Q2(b) · UPSC Civil Services Mains 2022 · Anthropology GS 2 · 15 marks · 1 min read

← Q5(b) Q3(a) →

What are the arguments for excluding Narmada Man from Homo erectus category?

Topic: Palaeo-Anthropological evidences from India with special reference to Siwaliks and Narmada basin (Ramapithecus, Sivapithecus and Narmada Man).. Syllabus: 1.2 Palaeo-Anthropological evidences from India with special reference to Siwaliks and Narmada basin (Ramapithecus, Sivapithecus and Narmada Man). Same official PYQ from year-wise 2022 and Palaeo-Anthropological evidences from India with special reference to Siwaliks and Narmada basin (Ramapithecus, Sivapithecus and Narmada Man)..

Revision summary

Narmada Man is the Hathnora skullcap found by Sonakia in 1982. It was first compared with Asian Homo erectus. Higher cranial capacity and a more arched vault argue against that label. The fossil is incomplete and the Narmada gravels are hard to date. Many workers now treat it as archaic Homo sapiens or heidelbergensis grade.

Model answer

Introduction

Narmada Man is the Hathnora calvarium found in the Narmada alluvium in 1982. It was first placed near Homo erectus, and later workers argued that the skull does not fit that box.

Body

The find

  • Arun Sonakia recovered the fossil at Hathnora on the Narmada. It is a partial skullcap, not a face, jaw, or limb set.
  • Early comparison with Java and Zhoukoudian erectus stressed a thick vault and a strong brow.

Arguments for exclusion

  • Cranial capacity estimates sit higher than typical Asian Homo erectus and nearer some archaic Homo sapiens or Homo heidelbergensis readings.
  • The vault is more arched, the parietal is broader, and some metrics sit with later Middle Pleistocene humans, not with classic erectus.
  • The specimen is incomplete. Without face, teeth, and postcrania, erectus is a risky default.
  • Stratigraphy of the Narmada gravels is reworked. Date and associated fauna do not lock the skull to an erectus time-slice.
  • Indian palaeoanthropology after M. L. K. Murty and later reviewers therefore prefers archaic Homo sapiens, Homo heidelbergensis, or an open Middle Pleistocene grade.

Caution

  • Exclusion is a metric and completeness argument. It is not a new complete skeleton. A single calvarium cannot carry a species war by itself.

Flow diagram

flowchart TD
  H[Hathnora calvarium] --> E[Early erectus label]
  H --> X[Higher capacity arched vault]
  X --> A[Archaic sapiens or heidelbergensis]

Conclusion

Narmada Man is excluded from Homo erectus mainly because of higher capacity, a more arched vault, a poor date, and missing bones. The safer label is a Middle Pleistocene archaic human until more fossils appear.

Quick related

Students also ask

PYQ trend

When UPSC asked this

Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.

  1. 2025 · Q2(a) · Anthropology GS 2 · 20 marks

    Discuss the palaeoanthropological significance of Siwaliks of India giving its subdivisions, fossil primate fauna and major primate fossil localities

    View answer →

  2. 2025 · Q5(b) · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks

    Taxonomic status of Ramapithecus in the light of Ramapithecus-Sivapithecus controversy.

    View answer →

  3. 2023 · Q5(b) · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks

    Ramapithecus-Sivapithecus debate

    View answer →

  4. 2022 · Q3(a) · Anthropology GS 2 · 20 marks

    Make a critical appraisal of Megalithic tradition in India with special reference to North-East India

    View answer →

  5. 2021 · Q2(c) · Anthropology GS 2 · 15 marks

    Discuss the morphological features and phylogenetic Position of Ramapithecus

    View answer →

  6. 2021 · Q8(c) · Anthropology GS 2 · 15 marks

    Identify the causes of tribal unrest with special reference to North-East India

    View answer →

  7. 2016 · Q2(b) · Anthropology GS 2 · 15 marks

    Delineate the salient characteristics of 'Narmada Man' and examine its phylogenetic significance

    View answer →

More from this topic

Q5(b) · UPSC Mains 2025 · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks

Taxonomic status of Ramapithecus in the light of Ramapithecus-Sivapithecus controversy.

Palaeo-Anthropological evidences from India with special reference to Siwaliks and Narmada basin (Ramapithecus, Sivapithecus and Narmada Man).

Lewis named Ramapithecus from Siwalik jaws; Simons and Pilbeam once put it on the human line. Sivapithecus faces from Potwar and Haritalyangar are orang-like, not australopith-like. Ramapithecus is now folded into Sivapithecus; it is not a hominin. The lesson is not to read human ancestry from a jaw fragment alone. Gigantopithecus/Indopithecus is a separate large ape, also not Homo.

Q2(a) · UPSC Mains 2025 · Anthropology GS 2 · 20 marks

Discuss the palaeoanthropological significance of Siwaliks of India giving its subdivisions, fossil primate fauna and major primate fossil localities

Palaeo-Anthropological evidences from India with special reference to Siwaliks and Narmada basin (Ramapithecus, Sivapithecus and Narmada Man).

Siwaliks are a Himalayan foreland molasse with Lower, Middle and Upper groups. Miocene hominoids centre on Sivapithecus (including former Ramapithecus) and large Indopithecus/Gigantopithecus. Haritalyangar, Ramnagar and Potwar Chinji are key localities. Ramapithecus is no longer a hominin; the face aligns with orangutans. The sequence is vital for Asian apes, not for an Indian origin of Homo.

Q5(b) · UPSC Mains 2023 · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks

Ramapithecus-Sivapithecus debate

Palaeo-Anthropological evidences from India with special reference to Siwaliks and Narmada basin (Ramapithecus, Sivapithecus and Narmada Man).

Lewis named Ramapithecus from Siwalik jaws and it was treated as a Miocene hominin. Pilbeam and later face finds showed an orang-like profile. Ramapithecus is now included in Sivapithecus. Haritalyangar and Potwar are key localities. The debate does not support an Indian origin of Homo.

Toppers' copies

Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.