is likewise more hominized in its fine internal structure necessary to permit 

 the emergence of more complex patterns of behavior than those of the apes. 



Upright posture. Australopithecus was essentially bipedal: he did not 

 depend upon his hands in locomotion to the same extent as the apes. Like- 

 wise, when at rest, he undoubtedly possessed that widespread Primate habit 

 of sitting upright with hands freed, while the structure of foot, knee, thigh, 

 and pelvis indicates anatomical adjustments to upright stance. Thus, 

 whether he was sitting, standing, walking, or running, the hands of Australo- 

 pithecus were freed for long periods of time. Hands were thus available for 

 manual and implemental activities for far more of the day than were those 

 of other Primates whose hands were liberated only during the process of 

 sitting upright. In contrast, the occasional, sporadic, and nonhabitual bi- 

 pedal ism of apes does not occupy any significant period of time within the 

 day; it is of interest chiefly in indicating how widespread among the Primates 

 is the capacity for uprightness, which only the hominids specialized in 

 and made a part of their peculiar and specific adaptations. 



Many are the views about the relationship between uprightness and 

 tool-using and -making. But all agree that the capacity for implemental 

 activity is at least enhanced by uprightness. If nothing else, the creature can 

 spend more of its time on manual activities. 



The hand. The attainment of uprightness meant the freeing of the 

 hand. This, in turn, led to, or was accompanied by, a change in its structure 

 and functioning. The hand became more capable of oppositional move- 

 ments between thumb and other fingers than are the hands of apes, and so 

 precision movements, as defined by Napier (i960), became anatomically 

 more feasible, easier, and more precise. We have relatively few hand-bones 

 of Australopithecus, namely a capitate (TM 1526) from Sterkfontein, 2 

 metacarpals from Swartkrans, and 1 from Kromdraai; in addition, from 

 Olduvai we have a capitate, scaphoid, trapezium, and 6 metacarpals, all of 

 which have been attributed to Homo habilis (Tobias 1971)- These hand- 

 and finger-bones show manual hominization, though to an imperfect degree. 



Summation on structural hominization of Australopithecus. It is 

 clear that Australopithecus was structurally more hominized than living, 

 nonhuman, higher Primates, especially with respect to those features relevant 

 for implemental activities. 



We may conclude that the structural and functional potential for im- 

 plemental and cultural capacity not only was present in Australopithecus 



% .26 



