Cut Marks on a Fossil Leg Bone Belonging to a Relative of Modern Humans Were Made by Stone Tools and Could Be Evidence of Cannibalism
在屬於現代人類同族之化石腿骨上的切割痕跡，是由石器造成的。因此，可能是同類相食行為的證據。
(圖援用自原文)
Researchers from the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History have identified the oldest decisive evidence of humans’ close evolutionary relatives butchering and likely eating one another.
來自由史密森學會管理的美國國家自然歷史博物館的研究人員們已經確認了，人類親近之演化上的同族，相互屠殺且可能相互吃食，最古老的決定性證據。
In a new study published today, June 26, in Scientific Reports, National Museum of Natural History paleoanthropologist Briana Pobiner and her co-authors describe nine cut marks on a 1.45 million-year-old left shin bone from a relative of Homo sapiens found in northern Kenya.
在一項今天(2023年6月26日)發表的新研究中，美國國家自然歷史博物館的古人類學家， Briana Pobiner及她的合撰者們描述了，來自於肯亞北部，發現的智人同族，在145萬年前，左脛骨上的九處切割痕跡。
Analysis of 3D models of the fossil’s surface revealed that the cut marks were dead ringers for the damage inflicted by stone tools. This is the oldest instance of this behavior known with a high degree of confidence and specificity.
有關此化石表面的3D模型分析揭露，此些切割痕跡與石器造成的傷害非常相似。這是此狀況，已知具有高度可信度及特殊性的最古老事例。
“The information we have tells us that hominins were likely eating other hominins at least 1.45 million years ago,” Pobiner said. “There are numerous other examples of species from the human evolutionary tree consuming each other for nutrition, but this fossil suggests that our species’ relatives were eating each other to survive further into the past than we recognized.”
Pobiner宣稱：「該我們擁有的資訊告知我們，至少在145萬年前，人族(古人類)很可能吃食其他人族。有許多來自人類演化樹的物種，為了獲取營養，而互相消費的其他例子。不過，此化石暗示，咱們物種的同族相互吃食來生存到，比過去我們認知的更久遠。」
Pobiner first encountered the fossilized tibia, or shin bone, in the collections of the National Museums of Kenya’s Nairobi National Museum while looking for clues about which prehistoric predators might have been hunting and eating humans’ ancient relatives.
當在尋找有關哪些史前掠食者，可能獵殺及吃食人類遠古同族的線索時，於肯亞奈羅比國家博物館的收集物中，Pobiner首度邂逅了化石化的脛骨。
With a handheld magnifying lens, Pobiner pored over the tibia looking for bite marks from extinct beasts when she instead noticed what immediately looked to her like evidence of butchery.
當她注意到，直接看來對她像是屠殺證據時。使用手持放大鏡，Pobiner仔細研究了此脛骨，以尋找來自滅絕之野獸的咬痕。
To figure out if what she was seeing on the surface of this fossil were indeed cut marks, Pobiner sent molds of the cuts—made with the same material dentists use to create impressions of teeth—to co-author Michael Pante of Colorado State University.
為了弄清楚，她在此化石表面看到的，是否確實是切割痕跡。Pobiner將此些切口的鑄模(使用牙醫師用來產生牙齒印痕的相同材料製成)送給了合撰者，科羅拉多州立大學的Michael Pante。
She provided Pante with no details about what he was being sent, simply asking him to analyze the marks on the molds and tell her what made them. Pante created 3D scans of the molds and compared the shape of the marks to a database of 898 individual tooth, butchery and trample marks created through controlled experiments.
她沒有提供Pante，有關他被發送之物的細節，僅要求他分析，於此些鑄模上的痕跡，並告知她是什麼造成此些痕跡。Pante進行了此些鑄模的3D掃描，並與透過受控實驗所產生，898名個體之牙齒、屠殺及踐踏痕跡的數據庫，進行了比較。
The analysis positively identified nine of the 11 marks as clear matches for the type of damage inflicted by stone tools. The other two marks were likely bite marks from a big cat, with a lion being the closest match. According to Pobiner, the bite marks could have come from one of the three different types of saber-tooth cats prowling the landscape at the time the owner of this shin bone was alive.
此分析確認了，11個痕跡中，9個與遭石器造成的傷害類型顯明匹配。其他兩個痕跡很可能來自大型貓科動物的咬痕，以獅子是最接近的相配者。根據Pobiner的說法，此些咬痕可能曾經來自，在這塊脛骨主人還活著時，於上述地帶潛行覓食之三種不同類型劍齒虎中的一種。
By themselves, the cut marks do not prove that the human relative who inflicted them also made a meal out of the leg, but Pobiner said this seems to be the most likely scenario. She explained that the cut marks are located where a calf muscle would have attached to the bone—a good place to cut if the goal is to remove a chunk of flesh.
就此些切割痕跡而言，它們並不能證明，造成此些切割痕跡的人類同族，也吃食來自腿的一餐。不過，Pobiner表示，這似乎是最有可能的腳本。她解釋，切割痕跡位於小腿肌肉會附著在骨頭上的位置。倘若目標是去除一塊肉，那麼這是切割的一處好地方。
The cut marks are also all oriented the same way, such that a hand wielding a stone tool could have made them all in succession without changing grip or adjusting the angle of attack.
此些切割痕跡，也全朝向相同方向。這樣，在不改變握力或調整攻擊角度的情況下，使用石器的手可能曾經連續產生它們。
“These cut marks look very similar to what I’ve seen on animal fossils that were being processed for consumption,” Pobiner said. “It seems most likely that the meat from this leg was eaten and that it was eaten for nutrition as opposed to for a ritual.”
Pobiner宣稱：「此些切割痕跡看起來，與我曾在被加工、供消費之動物化石上，看到的非常相似。來自這條腿的肉被吃食，且被吃食是為了營養，而不是為了一種儀式，這似乎是最可能的。」
While this case may appear to be cannibalism to a casual observer, Pobiner said there is not enough evidence to make that determination because cannibalism requires that the eater and the eaten hail from the same species.
儘管對漫不經意的觀察者而言，此真相可能看起來像是同類相食行為。不過，Pobiner表示，沒有足夠的證據，來做出那種決定。因為，同類相食行為必須吃食者與被吃食者，來自相同物種。
The fossil shin bone was initially identified as Australopithecus boisei and then in 1990 as Homo erectus, but today, experts agree that there is not enough information to assign the specimen to a particular species of hominin. The use of stone tools also does not narrow down which species might have been doing the cutting.
此脛骨化石最初被鑑定為南方古猿博伊西，然後於1990年被鑑定為直立人。不過目前，專家們一致認為，沒有足夠的資訊，來將此標本歸諸於特定的人族物種。石器的使用也未能縮小，哪物種可能曾進行這種切割。
Recent research from Rick Potts, the National Museum of Natural History’s Peter Buck Chair of Human Origins, further called into question the once-common assumption that only one genus, Homo, made and used stone tools.
來自美國國家自然歷史博物館之人類起源的Peter Buck主席，Rick Potts最近的研究進一步懷疑，對曾經普遍存在之僅一屬(人屬)製造及使用石器的假設。
So, this fossil could be a trace of prehistoric cannibalism, but it is also possible this was a case of one species chowing down on its evolutionary cousin.
因而，此化石可能是史前同類相食行為的一種遺跡。不過這也可能，這是一個物種吃食其演化上之同類的一種情況。
None of the stone-tool cut marks overlap with the two bite marks, which makes it hard to infer anything about the order of events that took place. For instance, a big cat may have scavenged the remains after hominins removed most of the meat from the leg bone. It is equally possible that a big cat killed an unlucky hominin and then was chased off or scurried away before opportunistic hominins took over the kill.
無一石器的切割痕跡與兩個，使其難以推斷，任何有關事件發生順序之事的咬痕，相重疊。譬如，在人族從此腿骨取下大部分肉後，一隻大型貓科動物可能曾清理此些殘骸。同樣有可能的是，一隻大貓殺死了一名不幸的人族，然後在機會主義的人族接手此獵殺之前，被驅離或匆促走開。
One other fossil—a skull first found in South Africa in 1976—has previously sparked debate about the earliest known case of human relatives butchering each other. Estimates for the age of this skull range from 1.5 to 2.6 million years old.
1976年，於南非首次被發現的另一顱骨化石。先前曾引發，有關人類同族互相屠殺，已知最早事例的爭論。此顱骨的年齡估計，範圍從150至260萬年。
Apart from its uncertain age, two studies that have examined the fossil (the first published in 2000 and the latter in 2018) disagree about the origin of marks just below the skull’s right cheek bone. One contends the marks resulted from stone tools wielded by hominin relatives and the other asserts that they were formed through contact with sharp- edged stone blocks found lying against the skull.
除了其不確定的年齡，有關此顱骨右顴骨下方痕跡的起源，已經檢查此化石的兩項研究(第一項於2000年發表，後者於2018年發表)看法分歧。一項研究堅決認為，這些痕跡來自人族同類使用的石器。另一項研究堅稱，這些痕跡是透過，與被發現倚附於此顱骨之鋒利石塊接觸形成的。
Further, even if ancient hominins produced the marks, it is not clear whether they were butchering each other for food, given the lack of large muscle groups on the skull.
此外，鑑於在此顱骨上缺乏大的肌肉群，即使遠古人族產生了此些痕跡，也不清楚他們是否，為了食物互相殘殺。
To resolve the issue of whether the fossil tibia she and her colleagues studied is indeed the oldest cut-marked hominin fossil, Pobiner said she would love to reexamine the skull from South Africa, which is claimed to have cut marks using the same techniques observed in the present study.
為了解決她及其同僚們研究的化石脛骨是否，確實是最古老、有切割痕跡之人族化石的問題。Pobiner表示，她想要重新檢視，該來自南非，據稱具有使用於目前研究中，被觀察到之相同技術切割痕跡的顱骨。
She also said this new shocking finding is proof of the value of museum collections.
她也表示，此令人震驚的新發現，是博物館收集物之重要性的證據。
“You can make some pretty amazing discoveries by going back into museum collections and taking a second look at fossils,” Pobiner said. “Not everyone sees everything the first time around. It takes a community of scientists coming in with different questions and techniques to keep expanding our knowledge of the world.”
Pobiner宣稱：「藉由返回博物館收集物中，並進行第二次檢視化石，能做出一些非常驚人的發現。並非每個人在第一次就看到一切。這需要一群科學家，提出不同的問題及技術，來不斷擴大我們對世界的瞭解。」
網址：https://www.si.edu/newsdesk/releases/humans-evolutionary-relatives-butchered-one-another-145-million-years-ago
翻譯：許東榮
文章定位：
