Although we may agree with Holloway that the only studies that are really 

 meaningful for behavioral interpretations are those that concentrate upon 

 the intermediate links in such a chain, nevertheless the 2 ends of the chain 

 remain valid objects of investigation in their own right. 



Thus far, we have concentrated on one end of the chain, that of brain 

 size, and have reviewed some of the attempts currently being made to probe 

 beyond brain size to the underlying fine structure. Let us now approach 

 the problem from the other end of the chain, that of behavioral traits, espe- 

 cially those of a cultural character. 



EIGHT 



U THE OTHER END OF THE CHAIN: 



y THE CULTURAL CAPACITY OF PRIMATES 



Cultural advancement is as striking a nonmorphological feature of 

 hominization as increase in brain size is as a morphological yardstick. 

 Bielicki (1969) has summarized the cultural traits or trait complexes "whose 

 evolution has constituted the essence of hominization" as follows: (a) imple- 

 mental behavior (tool-using and tool-making); (b) symbolic communication; 

 and (c) certain characteristics of social organization, in which preagricul- 

 tural human beings most markedly diverged from subhuman catarrhines 

 (enumerated by Bielicki as "mating rules, home basis, within-group eco- 

 nomic co-operation, sexual division of economic roles"— 1969, p. 58). A 

 further trait, namely hunting, Bielicki has classed among his list of "non- 

 cultural" features of hominization. 



Of these 4 behavioral complexes, we have little evidence bearing on 

 (b) and (c) and only some indirect evidence bearing on hunting. Item (a)— 

 implemental behavior— is clearly the behavioral trait or trait-complex about 

 which we have the greatest volume of material evidence. 



Implemental activities among non-hominid Primates 



When Dart (1926, 1929) first suggested that Australopithecus was capa- 

 ble of violent manual activities and of using and fabricating tools of bone, 

 horn, and teeth (1956b), relatively little was known of. the extent to which 

 other higher Primates were capable of tool-using, and even to a certain extent 



