# Orce Man

> Mediated Wiki article. Canonical URL: https://mediated.wiki/source/Orce_Man
> Markdown URL: https://mediated.wiki/source/Orce_Man.md
> Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orce_Man
> Source revision: 1353269824
> License: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/)

This article is about the cranial fragment which was once interpreted as belonging to "Orce Man", a putative early human. For the tooth associated with the so-called "child of Orce", see [Barranco León](/source/Barranco_Le%C3%B3n).

The **Orce Man**, **Orce Donkey**, or **Venta Micena fossil** is a [fossil](/source/Fossil) [cranium](/source/Cranium) fragment that was historically considered an infantile early [European](/source/Europe) member of *[Homo](/source/Homo)*. However, later research suggested that the remains actually belonged to the equine species *[Equus altidens](/source/Equus_altidens)*.[1][2]

## History

The specimen was discovered by Josep Gibert in 1982[3]-1983 at [Venta Micena](/source/Venta_Micena), one of several paleo-archaeological sites in the municipality of [Orce](/source/Orce), [Granada](/source/Province_of_Granada), Spain.[4] It was labelled hominid 2 or VM-0 after being freed from sediment by Gibert, Jordi Agustí, and Salvador Moyà-Solà. This team was young and established experts in various fields except [paleoanthropology](/source/Paleoanthropology), and took the fragment to [Barcelona](/source/Province_of_Barcelona), which funded the [Sabadell Institute of Paleontology](/source/Sabadell_Institute_of_Paleontology) and thus their research. They enlisted the [paleontologists](/source/Paleontology) Rafael Adrover, Pierre Mein, and Peter Andrews for [taxonomic](/source/Taxonomy) identification, and they agreed that the specimen was [human](/source/Human).

At this time, the [endocast](/source/Endocast) of the [vault](/source/Cranial_vault) remained attached to rock, but Gibert's team insisted that the portion cleaned was enough to publish it in May 1983 as the oldest human in Europe, sending it to the [Granada](/source/Granada) press. This sparked scientific interest in [Gibraltar](/source/Gibraltar) as the entrance point into Europe. During another excavation of the same year, they invited [Marie-Antoinette](/source/Marie-Antoinette_de_Lumley) and [Henry de Lumley](/source/Henry_de_Lumley) to study it, suggesting a [hominin](/source/Hominini) identity. The team became very prestigous, planning several [lectures](/source/Lecture) and a [book](/source/Book) on the find, as well as writing articles. Marie-Antoinette de Lumley's conclusions influenced Agustí and Moyà-Solà, but not Gibert.[1]

### Criticism and media frenzy

From October 1983 through April 1984, further preparations revealed a ridge in the endocast of the upper squame on the [occipital](/source/Occipital),[1] which when presented to M.-A. de Lumley again, she became convinced that it was a juvenile *[Equus](/source/Equus_(genus))*. The new opinion racked up eleven articles published in [El País](/source/El_Pa%C3%ADs) in the four days following the controversy, as well as opinion pieces and even cartoons. Gibert's refusal soon became a matter of [politics](/source/Politics), between "expert" [French](/source/France) paleontologists and overcoming [colonialism](/source/Colonialism) in Spain. Among those who criticized Gibert were Miquel de Renzi, Jaume de Porta, and Jaume Truyols, three [professors](/source/Professor) who thought Gibert's work was reckless and not properly tested. Allegedly, these comments were very damaging to his reputation, possibly leading to demotions and inability to excavate.

Gibert formed a team to prove their classification as *[Homo](/source/Homo)*, including Agustí, Moyà-Solà and faunal expert Bienvenido Martínez (who had earned a PhD from Gibert) among many others. In total, they wrote 138 publications, including 12 in impact journals in an attempt to circulate his ideas and credibility. He also attended a [conference](/source/Conference) and was met with little backlash, but M.-A. de Lumley attended a separate conference and criticized his work without his presence. Agustí and Moyà-Solà published an article accepting *Equus* as the identification. In 1995, a conference hosted by Gibert agreed with his findings, leading to a brief period of acceptance followed by statements by [José María Bermúdez de Castro](/source/Jos%C3%A9_Mar%C3%ADa_Berm%C3%BAdez_de_Castro) and [Eudald Carbonell](/source/Eudald_Carbonell) of [Atapuerca](/source/Archaeological_site_of_Atapuerca) suggesting that he is not scientifically rigorous.

Baruzzi (2013) note that during this controversy, Gibert maintained an eccentric and unorthodox attitude heading a paradigm shift in [human evolution](/source/Human_evolution) as a sort of revolutionary. Gibert's team broke again, with former members affirming taxonomic allocation to *Equus* and excavating the site. However, a directorial resignation from the Institute and newfound discussion over the specimen led to excavations being halted.[1]

### Aftermath

Baruzzi suggests that politicians involved in such a media [scandal](/source/Scandal) were influenced by the media and were given the power to influence scientific research. As well, Gibert held considerable power in [Orce](/source/Orce) as 'adoptive son of the town' and namesake of the local museum, formerly called the [Orce Museum](/source/Josep_Gibert_Museum). Since he was considered prestigious locally, Baruzzi suggests that the Orce Man scandal was an attempt to sully his image, and that the media frenzy lessened in 1999. Gibert spent the remainder of his life defending his taxonomic classification of the fragment until his death in 2007 due to lymphatic cancer. Campillo (2006) discovered the skull of a [Roman](/source/Ancient_Rome) girl and Gibert noted *[Homo erectus](/source/Homo_erectus)* sporting a similar crest. Discussion through media was also newfound, making science easier to engage with and quicker for scientists and the public.[1] Sanchez (2012/2013) used the informal name "Homo orcensis" for VM-0 in a photo caption.

## Description

Baruzzi identifies multiple causes for concern in identification of the skull. First is the crest along the [occiput](/source/Occiput), which is expected in *Equus* and the exception in *Homo*. Though it is rarely within variation for *Homo*, the occipital variability is exceedingly large. As well, the coronal suture is seen in the interior but not on the exterior, as it was abraded. This is [equine](/source/Equinae) in nature, but Gibert and colleagues suggest that it is not a natural anatomical feature, but rather a posthumous [fracture](/source/Bone_fracture). Digital impressions, like the ridge, are typical of equines but not adult [humans](/source/Human), which VM-0 is suggested not to be. A transverse and longitudinal curvature is typical of infant humans, [horses](/source/Horse) and [rhinos](/source/Rhinoceros), or as Agustí proposes, [taphonomic](/source/Taphonomy) deformation. These features, as well as a minute data pool, caused for great controversy.[1]

Gibert *et al.* (1989) note that comparison with [carnivores](/source/Carnivora) is impossible due to a prominent [sagittal](/source/Sagittal_crest) and occipito-transverse crest and defined differences from bears (i.e. suture straightness, closure, impression pronouncement, thickness). They suggested affiliation with *Homo erectus* [KNM ER 3733](/source/KNM_ER_3733) and [3883](/source/KNM_ER_3883), with dissimilarities to *[Homo habilis](/source/Homo_habilis)*, [Arago](/source/Tautavel_Man), [Swanscombe](/source/Swanscombe_Heritage_Park), [Broken Hill](/source/Kabwe_1), and [Petralona](/source/Petralona_skull). They found similarity with human [children](/source/Children) and some likeness to the [Sangiran](/source/Sangiran) hominins, but not those at [Zhoukoudian](/source/Peking_Man).[5]

Moyà-Solà and Köhler (1997) suggest that many of Gibert and team's observations are challengeable, most prominently the interpretation of the sutures. They suggest that it is *[Equus altidens](/source/Equus_altidens)* based on how common fossils of this species are at Venta Micena. Additionally, they call for scientists to consider that it is more likely that it is an ordinary equine than a hominin exhibiting rare morphological combinations and [pathologies](/source/Pathology), and that it is flawed "wishful thinking" otherwise.[2]

## Subsequent discoveries

Hominin occupation at Orce is generally uncontested because genuine evidence has come to light since the discovery of cranial fragment VM-0.

### BL02-J54-100

A lower left first [deciduous](/source/Deciduous_teeth) molar with a worn occlusal surface and resorption in the roots suggesting [antemortem](/source/Antemortem) shedding, catalogued as BL02-J54-100, was described by Toro-Moyano *et al.* (2013) and found to be 1.4 million years old. A defined mesial marginal ridge is elongated by a vestigial [paraconid](/source/Paraconid) and separates from the [metaconid](/source/Metaconid) by a deep, V-shaped groove, opening in the direction of the lingual face. This is seen in *[Australopithecus](/source/Australopithecus)* and *Homo*, especially human specimens [KNM-ER 820](/source/KNM-ER_820), [KNM-ER 1507](/source/KNM-ER_1507), and Zhoukoudian, but absent in *[Paranthropus](/source/Paranthropus)*. It is a confirmed specimen of *Homo* due to a [tuberculum molare](/source/Tuberculum_molare), relative expansion of the mesial cusps and mesial marginal ridge, and the larger and misplaced [protoconid](/source/Protoconid). Some similarity with [Gran Dolina](/source/Gran_Dolina), Arago, [Barranco León](/source/Barranco_Le%C3%B3n) and certain [Neanderthals](/source/Neanderthal) is observed, so no taxonomic identification is given.[6]

### Barranco León artifacts

[Oldowan](/source/Oldowan) tools, 1244 (26 [cores](/source/Lithic_core), 185 whole [flakes](/source/Lithic_flake), 78 flake fragments, 759 debris, 17 [retouched](/source/Lithic_reduction), 92 angular fragments, 12 various modified [cobbles](/source/Cobblestone), and 75 unmodified cobbles), were reported from the 1.4 mya-old Barranco León site in 2013. these tools were produced with [flint](/source/Flint), [quartzite](/source/Quartzite), and [limestone](/source/Limestone), and most raw material was probably originated from [Jurassic](/source/Jurassic) deposited 3 kilometers south of the site or secondary [alluvial](/source/Alluvium)/[colluvial](/source/Colluvium) deposits near the site. They [knapped](/source/Knapping) using hard-hammer percussion and direct unipolar and bipolar techniques, coordinated with the texture and quality of the rock. They seem to have prioritized small flakes for immediate use in cutting large [carcasses](/source/Carrion). Striations and polishes are similar to [Olduvai](/source/Olduvai_Gorge), [Koobi Fora](/source/Koobi_Fora), and [Monte Poggiolo](/source/Monte_Poggiolo), which indicates use on a variety of materials. Spiral or helical fractures, impact points, flake scars, and bone flakes were discovered on [megafaunal](/source/Megafauna) remains and are associated with the tools.[6]

## See also

- [Barranco León](/source/Barranco_Le%C3%B3n) (hominins from Orce)
- [Dmanisi](/source/Dmanisi_hominins) (early European Homo)
- [Shangchen](/source/Shangchen) (first European *Homo*)
- [Human evolution](/source/Human_evolution)

## References

1. Gibert, J.; Ribot, F.; Ferrandez, C.; Martinez, B.; Caporicci, R.; Campillo, D. (1989). ["Anatomical study: comparison of the cranial fragment from venta micena, (orce; Spain) with fossil and extant mammals"](http://link.springer.com/10.1007/BF02437268). *Human Evolution*. **4** (4): 283–305. [doi:10.1007/BF02437268](https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02437268). [ISSN 0393-9375](https://www.worldcat.org/issn/0393-9375). [S2CID 85197873](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:85197873)

1. Moyà-Solà, Salvador & Köhler, Meike (1997). ["The Orce skull: anatomy of a mistake"](https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0047248497901214). *Journal of Human Evolution*. **33** (1): 91–97. [Bibcode:1997JHumE..33...91M](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997JHumE..33...91M). [doi:10.1006/jhev.1997.0121](https://doi.org/10.1006/jhev.1997.0121). [PMID 9236079](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9236079)

1. Carandell Baruzzi, Miquel (2013). ["Homínidos, dudas y grandes titulares: la controversia del Hombre de Orce en la prensa española (1983-2007)"](https://scielo.isciii.es/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&pid=S0211-95362013000200005&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es). *Dynamis*. **33** (2): 365–387. [doi:10.4321/S0211-95362013000200005](https://doi.org/10.4321/S0211-95362013000200005). [hdl:10481/75571](https://hdl.handle.net/10481/75571). [ISSN 0211-9536](https://www.worldcat.org/issn/0211-9536)

1. ["Orce archaeopalaeontological sites"](https://www.andalucia.org/en/orce-cultural-tourism-orce-archaeopalaeontological-sites). Retrieved 25 April 2024.

1. Gibert, J.; Ribot, F.; Ferrandez, C.; Martinez, B.; Caporicci, R.; Campillo, D. (1989). ["Anatomical study: comparison of the cranial fragment from venta micena, (orce; Spain) with fossil and extant mammals"](http://link.springer.com/10.1007/BF02437268). *Human Evolution*. **4** (4): 283–305. [doi:10.1007/BF02437268](https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02437268). [ISSN 0393-9375](https://www.worldcat.org/issn/0393-9375). [S2CID 85197873](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:85197873)

1. Toro-Moyano, Isidro; Martínez-Navarro, Bienvenido; Agustí, Jordi; Souday, Caroline; Bermúdez de Castro, José María; Martinón-Torres, María; Fajardo, Beatriz; Duval, Mathieu; Falguères, Christophe; Oms, Oriol; Parés, Josep Maria; Anadón, Pere; Julià, Ramón; García-Aguilar, José Manuel; Moigne, Anne-Marie (2013). ["The oldest human fossil in Europe, from Orce (Spain)"](https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0047248413000304). *Journal of Human Evolution*. **65** (1): 1–9. [Bibcode:2013JHumE..65....1T](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013JHumE..65....1T). [doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2013.01.012](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2013.01.012). [hdl:10072/338463](https://hdl.handle.net/10072/338463). [PMID 23481345](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23481345)

---
Adapted from the Wikipedia article [Orce Man](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orce_Man) by Wikipedia contributors ([contributor history](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orce_Man?action=history)). Available under [Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/). Changes may have been made.