The exciting discovery of a fossilized human male innominate bone (NAORA, N. (1936) Minerva 1, 147-156) of Ni pponanthropus akashiensis (hereafter called " Akashi specimen") in a clod from the Nishiyagi Pleistocene deposit in Akashi has stimulated much research on human evolution in Japan. Unfortunately, the Akashi specimen was lost during World War II before details of its morphological and archaic nature were published. However, a cast and photographs taken immediately after collection have been available for detailed investigations. It should be mentioned here that obvious fossilization of the specimen was repeatedly confirmed by several anthropologists and paleobiologists who had actually scrutinised the specimen before it was lost.
Recently, the morphology of the Akashi specimen cast has been investigated by ENDO and BABA and statistically compared with modern Japanese specimens (ENDO, B, and BABA, H. (1982) J. Anthrop. Soc. Nippon 90, Suppl.27-54). Their conclusion was that the innominate bone discovered in Akashi is not archaic and is that of a modern Japanese. However, this conclusion was reached solely from their statistical comparison, without any consideration of other related discoveries and further, I believe that their conclusion was an improper interpretation of the statistical data.
Their statistical data have clearly shown that the individual innominate bones of modern Japanese exhibit a wide variation in characteristics. It is highly likely, therefore, that although only one Akashi specimens is available for investigation at present, the morphological variation of the innominate bones of N, akashiensis population was as wide as that of the modern Japanese population. ENDO and BABA have also demonstrated that the Akashi specimen does not show any morphological properties "representative" of the innominate bone of modern Japanese in any particular aspect. Interestingly enough, the above observations are open to other interpretations which are much more likely than their mere suggestion.
There must be at least three allowable interpretations of the morphological data from the Akashi specimen; l) The Akashi specimen belongs to modern Japanese, but its morphology is not highly representative of the modern Japanese population. 2) The Akashi specimen is archaic and shows the characteristics representative of the innominate bone of the N, akashiensis population. Due to a wide variation in morphology of individual innominate bone within the populations of both modern Japanese and N, akashiensis, we expect a significant overlap in these variations. 3) As in 2), the Akashi specimen is indeed the innominate bone of an N, akashiensis which as a whole, are clearly distinct from that of modern Japanese. However, some particular features observed in the Akashi specimen are not representative of those of N, akashiensis and coincidentally resemble an atypical morphology of modern Japanese. ENDO and BABA have simply suggested the first possibility without exclusion, even any consideration, of the alternative possibilities. In their studies, no conclusive evidence has been presented supporting the first possibility. Considering various circumstancial facts, e. g, evident fossilization of the specimen, discoveries of archaic types of stone tools and animal fossils from the same deposit, together with characteristics observed in the Akashi specimen, it may be concluded that the first possibility is unlikely and the second, third or intermediate possibilities are the more probable interpretations. In addition, doubts about the details of their analyses are also noted.
View full abstract