Content deleted Content added
Clumsystiggy (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
m rv sockpuppet |
||
| (10 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Short description|Hominin fossil}}
{{coord|47.627|N|18.384|E|display=title}}
{{Infobox fossil|common name=Samu|image=Homo erectus palaeohungaricus.JPG|alt=The bone, situated opposite its life position.|caption=The bone, situated opposite its life position.|species=''[[Homo neanderthalensis]]''?<br />''[[Homo heidelbergensis]]''|place discovered=[[Vértesszőlős|Vértesszőlős Early Man Site]], [[Hungary]]|age=325-340 ka|discovered by=László Vértes and team|date discovered=21 August 1965|catalog number=VSZ I-II}}
'''Samu''' ('''VSZ II''') is the nickname given to a fragmentary [[Middle Pleistocene]] human [[occipital bone|occipital]], also known as '''Vertesszolos Man''' or '''Vertesszolos occipital''', discovered in [[Vértesszőlős]], [[Central Transdanubia]], [[Hungary]].
Line 9 ⟶ 7:
The find was made on August 21,1965 during a dig led by {{ill|László Vértes|hu|Vértes László}} in the small town of Vértesszőlős, and the fossil was nicknamed '''Sámuel''', because the twenty-first of August is the [[name day]] of [[biblical judge]] [[Samuel]] in Hungarian tradition.<ref>János Ladó, Ágnes Bíró, ''Magyar utónévkönyv'' (2005), p. 109.</ref> Since, the fossil has widely became known as Samu, a short form of the name in Hungary. The site has garnered much scientific interest due to an abundance of [[Fauna|faunal]] remains during [[Quarry|quarrying]].
At the same time as the occipital, 'several lower'<ref name=":3">{{Cite journal |last1=Roksandic |first1=Mirjana |last2=Radović |first2=Predrag |last3=Lindal |first3=Joshua |date=2018 |title=Revising the hypodigm of Homo heidelbergensis: A view from the Eastern Mediterranean
A replica of the Samu occipital bone is on exhibit in the [[Hungarian National Museum]],<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |date=2009-02-10 |title=Samunak kutya baja - FN.hu |url=http://www.fn.hu/tudomany/20090209/samunak_kutya_baja/ |access-date=2023-08-17 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090210123748/http://www.fn.hu/tudomany/20090209/samunak_kutya_baja/ |archive-date=2009-02-10 }}</ref> as well as associated tools and fossilized animal footprints.<ref name="Fzy412">{{Cite book |last1=Fozy |first1=István |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=DQIjAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA412 |title=Fossils of the Carpathian Region |last2=Szente |first2=István |date=2013-12-18 |publisher=Indiana University Press |isbn=978-0-253-00987-6 |language=en}}</ref> Since discovery, the occipital has drawn great [[Tourism|tourist attraction]] and scientific interest.<ref name=":0" /> "Samu" has become a common name for plastic skeletons shown in [[biology]] classes in Hungarian student slang.<ref>[http://mnytud.arts.unideb.hu/szleng/ronaky/re_tan.htm Hogyan beszél ma az ifjúság?] (paper on student slang)</ref>
Line 25 ⟶ 23:
== Description ==
The occipital fragment probably belonged to an adult individual, but it is very thin and flattened at the top-rear. The nuchal hump is very developed and, in life, would have supported very robust neck [[musculature]]. The [[cranial capacity]] was initially estimated to be 1300 cc. The fragment has been distorted during [[fossilization]] within the [[travertine]]. Vértes hypothesized that traces of brain extraction and [[Human cannibalism|cannibalism]] are present on the bone, although this is typically rejected.<ref name=":0" /> Later [[Morphology (biology)|morphological]] analysis by Roksandic, Radović, and Lindal (2018) clarify that the revised cranial capacity is 'large', but do not list a metric.<ref name=":3" />
The [[Nuchal plane|nuchal]] and [[Occipital plane|occipital planes]] have a sharp angle. The [[Occipital bun|occipital torus]] is moderately wide, and a deep [[Sulcus (morphology)|sulcus]] that is somewhat continuous along the [[superior nuchal line]] makes this formation pronounced. A [[Suprainiac fossa|suprainiac]] depression is either not found above it, or, like [[Bilzingsleben (Paleolithic site)|Bilzingsleben]], it is not preserved in the fossil as it sits high and starts with the [[opisthocranion]]. The incipient suprainiac fossa is a derived [[Neanderthal]] trait, but the broad [[Mandible|ramus]] with small distance to the [[Third molar|M3]], thick and angled occipital, high [[inion]], and occipital torus morphology are basal ''[[Homo erectus]]'' traits.<ref name=":3" />
Line 32 ⟶ 30:
The fossil was first described as '''''Homo erectus (seu sapiens) paleohungaricus''''' by Hungarian [[anthropologist]] Andor Thoma in 1996. Thoma was not sure what [[species]] his [[subspecies]] should belong to, ''seu'' being a [[Latin]] term meaning "either" or "or",<ref>{{Citation |title=seu |date=2023-08-10 |url=https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=seu&oldid=75604278 |work=Wiktionary, the free dictionary |access-date=2023-08-17 |language=en}}</ref> suggesting that either '''''H. sapiens paleohungaricus''''' or '''''H. erectus paleohungaricus''''' may be potentially valid as a late specimen of ''H. erectus'' or an early ''[[Human|H. sapiens]]''. Because the fossil is very fragmentary, the [[Taxonomy (biology)|classification]] of the find has since been controversial. Vértes suggested that it was a ''Homo erectus'', as did [[Phillip Tobias]]. However, Tobias disagreed in the estimated cranial volume of 1300 cc. Of the many scientists who examined Samu, Wolpoff concluded that the bone was relatively [[Diagnosis (taxonomy)|nondiagnostic]] in that it could not be conclusively generalized from its preservation and [[Taphonomy|taphonomic]] damage.<ref name=":0" />
Others remained divided by the apparently large volume and Neanderthal-like traits (which drew criticism, as the nuchal region of Samu is unlike Neanderthals). [[Chris Stringer|Stringer]] first classified the fragment as a late-surviving [[Accretion model of Neanderthal origins|preneanderthal]], a term that describes specimens typically assigned to ''[[Homo heidelbergensis]]'' with Neanderthal affinities. Others such as Adams (1999) suggest that the [[population]] is transitional of ''Homo erectus'' and ''Homo sapiens''.<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal |last=Adams |first=Brian |date=1999 |title=Lower, Middle or Upper Palaeolithic? A Classification Analysis of the Bársony House Hand Axes from the North Carpathian Basin
Roksandic, Radović, and Lindal (2018) suggest that the specimen is alike to [[Castel di Guido]], [[Tautavel Man|Arago]], Bilzingsleben, and Petralona in the suite of [[Basal (phylogenetics)|basal]] ''Homo erectus'' traits with few [[Derived (phylogenetics)|derived]] Neanderthal traits. They raise the possibility that a restricted ''Homo heidelbergensis'' definition might include this specimen, and definitely includes [[Mauer 1|Mauer]], [[Ceprano Man|Ceprano]], [[Visogliano]], [[Mala Balanica|Balanica]], [[HaZore'a|Hazorea]], and [[Nadaouiyeh Aïn Askar]] as a group close to the human-Neanderthal split.<ref name=":3" /> However, they did not include the specimen in their ''[[Homo bodoensis]]'' like they did with many of the other specimens mentioned in their 2018 study,<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Roksandic |first1=Mirjana |last2=Radović |first2=Predrag |last3=Wu |first3=
== Technology ==
Line 44 ⟶ 42:
== Paleoecology ==
[[File:Ősembertelep Vértesszőlős 01.jpg|thumb|Sign at the archeological site denoting the finding of the occipital.|252x252px]]The town of Vértesszőlős is located in the northern section of the [[Pannonian Plain|Pannonian Plains]] of the [[Gerecse Mountains]] foothills. The fossil itself was exhumed from the [[Által-ér]], a river that stretches 51 km and
== Notes ==
Line 54 ⟶ 52:
[[Category:Fossils of Hungary]]
[[Category:Tourist attractions in Komárom-Esztergom County]]
| |||