Did Eve make footprints in the sand 117,000 years ago?

Thursday 14 August 1997 23:02
Comments

Washington (Reuters) - A set of 117,000-year-old footprints found in South Africa is possible evidence of a woman who could be the common ancestor of all modern humans, the fossils' discoverers said yesterday.

Made by bare feet in wet sand after a rainstorm, the prints are an important clue to a period with a scarce fossil record: 100,000 to 300,000 years ago, when modern humans emerged.

"These were made by a person who looked anatomically just like us," said Lee Berger, a palaeoanthropologist who announced the discovery at a news conference at the National Geographic Society in Washington, where a fibreglass cast of the footprints was displayed.

Mr Berger and David Roberts, a South African geologist who found the fossils nearly two years ago, referred to the person who made the prints as "she", based on the small size of the feet, but acknowledged that it could have been a small man or a child.

If the prints were made by a female, she could be the anthropological "Eve", a hypothetical woman who lived in Africa between 100,000 and 300,000 years ago and carried a type of DNA that is passed on only through females.

Eve is thought to be the common ancestor of modern human, and while Mr Berger said it was highly questionable that the prints were hers, he also said they were made at the right time and place to fit her profile.

Mr Roberts, of the South African Council for Geoscience, found the footprints in the rocky shore of the Langebaan Lagoon, 60 miles (97km) north of Cape Town. The chances of them surviving to this day were "millions to one", he said. To last this long, the footprints had to be quickly covered after being made, possibly by blowing sand, then buried for a long time to be preserved in rock, then eroded to the point where hardened sediment from the ancient dunes could be chipped away to reveal them again.

What he first saw was a ridge in the rock along the lagoon that showed where the ancient sand had been pushed aside by the side of the woman's foot; the actual footprint was filled with sand.

Mr Roberts was looking for footprints in the area because he had already found fossilized tracks of carnivores and rock fragments that had been worked on by hominids.

Only three other sets of hominid footprints have been found in Africa, and two of these came from more than a million years ago, too early for modern humans. The third set were dated about 30,000 years ago, a blink in the course of human evolution, Mr Berger said.

The Langebaan footprints were dated by studying the surrounding sediments and noting the fluctuations in sea level in the area over time, Mr Roberts said. The line of footprints stretches away from the shore into what used to be ancient sand dunes which are now buried under rock. Mr Berger said scientists plan to uncover those additional footprints.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

By clicking ‘Create my account’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in