tion "

W

as soon as we to confounded here started assume did we to that have come human someone communicable from?" beings might This for simple ages. have language raised It question is reasonable

and this cogni-

has

ques-

tive ability eons ago. The recent discovery of a fossil piece showing

similar voicing capability as ours may date verbal communication to

500,000 years ago. Likely, it was not language as we know it today.

Modern chimpanzees show a hint of the thinking process (i.e., cogni-

tion, implying that humans could think very early on). Without any

hard evidence as to the origins of our language and intelligence, we

might never know when or how this question was first asked.

It is commonly believed that we ask this question out of natural

curiosity, which has been around since early in our existence.

Humans have always been curious by nature indeed since the early

days. Early humans were curious about practical matters, mostly

things about which they had immediate concerns. For example, they

might have been curious why some nuts (bitter almonds, for exam-

ple) might cause breathing difficulties upon ingestion, why some

plants had the ability to stop the bleeding from open wounds (e.g.,

yarrow), or why fire could not arise from damp wood. Such a non-

2

C H R I S Y O U N G K E L LY

tangible question of our origins could only be entertained when they

did not have to worry about their livelihood and had tons of time on

their hands.

Why might that question even be contemplated and in need of

answers? Some believe there was a need to know all along.

WHO NEEDS TO KNOW?

Early humans' basic social units might have consisted of immediate

families, close relatives, and friends during hunter-and-gatherer

times. We do not have written records as to how these human clans

were organized, but it would be reasonable to assume that our social

structures were similar to those of our closest relatives: advanced

primates. Evolution psychologists suggest that typical social group

sizes were a few dozen—around 30 individuals—in those days,

similar to modern-day chimps in their natural habitat. It could be as

many as 150 in some rarer cases, but larger groups tend to disintegrate

into smaller cliques unless rules and regulations are established and

observed throughout.

Just try to imagine that we are members of such a social group

during our early tribal days for the time being. To keep the units

cohesive and survive, we encourage and foster innate empathy,

compassion, and altruism. Similar to what we observe in modern-day

primates, these emotions are reflected in how we take care of each

other. Not all is well all the time, though. There are always occasional

scuffles, vying for resources. The conflicts are usually reconciled

between engaging parties by some material offering, a friendly jab on

the chin, some backslapping, or guffawing at each other. Lives are, in

general, peaceful, because we know each other intimately in these

small groups, and the subsistence is quite serene and satisfying on

most days.

But our lives are more complicated since there are unavoidable

yet necessary interactions with other groups that stir commotions in

the middle of the doldrums. According to a recent study, this type of

social networking among early human groups is the main driving

from where we came

3

force of our complex civilization. What was the interaction between

groups? In our xenophobic nature, the first instinct is to put up a

defense to try to find out from where the other group had come

through some forms of communication. During this probing dance,

one of the first questions asked would most likely have been "Where

are you from?" much like any partygoers striking up a conversation in

modern days. Only when the interacting groups are deemed

nonthreatening to each other would we start sharing food and

stories, trading surpluses for shortages, and establishing alliances for

common causes like hunting or fighting disasters.

Reaching out to other groups is, at times, intentional. In some

cases, this is a means to look for mating opportunities outside of

one's own unit. Whatever the motivation might be, the urge to know

about us is part survival and part reproductive. A desire from this

instinctual perspective should be enough motivation to care about

from where we—or others—have come.