Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T21:37:48.043Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Preface by the authors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2016

Ivan Norscia
Affiliation:
Università degli Studi, Pisa
Elisabetta Palagi
Affiliation:
Università degli Studi, Pisa
Get access

Summary

Diversity organises unity which organises

Edgar Morin, 1977

Theoretical discussion and debate are open on which part of social behaviour is really exclusive of Homo sapiens and other apes, and what, instead, is rooted in the common ground of primate origins. Since the time of our common ancestors, lemurs have been following their own evolutionary pathway to become ‘modern primates’. This process, enhanced by Madagascar's isolation from the rest of the world, which started about eighty million years ago, has led lemurs to possess a puzzling combination of features, such as a small brain and communication highly based on smell combined with biological peculiarities, such as female dominance, lack of sexual dimorphism and strict seasonal breeding. On the other hand, group-living lemurs share basic features with social monkeys and apes such as cohesive multimale-multifemale societies, female philopatry and individual recognition. Lemurs are the ideal model to shed light on the ‘primate behavioural potential’ in terms of conflict management, communication strategies and society building, and on how much these crucial aspects of social living are similar to or different from those found in monkeys, apes and humans. Part of the perceived gap between strepsirrhines and haplorrhines – also mentioned by Alison Jolly and Ian Tattersall in their foreword – probably lies in the divergent research methodologies applied to these two groups. The aim of this book is to review and expand upon the newest fields of research in lemur behavioural biology, including recent analytical approaches that, so far, have been restricted to haplorrhines.

Breaking the wall

Are lemurs primates? This question may sound rhetorical, but unfortunately the answer (yes, they are) cannot be taken for granted.

The idea for this book came to our minds after a few influential Italian anthropologists had questioned the relevance of lemur behavioural studies to the anthropological domain and, therefore, to the understanding of the evolution of human behaviour. Monkeys were discriminated against as well, because – according to these scholars – they did not fit in the discipline, unless direct comparisons with humans were drawn. While the significance of lemurs and monkeys to human evolution was debated (and no consensus reached), apes were automatically included in the anthropological domain, thankfully. Of course the discrimination of strepsirrhines and monkeys was instrumental in favouring other research strains.

Type
Chapter
Information
The Missing Lemur Link
An Ancestral Step in the Evolution of Human Behaviour
, pp. xviii - xxxi
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Beard, K. C. (1988). The phylogenetic significance of strepsirhinism in Paleogene primates. International Journal of Primatology, 9, 83–95/96.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. R. (1859). On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. London: John Murray.
de Waal, F. B. & Ferrari, P. F. (2010). Towards a bottom-up perspective on animal and human cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14, 201–207.Google Scholar
Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, E. (1796). Mammifères. Memoire sur les rapports naturels des makis Lemur, L. et Description d'une espèce nouvelle de Mammifère. Magazin Encyclopédique, 1, 20–50.Google Scholar
Haeckel, E. (1883). The History of Creation: or the Development of the Earth and its Inhabitants by the Action of Natural Causes, 3rd ed. translated by Lankester, E. R.. London: Kegan Paul, Trench and Co.
Hofer, H. O. (1977). The anatomical relations of the ductus vomeronasalis and the occurrence of taste buds in the papilla palatina of Nycticebus coucang (Primates, Prosimiae) with remarks on strepsirrhinism. Gegenbaurs Morphologisches Jahrbuch, 123, 836–856.Google Scholar
Hübrecht, A. A. W. (1908). Early ontogenetic phenomena in mammals and their bearing on our interpretation of the phylogeny of vertebrates. Quarterly Journal of Microscopic Science, 53, 1–181.Google Scholar
Jolly, A. (1985). The Evolution of Primate Behavior, 2nd edition. New York: Macmillan.
Jolly, A. (2001). Lucy's Legacy: sex and intelligence in human evolution. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Illiger, C. (1811). Prodromus Systematis Mammalium et Avium. Berlin: Sumptibus C. Salfeld.
Luckett, W. P. (1976). Cladistic relationships among primate higher categories: evidence of the fetal membranes and placenta. Folia Primatologica, 25, 245–276.Google Scholar
Martin, R. D. (1990). Primate Origins and Evolution: a Phylogenetic Reconstruction. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Morin, E. (1977). La Methode. 1. La Nature de la nature. Paris: Seuil.
Morin, E. (1990). Introduction à la pensée complexe (Vol. 96). Paris: Esf.
Reng, R. (1977). Die Placenta von Microcebus murinus Miller. Zeitschrift für Säugetierkunde, 42, 201–214.Google Scholar
Rosenberger, A. L. & Strasser, E. (1985). Toothcomb origins: support for the grooming hypothesis. Primates, 26, 73–84.Google Scholar
Rosenberger, A. L. & Szalay, F. S. (1980). On the tarsiiform origins of Anthropoidea. In: Ciochon, R. L. & Chiarelli, A. B., Evolutionary Biology of the New World Monkeys and Continental Drift. New York: Plenum Press.
Simpson, G. G. (1945). The principles of classification and a classification of the mammals. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 85, 1–350.Google Scholar
Simpson, G. G. (1961). Principles of Animal Taxonomy. New York: Columbia University Press.
Tattersall, I. (1982). The Primates of Madagascar. New York: Columbia University Press.
Tattersall, I. (2003). The Monkey in the Mirror: Essays on the Science of What Makes Us Human. Harvest Books.
Van Valen, L. (1969). The classification of the primates. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 30, 295–296.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×