Skip to main content

Human Origins, a short history - Sarah Wild ***

It's inevitable that us humans have a distinct interest in where we come from as a species, and in this book Sarah Wild takes us through the latest state of knowledge on the origin of our species and of the various extinct species that broadly fall within the 'hominin' descriptor.

There's plenty of compact information here, with occasional boxes filling in basics, such as how fossils form and what a hominin is. Some of the facts are eminently quotable - my favourite was that of all the species mentioned, only Homo sapiens has a chin (not sure what this says about chinless wonders). I particularly liked the chapters on 'the first sapiens' - what we know about the earliest members of our species - and on 'the big questions', notably what happened to all the other related-ish species and the ways in which we are still evolving.

Unfortunately, though, the book does suffer from Rutherford stamp collecting syndrome. The great physicist commented (roughly) that all science is either physics or stamp collecting - suggesting that other scientific disciplines focus too much on collecting and collating data, where physics is more about deducing laws and explanation of phenomena (hence far more interesting). Wild gives us a plethora of data and species, with many different hominins named, and their distinguishing features reeled off. What's missing is a sense of storytelling and narrative - it's just too fact-heavy.

Just to give one example: in a section labelled 'Homo mysteries', Wild introduced the famous 'hobbit' of the Indonesian island of Flores. We hear about where the remains were found, the excavations, the species' strange mix of characteristics and the debate over whether the remains were of a new species or of individuals with birth defects. But nowhere is there a mention of the best bit of the story (appearing in Henry Gee's The Accidental Species), that the discoverers originally suggested naming the species Homo florianus, but hastily renamed it Homo floresiensis when they discovered their original name means a flowery part of the anatomy. It might be trivial, but a story like this adds human interest. Similarly we hear very little other about the discoverers than their names - ironically, it would have been great to give more human context.

I was also uncomfortable with Wild's use of the word 'ancestor'. As far as I'm concerned, an ancestor is in a species' direct lineage. But at one point we are told 'For many years [Ardipithecus ramidus] was the oldest human ancestor we knew of.' Yet, as we are correctly told some pages later, 'We do not know how the human lineage evolved from early hominins' - all we have is fragments of different earlier hominins, many of which will not be our ancestors, and we have no way of being clear when dealing with specimens too old for genetic identifiers.

The book was absolutely fine as a textbook light, and I was happy to endorse it as such. If you need to get information about the context of human evolution, it will give a good collection of facts (if we overlook the ancestor thing) - but it hasn't got the readability of good popular science.

Hardback:   
Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Mathematics with Love – Mary Stopes-Roe *****

Admittedly it’s early days (this review is written in January), but this, for me, is the surprise hit of the year so far! I approached this book with trepidation, but found it absolutely delightful. It is described on the cover as the “courtship correspondence of Barnes Wallis, inventor of the bouncing bomb”, and contains a series of letters between Wallis and his cousin and eventual wife Molly Bloxham, along with some useful annotation by their daughter, Mary. The courtship itself is not without difficulties, as Wallis was 18 years older than the 17-year-old Molly at the start of the correspondence, and her father, not surprisingly, wasn’t too pleased about the interest of such an elderly suitor, but that isn’t the only reason the letters are interesting – it’s also because of maths, and Wallis’s position in the UK as the engineering hero of the Second World War. (Incidentally, it seemed very strange to see letters addressed to “Barnes” – I had always assumed Barnes Wallis was a ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Why Nobody Understands Quantum Physics - Frank Verstraete and Céline Broeckaert **

It's with a heavy heart that I have to say that I could not get on with this book. The structure is all over the place, while the content veers from childish remarks to unexplained jargon. Frank Versraete is a highly regarded physicist and knows what he’s talking about - but unfortunately, physics professors are not always the best people to explain physics to a general audience and, possibly contributed to by this being a translation, I thought this book simply doesn’t work. A small issue is that there are few historical inaccuracies, but that’s often the case when scientists write history of science, and that’s not the main part of the book so I would have overlooked it. As an example, we are told that Newton's apple story originated with Voltaire. Yet Newton himself mentioned the apple story to William Stukeley in 1726. He may have made it up - but he certainly originated it, not Voltaire. We are also told that ‘Galileo discovered the counterintuitive law behind a swinging o...
Post a Comment
Read more

On Time - Jim Al-Khalili *****

By a small margin Jim Al-Khalili's The World According to Physics is my favourite of his books, both because the 'three pillars' concept at its heart works so well - but also because it's short. On Time is somewhat heavier, but thankfully not a wrist-buster. It might seem at first sight odd that a book on a subset of physics is considerably longer than one covering the whole thing, but time is one of those subjects that inevitably involves considerable complexities and needs depth. As Al-Khalili establishes, it's hard to think of any other scientific concept where our perception of it - what he refers to as manifest time or psychological time - is so different from the view from physics. Some physicists go so far as to suggest that time doesn't exist at all. In the book, Al-Khalili sets out (to my mind quite successfully) both to explain why they think this is the case, but also why it's not the best interpretation of time. I'd certainly note that I...
Post a Comment
Read more