Editing Early modern human (section)

==Name and taxonomy==
{{further|Homo|Names for the human species}}
{{main|Human taxonomy}}
{{Human timeline}}
The [[binomial nomenclature|binomial name]] ''Homo sapiens'' was coined by [[Carl Linnaeus|Linnaeus]], [[10th edition of Systema Naturae|1758]].<ref>{{cite book|last=Linné |first=Carl von |title=Systema naturæ. Regnum animale |year=1758 |pages=18, 20 |url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/80764#page/28/mode/1up |edition=10th|access-date=2019-05-06|publisher=Sumptibus Guilielmi Engelmann }}</ref> The [[Latin]] noun ''[[wikt:homo#Latin|homō]]'' (genitive ''hominis'') means "human being", while the participle ''[[wikt:sapiens#Latin|sapiēns]]'' means "discerning, wise, sensible".

The species was initially thought to have emerged from a predecessor within the genus ''Homo'' around 300,000 to 200,000 years ago.{{refn|group=note|This is a matter of convention (rather than a factual dispute), and there is no universal consensus on terminology. Some scholars include humans of up to 600,000 years ago under the same species. See Bryant (2003), p. 811.<ref>{{cite book|url= https://books.google.com/books?id=3z9EpgisKOgC |title=Handbook of Death and Dying |last=Bryant |first=Clifton D |year=2003 |publisher=SAGE |isbn=0761925147}}</ref> See also Tattersall (2012), Page 82 (''cf''. Unfortunately this consensus in principle hardly clarifies matters much in practice. For there is no agreement on what the 'qualities of a man' actually are," [...]).<ref>{{cite book|url= https://books.google.com/books?id=h5PGjJW8FLoC |title=Masters of the Planet: The Search for Our Human Origins |last=Tattersall |first=Ian |year=2012 |publisher=St Martin's Press |isbn=978-1137000385}}</ref>}} A problem with the morphological classification of "anatomically modern" was that it would not have included certain extant populations. For this reason, a lineage-based ([[cladistic]]) definition of ''H. sapiens'' has been suggested, in which ''H. sapiens'' would by definition refer to the modern human lineage following the split from the Neanderthal lineage. Such a cladistic definition would extend the age of ''H. sapiens'' to over 500,000 years.{{refn|group=note|Werdelin<ref>{{cite book|first1=Lars |last1=Werdelin |first2=William Joseph |last2=Sanders |title=Cenozoic Mammals of Africa |year=2010 |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=6c8lDQAAQBAJ&pg=PA517 |page=517 |publisher=Univ of California Press|isbn=978-0520257214 }}</ref> citing Lieberman et al.<ref>{{cite journal|first1=DE |last1=Lieberman |first2=BM |last2=McBratney |first3=G |last3=Krovitz |title=The evolution and development of cranial form in ''Homo sapiens'' |journal=PNAS |year=2002 |volume=99 |issue=3 |pages=1134–1139 |doi=10.1073/pnas.022440799|pmid=11805284 |pmc=122156 |bibcode=2002PNAS...99.1134L |doi-access=free }}</ref>}}

Estimates for the split between the Homo sapiens line and combined [[Neanderthal]]/[[Denisovan]] line range from between 503,000 and 565,000 years ago;<ref name="Hajdinjak2018">{{Cite journal|last1=Hajdinjak|first1=Mateja|last2=Fu|first2=Qiaomei|last3=Hübner|first3=Alexander|last4=Petr|first4=Martin|last5=Mafessoni|first5=Fabrizio|last6=Grote|first6=Steffi|last7=Skoglund|first7=Pontus|last8=Narasimham|first8=Vagheesh|last9=Rougier|first9=Hélène|last10=Crevecoeur|first10=Isabelle|last11=Semal|first11=Patrick|display-authors=4|date=2018-03-01|title=Reconstructing the genetic history of late Neanderthals|journal=[[Nature (journal)|Nature]]|volume=555|issue=7698|pages=652–656|bibcode=2018Natur.555..652H|doi=10.1038/nature26151|issn=1476-4687|pmc=6485383|pmid=29562232|first14=Jean-Jacques|last30=Pääbo|last27=Reich|first27=David|last28=Prüfer|first28=Kay|last29=Meyer|first29=Matthias|first31=Janet|first30=Svante|last31=Kelso|last26=Patterson|last14=Hublin|first13=Sahra|last13=Talamo|first12=Marie|last12=Soressi|first26=Nick|first25=Montgomery|last15=Gušić|last20=Posth|first15=Ivan|last16=Kućan|first16=Željko|last17=Rudan|last18=Golovanova|first18=Liubov V.|last19=Doronichev|first19=Vladimir B.|first20=Cosimo|last25=Slatkin|last21=Krause|first21=Johannes|last22=Korlević|first22=Petra|last23=Nagel|first23=Sarah|last24=Nickel|first24=Birgit|first17=Pavao}}</ref> between 550,000 and 765,000 years ago;<ref name="Meyer2016">{{Cite journal|last1=Meyer|first1=Matthias|last2=Arsuaga|first2=Juan-Luis|last3=de Filippo|first3=Cesare|last4=Nagel|first4=Sarah|last5=Aximu-Petri|first5=Ayinuer|last6=Nickel|first6=Birgit|last7=Martínez|first7=Ignacio|last8=Gracia|first8=Ana|last9=de Castro|first9=José María Bermúdez|last10=Carbonell|first10=Eudald|last11=Viola|first11=Bence|display-authors=4|date=2016-03-01|title=Nuclear DNA sequences from the Middle Pleistocene Sima de los Huesos hominins|journal=[[Nature (journal)|Nature]]|volume=531|issue=7595|pages=504–507|bibcode=2016Natur.531..504M|doi=10.1038/nature17405|issn=1476-4687|pmid=26976447|last14=Pääbo|first13=Kay|last13=Prüfer|first12=Janet|last12=Kelso|first14=Svante|s2cid=4467094}}</ref> and (based on rates of dental evolution) possibly more than 800,000 years ago.<ref name="Gómez-Robles2019">{{Cite journal|last=Gómez-Robles|first=Aida|date=2019-05-01|title=Dental evolutionary rates and its implications for the Neanderthal–modern human divergence|journal=[[Science Advances]]|volume=5|issue=5|pages=1268|bibcode=2019SciA....5.1268G|doi=10.1126/sciadv.aaw1268|issn=2375-2548|pmc=6520022|pmid=31106274}}</ref>

Extant human populations have historically been divided into [[Human subspecies|subspecies]], but since around the 1980s all extant groups have tended to be subsumed into a single species, ''H. sapiens'', avoiding division into subspecies altogether.{{refn|group=note|The history of claimed or proposed subspecies of ''H. sapiens'' is complicated and fraught with controversy. The only widely recognized archaic subspecies{{citation needed|date=February 2019}} is ''[[Homo sapiens idaltu|H. sapiens idaltu]]'' (2003). The name ''H. s. sapiens'' is due to [[Carl Linnaeus|Linnaeus]] ([[10th edition of Systema Naturae|1758]]), and refers by definition the subspecies of which Linnaeus himself is the type specimen. However, Linnaeus postulated four other extant subspecies, viz. ''H. s. afer'', ''H. s. americanus'',  ''H. s. asiaticus'' and ''H. s. ferus'' for Africans, Americans, Asians and [[Malay race|Malay]]. This classification remained in common usage until the mid 20th century, sometimes alongside ''H. s. tasmanianus'' for Australians. See, for example, Bailey, 1946;<ref>{{cite book|url= https://books.google.com/books?id=y3AxAAAAMAAJ |first=John Wendell |last=Bailey |title=The Mammals of Virginia |year=1946 |page=356}}</ref> Hall, 1946.<ref name=Hall>{{cite journal|last=Hall |first=E |year=1946 |title=Zoological Subspecies of Man at the Peace Table |journal=Journal of Mammalogy |volume=27 |issue=4 |pages=358–364 |doi=10.2307/1375342|jstor=1375342 |pmid=20247535 }}</ref> The division of extant human populations into taxonomic subspecies was gradually given up in the 1970s (for example, [[Grzimek's Animal Life Encyclopedia]]<ref>{{cite encyclopedia|url= https://books.google.com/books?id=ZHNMAQAAIAAJ |title=Grzimek's Animal Life Encyclopedia |volume=11 |page=55 |year=1970|isbn=978-0442784782 |last1=Grzimek |first1=Bernhard |publisher=Van Nostrand Reinhold Company }}</ref>).}}

Some sources show Neanderthals (''H. neanderthalensis'') as a subspecies (''H. sapiens neanderthalensis'').<ref name="HublinOrigin">{{cite journal |doi=10.1073/pnas.0904119106 |title=The origin of Neandertals |year=2009 |last1=Hublin |first1=J. J. |journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences |volume=106 |issue=38 |pages=16022–16027 |pmid=19805257 |jstor=40485013 |bibcode=2009PNAS..10616022H |pmc=2752594|doi-access=free }}</ref><ref name="HFMcN">{{Cite journal |title=Neanderthal taxonomy reconsidered: implications of 3D primate models of intra- and interspecific differences |pmid=14745010 |last1=Harvati |first1=K. |last2=Frost |first2=S.R. |last3=McNulty |first3=K.P. |date=2004 |doi=10.1073/pnas.0308085100 |pmc=337021 |volume=101 |issue=5 |journal=Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. |pages=1147–1152|bibcode=2004PNAS..101.1147H |doi-access=free }}</ref> Similarly, the discovered specimens of the ''[[Homo rhodesiensis|H. rhodesiensis]]'' species have been classified by some as a subspecies (''H. sapiens rhodesiensis''), although it remains more common to treat these last two as separate species within the genus ''Homo'' rather than as subspecies within ''H. sapiens''.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |title= ''Homo neanderthalensis'' King, 1864|encyclopedia= Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Human Evolution|year= 2013 |publisher= Wiley-Blackwell |location= Chichester, West Sussex|pages=328–331}}</ref>

All humans are considered to be a part of the subspecies ''[[Homo sapiens sapiens|H. sapiens sapiens]]'',<ref name="britannica-H.-sapiens-sapiens">{{Cite web|last=Rafferty|first=John P.|title=Homo sapiens sapiens|url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/Homo-sapiens-sapiens|access-date=2020-08-11|website=Encyclopedia Britannica|language=en}}</ref> a designation which has been a matter of debate since a species is usually not given a subspecies category unless there is evidence of multiple distinct subspecies.<ref name="britannica-H.-sapiens-sapiens" />