--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Glynn Isaac Defines "the Homebase Hypothesis"

It has been argued since Darwin's day that the great apes were man's nearest living relatives, and as evidence emerged during the late 1960's of the hunting propensities and simple tool use of chimpanzees (Goodall 1986), anthropologists found more and more reason to presume similarity of behavior between modern (e.g., Pan troglodytes or Pan panicus) and ancient varieties of hominids (Tanner 1981).

Still, modern humans are not chimps. Substantial differences of behavior exist between the great apes and hominids, and it was the late Glynn Isaac's notion that these differences began early in our history.

Specifically, he noted that the modern human "habitually carries tools, food and other possessions either with his arms or in containers," communicates with other humans by a spoken language, that the acquisition and sharing of food is "a corporate responsibility," that modern human hunter-gathers conduct their foraging operations in the vicinity of communal gathering places or "home bases," and that humans seek to acquire high-protein fo

Meanwhile, that frontal attack was going on in East Africa, much of it under Isaac's direction at the Koobi Fora research project, of which he had been co-leader (with Richard Leakey) since 1970. There seems to have been a graduate student uncovered with each and every artifact, and many of them produced dissertations on paleolithic taphonomy and went on to related careers-- too many to name here.

Which is snide. Reviewing his contributions, Binford had undoubtably been correct in calling for more objective examination of the evidence and for studies of the processes which had created the archaeological record. He had put his principles into practice by studying hunting and settlement patterns among the Nunamuit Eskimos and his prediction that lower Pleistocene hominids were more scavengers than hunters has achieved the status of conquering orthodoxy. A cynic could argue his predictions owed as much to guess as theory but he had been right about as often as wrong-- which was a respectable batting average.

odstuffs by hunting or fishing. None of these are common behavior among the apes or are practiced to the extent that they are among Homo sapiens sapiens. (Isaac 1978)

Binford was pleased to see new thinking, but noted (correctly, in my opinion) that "It is a classic post hoc accommodative argument" which could not be tested because it was designed to fit all the available evidence. (Binford 1985:313)

Despite this, he backed off from broader claims of hunting at Koobi Fora, with the remark that "Given the low level of stone technology in evidence, I am inclined to suspect scavenging...." It was even probable that "the first toolmakers lacked the highly developed mental and cultural abilities of more recent humans."

Some common words found in the essay are:
Koobi Fora, Glynn Isaac, BP Moreover, Glynn Isaac's, Level Olduvai, Scientific American, Walker Leakeys, Anthropological Research, Nicola Stern, Donald Johanson, home base, koobi fora, type sites, home bases, homo erectus, glynn isaac, york academic press, lower paleolithic, press 1989, faunal remains, university press, cambridge cambridge university, cambridge university press, academic press ---, home base idea,
Approximate Word count = 2956
Approximate Pages = 12 (250 words per page double spaced)