(picture M. Day)
All text and images are protected under U.S copyright law.
Do not use without permission.
Some people believe that Homo erectus is a smaller version of Neanderthal man. It is not. Neanderthals were true humans, and Homo erectus is a complex ape.
This page will show some of the differences in the two.
We will also look at the difference in the Neanderthal and Homo erectus infants.
In the "Image of God" video, author Marvin Lubenow states that he believes Homo erectus is just a smaller version of Neanderthal. He states this again in his book "Bones of Contention":
"My own conclusion is that Homo erectus and Neandertal are actually the same. Homo erectus is on the lower end of a continuum that includes Homo erectus, Archaic Homo sapiens and Neandertal."
pg. 138 "Bones of Contention" by Marvin Lubenow 1992
Notice Dr. Lubenow says "My own conclusion..." This is true, as authorities on Neanderthal and Homo erectus disagree with him.
The following quote is often used to support this conclusion:
"When I put the mandible onto the skull,’ Walker recalled, ‘Richard [Leakey] and I both laughed because it looked so much like a Neanderthal."
Rensberger, Boyce, "Human Fossil is Unearthed," Washington Post, October 19, 1984, pp. A1, A11.
However there are hundreds of differences between the two, not only in the skull but in the body itself.
There are some similarities between H. erectus and the Neanderthals, but the differences are greater.
I will expand on this when I update this page.
The Modjokerto infant was found in 1936 (pg 12 "The Evolution of Homo erectus" by P. Rightmire), at Modjokerto in Central Java (pg 83 "History of the primates: An introduction to the study of fossil man" Fifth edition W. E. LeGros Clark, 1966, University of Chicago Press)
The Modjokerto child was the first to be cranium to be assigned to the species "Homo modjokertensis"
(pg 12 "The evolution of Homo erectus" by P. Rightmire).
W.E. LeGros Clark lists the Modjokerto skull as a "baby Homo erectus"
(Pg. 83 "History of the primates: An introduction to the study of fossil man" Fifth edition W. E. LeGros Clark, 1966, University of Chicago Press)
Mojokerto can be confidently assigned to Homo erectus based on comparison to other Homo erectus youth found at Peking, China.
("Developmental age and Taxonomic Affinity of the Mojokerto Child, Java, Indonesia" Susan C. Anton, AJPA 102:497-514, 1997)
I became aware of the Modjokerto child while reading "History of the primates" by W. E. LeGros Clark. This is a book published in 1966. I have hundreds of books on the fossil record that have been published since then, but the Modjokerto skull is almost never mentioned. An exception is the book "Java man" by Lewin. I found this strange and decided I wanted to study the skull in more detail.
The Modjokerto infant is about 2 years old, possibly older.
(pg. 83 "History of the primates: An introduction to the study of fossil man" Fifth edition W. E. LeGros Clark, 1966, University of Chicago Press)
Mojokerto has been given various developmental ages ranging from 1-8 years. This can be narrowed to 4-6 years based on comparisons of Neanderthal and modern H.sapien cranial base angulatrion.("Developmental age and Taxonomic Affinity of the Mojokerto Child, Java, Indonesia" Susan C. Anton, AJPA 102:497-514, 1997)
Question:
"I am troubled by the position that all Homo erectus fossils are apes and not variants of the human race. It seems like Homo erectus has many of the same morphological characteristics as Neanderthal, i.e., thick brow ridges, with the notable exception that the brain case [of Homo erectus] is much smaller than [that of] Neanderthal."
David R. 10/30/01
My response:
There are many differences between the two, apart from brain size. Though this is one of the only differences you will hear in books aimed at the general public. Books with intense descriptions of their anatomy quickly point out many differences.
Compared to adult Homo erectus individuals the young have a more rounded frontal and less angulated occipital. Humans (H. sapiens) "do not show these differences relative to adults." (Homo erectus adults display a less rounded frontal and more angulated occipital than adult Homo sapiens pg 508)("Developmental age and Taxonomic Affinity of the Mojokerto Child, Java, Indonesia" Susan C. Anton, AJPA 102:497-514, 1997)
The differences are not only in the skull but in the entire body.
A major difference between apes and humans is the large brow ridge over the eyes in apes. The ape like heritage of Neanderthals has been argued based in part on the existence of this boney structure. However apes and monkeys have these brows from infancy on. The Neanderthals (who were fully human) developed these structures as they aged (see chapter_).
Dr. Jack Cuozzo, author of the book: "Buried Alive - the Startling Truth about Neanderthal man" shows that the presence of the supra-orbital torus (or brow ridges, pg 205 Cuozzo) indicate that Neanderthals lived for hundreds of years and that we would develop these structures if we lived as long as the people in the early part of Genesis.
Unlike Neanderthals who develop brow ridges as they age, H. erectus had them from infancy on.
Consider this quote from LeGros Clark regarding the infant Homo erectus child from Modjokerto.
"The brow ridges already at this early age are unusually prominent, and the forehead region (which in apes as well as Man is relatively more prominent in the infant than it is in the adult) is definitely retreating" (pg. 84 "History of the primates: An introduction to the study of fossil man" Fifth edition W. E. LeGros Clark, 1966, University of Chicago Press)
Question:
Homo erectus fossils also have brow ridges. Do you believe that Homo erectus also lived to great age? If so, what of the fact that Turkana boy, thought to be 12 years old, also appears to have brow ridges?"
"I was fascinated by Dr. Cuozzo's explanation of the famous Neanderthal brow ridges as the result of great age.
David R. 10/30/01
My response: Homo erectus and other apes may have lived to great ages. This may also be true of the dinosaurs who obtained great size only after living hundreds of years. However apes have brow ridges early on in their development. This is one of the ways to distinguish the two (man and ape) from each other.
So the fact that KNM-WT 15000 ("Turkana boy"), Mojokerto, and the Peking (Chinese Homo erectus) children have brow ridges at an early age is significant because it helps show that these are not human beings.
You will not find a Neanderthal child with brow-ridges (except in those cases where less than honest people put them there i.e.: Neanderthal documentaries etc.)
Neanderthal children do not have the large prominent brow ridges, which develop later in their lifetimes. Homo erectus however has the large tori from their infancy.
There are many other changes I will discuss later. But keep in mind, if Neanderthal and H. erectus were the same as Lubenow claims (and they are not) then why would they develop differently? (explain difference in Neanderthal and H. sapien growth contrast to differences in erectus)
In his debate with Dr. Cuozzo, Dr. Alan Mann (of Penn State University, now at Princeton University) shows his misunderstanding of Dr. Cuozzo's work on Neanderthal growth and development.
Dr. Mann said: "They [presumably everything prior to Neanderthals] have brow ridges, and though my honored debatee, colleague here will tell you that the brow ridges are there because these people were very very ancient and the brow ridge developed as a result of chewing stresses. I will show you that many of these fossils are juveniles, are young. Whose skeletons and dentitions have not yet reached maturity yet they had really nice and well developed browridges.
Dr. Mann is partly right. But Dr. Cuozzo applies this ONLY to the Neanderthal (human) fossils. This growth of the brow ridge does not apply to erectus or the Australopithecines.
Although Anton (pg 509) claims there is no sagital keel, one is indeed present (though small) in Mojokerto. This keel may be a result of function, (as opposed to genetics), and develop with age. But it is important to point out that no Neanderthal child has this feature.("Developmental age and Taxonomic Affinity of the Mojokerto Child, Java, Indonesia" Susan C. Anton, AJPA 102:497-514, 1997)
Speaking of the (Homo erectus) Modjokerto Infant Calvarium, Michael Day says:
"The recession of the forehead is more marked than that of a modern child of equivalent age, whilst the occiput shows no sign of a torus. The age at death has been estimated at two years" (Dubois, 1936)
as quoted in Michael Day: "Guide to Fossil Man" (1965)
This is more evidence that Homo erectus is not human (as claimed by Lubenow etc)
Is this similar to occiptital tori growth in Neanderthals?
The occipital bun is a feature that may have given Neanderthals better sight than we have today.
I will be adding a picture of a baby chimp from the book "Antiquity of man". You will see how some primates change in appearance as they mature.
cc. of Modjokerto:
650 cc (Dubois, 1936)
700 cc (Boule and Vallois, 1957)
both estimates are from pg 235 of "Guide to Fossil Man" by Michael Day (1965)
The brain size of Modjokerto is small compared to humans. Since Homo erectus is non-human, this is what we would expect.
"Compared with the skulls of modern children of an equivalent age it is small, for its cranial capacity is estimated at about 700 c.c. (in comparison with about 1000 c.c. for a modern European child of two years)..." (pg. 83 "History of the primates: An introduction to the study of fossil man" Fifth edition W. E. LeGros Clark, 1966, University of Chicago Press)
Dating the Modjokerto child has been problematic (Read pg 14 Rightmire, and also "Java man" by Lewin) as the discoverer does not appear to remember where it was found.
| Modjokerto | Homo erectus infant |
|---|---|
 |
Here we see a picture of the Homo erectus Modjokerto infant (picture by C. Swisher, Java man) |  |
Here the Modjokerto infant is compared to a Human child (European, age 2)The erectus skull is placed inside the human skull. Notice the prominent brow ridges, and post orbital constriction already present in the erectus youth. (Picture source: pg. 85 LeGros Clark "History of the primates") |
If you can not see the chart above, please email me (include page address)
Here is the Homo erectus/ergaster skull KNM-ER 3733 it shows postorbital constriction.
The Neanderthal youth had well defined chins, which later becomes less prominent as they aged (after hundreds of years). In Neanderthals the teeth move forward as they grow (see Cuozzo, "Buried Alive") giving a chin-less appearance. This is important because no matter what their age, Homo erectus infants never had chins.
The faces of some of the Peking Homo erectus infants have shown this.
On 3/7/01 I spoke with Dr. Lubenow about this. I told him that if the lack of chin in Neanderthal is only found in adults, and that juvenile Neanderthals had chins, then juvenile erectus would also have chins -if as he claimed erectus and Neanderthal were one and the same.
He said that he had never thought of that. He thought for a few moments, and rather than realizing that erectus and Neanderthal were NOT the same, he said that there must be some other cause of chin loss in Neanderthals.
I disagree of course, as you can see in Dr. Cuozzo's book "Buried Alive" - the loss of chin in the aging Neanderthals are well documented.
In regards to Dr. Lubenow, please keep in mind, I am attacking ideas, not the people who hold those ideas.
Homo erectus is not a smaller version of Neanderthal man. They are 2 distinct creatures. One human, one ape.
Neanderthal man was a true human, a descendant of Adam and Eve.
Homo erectus was a complex-ape that lived at the same time and is now extinct.
If you have any questions on Creation, Evolution, or just want to say "Hi" please feel free to email me.
| Main Index | Ape-man Index | 