The Neandertals were thought to be deformed people, or perhaps members of some degenerate race. People tried mightily to reconcile the evidence in their hands with what they thought they must believe as Christians. A recent poll shows this struggle continuing; it reports that only 50% of Americans believe in evolution.
A major theme in this book is the battle between those who regard people as a "goal" of evolution and those who think it just happened to work out that way, so far. Tattersall laments the "parochialism" of paleoanthropology and wishes it's practitioners were as objective as paleontologists of other species, such as lemurs, his specialty. The idea that the universe is "trying" to create humans shows up in several ways.
The lumping of too many human characteristics onto the first bipedal hominid.
"Oh! He's standing up! That's because he's smart! And because he wants to "free up" his hands so he can take food back to his wife. And that food is the meat of some mighty animal he hunted, because as soon as he stood up, he became the most powerful predator in the world." Actually it seems that he was just another ape who got around a little differently.
The one-species hypothesis
"Only one species of hominid can exist at once, because we're so special. Culture is our niche, and only one species can occupy that space at a time." There seem to have been many species of hominid in existence at many points in our history, including the Neandertals as late as 30,000 year ago. Anatomically modern humans seem to have coexisted with them for at least 50,000 years.
The multiregional hypothesis
"The races of today, africans, asians, europeans, and australians, are descendents of different subspecies. Skeletal characteristics of modern people in, say, China, can be seen in hominid fossils found there. There was just enough interbreeding of subspecies to keep us from diverging into separate species". This pisses Tattersall off. He says,"This viewpoint does seem to me to illustrate, better than any other current example, the extreme parochiality with which paleoanthropology is cursed." He thinks that new hominid species replaced older ones rather than thinking the entire population of homo erectus, say, evolved gradually into homo sapiens. He regard this theory as sort of a disguise for "parallel evolution" toward the "goal" of modern humans.
As I read this book, I kept feeling the desire to look at all these fossils to see for myself.
October 12, 2014
I got about halfway through review a worksheet on early humans with a class of sixth graders when one kid asked where did the new things (species) come from if the old ones all disappeared (excellent question) and I realized without using the word I was teaching them about evolution, which I didn't really agree with. So to flesh out my understanding of what the lesson was about to better evaluate my own stand on the issues I found this book at the library.
It was definitely a bit too technical for me, though I think I could read it again to pick up bits I missed and still enjoy it. The technical bits really compounded in the descriptions of more recent finds where different fossils were given much names that are much better for cataloging, but much less memorable. The author also has the kind of educated person vocabulary that sometimes surprises me (with words like "farrago" and "allopatric") and sometimes makes me think he's making things up (like "lingusitician").
It's a great overview of the history of paleoanthropology and the various interpretations of the hominid fossils that have been found. I always find it interesting to see behind the veil of popular conception of science and find the impassioned debate and sometimes crazy speculation.
Even if you don't believe in evolution, this is a good book to understand the ideas behind it and their development.
It was definitely a bit too technical for me, though I think I could read it again to pick up bits I missed and still enjoy it. The technical bits really compounded in the descriptions of more recent finds where different fossils were given much names that are much better for cataloging, but much less memorable. The author also has the kind of educated person vocabulary that sometimes surprises me (with words like "farrago" and "allopatric") and sometimes makes me think he's making things up (like "lingusitician").
It's a great overview of the history of paleoanthropology and the various interpretations of the hominid fossils that have been found. I always find it interesting to see behind the veil of popular conception of science and find the impassioned debate and sometimes crazy speculation.
Even if you don't believe in evolution, this is a good book to understand the ideas behind it and their development.
October 18, 2012
Ian Tattersall's book, The Fossil Trail, is a good introduction to the history of paleoanthropology for someone who knows very little about the subject. If you have read any of the primary source materials, i.e.articles and seminar talks by some of the leading paleoanthropologists, or even some good textbooks on the subject, you may be a little bored or frustrated with this pop-bestseller approach. The good, hard information is buried in the narrative flow. There are too many discoveries and not enough theories; too much context and not enough to put into it.
Of course, I spent several months struggling with harder source materials and it was torture, but when I finally managed to absorb the jargon, definitions, and theories, I really felt like I knew something...when you read a book like The Fossil Trail, you will probably have more questions than answers...or you will decide that you don't want to know more, thank you.
After reading this book, I am revising my opinion of all such science books for the general public, including classics like THE DOUBLE HELIX. How much does one really learn from them? I guess there is no substitute for field work, regardless of the field or pursuit. No earn, no learn.
Of course, I spent several months struggling with harder source materials and it was torture, but when I finally managed to absorb the jargon, definitions, and theories, I really felt like I knew something...when you read a book like The Fossil Trail, you will probably have more questions than answers...or you will decide that you don't want to know more, thank you.
After reading this book, I am revising my opinion of all such science books for the general public, including classics like THE DOUBLE HELIX. How much does one really learn from them? I guess there is no substitute for field work, regardless of the field or pursuit. No earn, no learn.
Currently reading
July 28, 2011Interesting in it's attempt to try and show how even evolution is a social construction, but it seems to fail in a similar way as Edward Said's Orientalism does. It confirms an objective reality that it's trying to make subjective when it uses it's own terms and methods.
May 22, 2015
It has been a long time since I read this, but I remember it being eye-opening and relatively easy to read despite being technical.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews