Who were the Nataruk people? Mandibular morphology among late Pleistocene and early Holocene fisher-forager populations of West Turkana (Kenya).

Africa is the birthplace of the species Homo sapiens, and Africans today are genetically more diverse than other populations of the world. However, the processes that underpinned the evolution of African populations remain largely obscure. Only a handful of late Pleistocene African fossils (∼50-12 Ka) are known, while the more numerous sites with human fossils of early Holocene age are patchily distributed. In particular, late Pleistocene and early Holocene human diversity in Eastern Africa remains little studied, precluding any analysis of the potential factors that shaped human diversity in the region, and more broadly throughout the continent. These periods include the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), a moment of extreme aridity in Africa that caused the fragmentation of population ranges and localised extinctions, as well as the 'African Humid Period', a moment of abrupt climate change and enhanced connectivity throughout Africa. East Africa, with its range of environments, may have acted as a refugium during the LGM, and may have played a critical biogeographic role during the heterogene`ous environmental recovery that followed. This environmental context raises a number of questions about the relationships among early Holocene African populations, and about the role played by East Africa in shaping late hunter-gatherer biological diversity. Here, we describe eight mandibles from Nataruk, an early Holocene site (∼10 Ka) in West Turkana, offering the opportunity of exploring population diversity in Africa at the height of the 'African Humid Period'. We use 3D geometric morphometric techniques to analyze the phenotypic variation of a large mandibular sample. Our results show that (i) the Nataruk mandibles are most similar to other African hunter-fisher-gatherer populations, especially to the fossils from Lothagam, another West Turkana locality, and to other early Holocene fossils from the Central Rift Valley (Kenya); and (ii) a phylogenetic connection may have existed between these Eastern African populations and some Nile Valley and Maghrebian groups, who lived at a time when a Green Sahara may have allowed substantial contact, and potential gene flow, across a vast expanse of Northern and Eastern Africa.

The Current Status of the Kenya Capsian.

East Africa is home to a rich array of stone-tool traditions that span human prehistory. It is unsurprising, therefore, that the region attracted pioneer prehistorians in the early twentieth century, including L. S. B. Leakey, E. J. Wayland and T. P. O'Brien, who created the first cultural framework for East African prehistory during the 1930s. Although aspects of this framework remain relevant today, others have become misunderstood relics of an old classification system that hinders current research. This is particularly evident in the classification of a Later Stone Age (LSA) culture - the Kenya (East African) Aurignacian, later known as Kenya (East African) Capsian. Although this cultural entity was redressed during the 1970s and 1980s and redefined as the Eburran industry, there is still mystique surrounding the current status of the Kenya Capsian, its original scope and definition, the relationship with the Eburran and its position within a modern understanding of the East African LSA. This is largely due to paradigmatic shifts in researcher attitudes, leading to the use of the Eburran as a false proxy. It is necessary now to completely remove the term Kenya Capsian as an indication of similarity among the different LSA technologies. However, there also needs to be less emphasis on the importance of the Eburran and recognition that it is just one example of a multitude of diverse localised LSA industries. This will open the way for future research into the LSA and facilitate our greater understanding of recent prehistory in East Africa.

L'Afrique de l'Est est le berceau d'un riche ensemble de traditions qui couvrent toute la préhistoire humaine. Il est donc peu surprenant que cette région ait attirée au début du vingtième siècle les pionniers de la préhistoire, dont L. S. B. Leakey, E. J. Wayland et T. P. O'Brien, qui établirent les premiers systèmes culturels de l'Est Africain dans les années 1930. Bien qu'un certain nombre d'aspects de ce système reste pertinent aujourd'hui, d'autres constituent aujourd'hui les reliquats mal interprétés d'un vieux système de classification qui entrave la recherche actuelle. Cela est particulièrement clair pour la classification de la culture de l'Age de Pierre Tardif (APT) ­ l'Aurignacien du Kenya (Est Africain), connu ensuite sous le nom de Capsien du Kenya (Est Africain). Bien que cette entité culturelle ait été révisée pendant les années 70 et 80, et redéfinie comme industrie de l'Eburrien, une certaine confusion entoure toujours le statut actuel du Capsien du Kenya, son ampleur originale et de sa définition, sa relation avec l'Eburrien, et sa position vis-à-vis de notre vision de l'APT de l'Est Africain. Cela s'explique en grande partie par les variations paradigmatiques des chercheurs, conduisant à utiliser abusivement le terme Eburrien. Il est désormais nécessaire de complètement abandonner l'expression Capsien du Kenya pour indiquer une similarité entre technologies de l'APT. Cependant, il est également nécessaire de moins insister sur l'importance de l'Eburrien, et de reconnaître qu'il s'agit juste d'un exemple parmi d'autres d'une multitude d'industries locales de l'APT. Cela devrait ouvrir la voie à de futures recherches sur l'APT et faciliter une meilleure compréhension de la préhistoire récente de l'Afrique de l'Est.