{{Short description|Illustration of human evolution}} {{Use dmy dates|date=April 2020}} {{Italic title}} [[File:The March of Progress.jpg|thumb|upright=1.2|The original '''''March of Progress''''' illustration from ''Early Man'' (1965) with spread extended (top) and folded (bottom)]] '''''The March of Progress''''',<ref name="Shelley 2001">{{cite journal |last=Shelley |first=Cameron |title=Aspects of visual argument: A study of the March of Progress |journal=Informal Logic |publisher=University of Windsor Leddy Library |volume=21 |issue=2 |date=1 January 2001 |issn=0824-2577 |doi=10.22329/il.v21i2.2239|doi-access=free }}</ref><ref name="Lubbock 2008"/><ref name="Feteris et al 2011"/> originally titled '''''The Road to Homo Sapiens''''', is an illustration that presents 25 million years of human evolution. It was created for the ''Early Man'' volume of the ''Life Nature Library'', published in 1965, and drawn by the artist Rudolph Zallinger. It has been widely parodied and imitated to create images of progress of other kinds.
==Illustration==
=== Context ===
The illustration is part of a section of text and images commissioned by Time-Life Books for the ''Early Man'' volume (1965) of the ''Life Nature Library'', by F. Clark Howell.<ref name=Howell1965>Howell, F. Clark and the Editors of Time-Life Books (1965), ''Early Man'', New York: TIME-LIFE Books, pp. 41–45.</ref>
The illustration is a foldout entitled "The Road to Homo Sapiens". It shows a sequence of figures, drawn by natural history painter and muralist Rudolph Zallinger (1919–1995).<ref name=Howell1965/> The 15 human evolutionary forebears are lined up as if they were marching in a parade from left to right. The first two sentences of the caption read "What were the stages of man's long march from apelike ancestors to ''sapiens''? Beginning at right and progressing across four more pages are milestones of primate and human evolution as scientists know them today, pieced together from the fragmentary fossil evidence."<ref name=Howell1965/>
=== Sequence of species ===
The 15 primate figures in Zallinger's image, from left to right, are listed below. The datings follow the original graphic and may no longer reflect current scientific opinion.
* ''Pliopithecus'', 22–12 million years old "ancestor of the gibbon line" * ''Proconsul'', 21–9 million years old primate which may or may not have qualified as an ape * ''Dryopithecus'', 15–8 million years old fossil ape, the first such found (1856) and probable ancestor of modern apes * ''Oreopithecus'', 15–8 million years old * ''Ramapithecus'', 13–8 million years old ape and possible ancestor of modern orangutans (now considered a female ''Sivapithecus'') * ''Australopithecus'', 2–3 million years old; then considered the earliest "certain hominid" * ''Paranthropus'', 1.8–0.8 million years old * Advanced ''Australopithecus'' (''Homo habilis)'', 1.8–0.7 million years old * ''Homo erectus'', 700,000–400,000 years old, then the earliest known member of the genus ''Homo'' * Early ''Homo sapiens'', 300,000–200,000 years old; from Swanscombe, Steinheim and Montmaurin, then considered probably the earliest ''H. sapiens'' * Solo Man, 100,000–50,000 years old; described as an extinct Asian "race" of ''H. sapiens'' (now considered a sub-species of ''H. erectus'') * Rhodesian Man, 50,000–30,000 years old; described as an extinct African "race" of ''H. sapiens'' (now considered either ''H. rhodesiensis'' or ''H. heidelbergensis'' and dated much earlier) * Neanderthal Man, 100,000–40,000 years old * Cro-Magnon Man, 40,000–5,000 years old * Modern Man, 40,000 years to the present
=== Intention ===
Contrary to appearances and some complaints, the original 1965 text of "The Road to Homo Sapiens" reveals an understanding of the fact that a linear presentation of a sequence of primate species, all in the direct line of human ancestors, would not be a correct interpretation. For example, the fourth of Zallinger's figures (''Oreopithecus'') is said to be "a likely side branch on man's family tree". Only the next figure (''Ramapithecus'') is described as "now thought by some experts to be the oldest of man's ancestors in a direct line" (something no longer considered likely). That implies that the first four primates are not to be considered actual human ancestors. Likewise, the seventh figure (''Paranthropus'') is said to be "an evolutionary dead end".<ref name=Howell1965/> In addition, the colored stripes, across the top of the figure, which indicate the age and duration of the various lineages clearly imply that there is no evidence of direct continuity between extinct and extant lineages and also, multiple lineages of the figured hominids occurred contemporaneously at several points in the history of the group.
==Reception== [[File:Astronomy Evolution 2 (27458655072).jpg|thumb|One of many versions of the progressionist meme: ''Astronomy Evolution 2'' by Giuseppe Donatiello, 2016]] thumb|Anti-war mural, Tehran, 2007
The image has frequently been copied, modified, and parodied.
It has also been criticized as "unintentionally and wrongly" implying that "evolution is progressive".<ref name="Tucker2012">{{cite news|last1=Tucker|first1=Jennifer|title=What our most famous evolutionary cartoon gets wrong|url=https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2012/10/27/what-our-most-famous-evolutionary-cartoon-gets-wrong/drKMD5121W6EUxXJ4pF0YL/story.html|accessdate=29 December 2017|work=The Boston Globe|date=28 October 2012}}</ref> The image has been described as having a "visual logic" of linear progression.<ref name="Shelley 2001"/> ''The Lancet'' called it "proverbial, much quoted or adapted, familiar to multitudes who have never seen its original version or heard of its maker".<ref name="Lubbock 2008">{{cite journal |last=Lubbock |first=Tom |title=Art and evolution |journal=The Lancet |volume=372 |year=2008 |issn=0140-6736 |doi=10.1016/s0140-6736(08)61876-0 |pages=S14–S20|s2cid=54266427 }}</ref> The image has become better-known than the science behind it.<ref name="Feteris et al 2011">{{cite book |chapter=Strategic maneuvering with visual arguments in political cartoons: A pragma-dialectical analysis of the use of ''topoi'' that are based on common cultural heritage |last1=Feteris |first1=Eveline T. |last2=Groarke |first2=Leo |last3=Plug |first3=Jose |editor1-first=Eveline T. |editor1-last=Feteris |editor2-first=Bart |editor2-last=Garssen |editor3-first=A. Francisca |editor3-last=Snoek Henkeamns |title=Keeping in Touch With Pragma-Dialectics: in Honor of Frans H. Van Eemeren |date=2011 |publisher=John Benjamins Publishing |pages=67–69 |isbn=978-9027211811 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=9OQz544uKeUC&pg=PA59}}</ref>
With regard to the way the illustration has been interpreted, the anthropologist and author of the section, F. Clark Howell, remarked:<ref name=Barringer2006/>
{{quote|The artist didn't intend to reduce the evolution of man to a linear sequence, but it was read that way by viewers. ... The graphic overwhelmed the text. It was so powerful and emotional.<ref name=Barringer2006>Barringer, David (2006) "Raining on Evolution’s Parade"; ''I.D. Magazine'', March/April 2006.</ref>}} Stephen Jay Gould (1941–2002) condemned the iconology of the image in several pages of his 1989 book, ''Wonderful Life'', reproducing several advertisements and political cartoons that make use of the illustration to make their various points. In a chapter, "The Iconography of an Expectation", he asserted that<ref name=Gould1989/> {{quote|The march of progress is ''the'' canonical representation of evolution – the one picture immediately grasped and viscerally understood by all. ... The straitjacket of linear advance goes beyond iconography to the definition of evolution: the word itself becomes a synonym for ''progress''. ... [But] life is a copiously branching bush, continually pruned by the grim reaper of extinction, not a ladder of predictable progress.<ref name=Gould1989>Gould, Stephen Jay (1989), ''Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History''. W.W. Norton & Company, pp 30–36.</ref>}} The intelligent design advocate Jonathan Wells wrote in ''Icons of Evolution: Science or Myth?'' (2002), "Although it is widely used to show that we are just animals, and that our very existence is a mere accident, the ultimate icon goes far beyond the evidence."<ref>{{cite book |last=Wells |first=Jonathan |title=Icons of Evolution: Science or Myth? |year=2000 |publisher=Regnery Publishing |page=211 }}</ref> The book likens a selection of evolution theory textbook topics to the cover illustration thus qualified.
[[File:Protestplakat S21 am Bauzaun - 89.jpg|thumb|A German protest banner against the Stuttgart 21 project, 2010. The caption below the image reads "We will not allow ourselves to be made into monkeys!"]]
Riley Black, writing for ''Scientific American'', argues that the idea of a "march of progress", as depicted in the 1965 Time-Life illustration, dates back to the medieval great chain of being and the 19th century idea of the "missing link" in the fossil record. In her view, to understand life and evolution, "step one involves casting out types of imagery which constrain rather than enlighten."<ref name="Switek2010">{{cite web |last1=Black |first1=Riley |title=Breaking our link to the 'March of Progress' |url=https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/breaking-our-link-to-the-march-of-progress/ |publisher=Scientific American |accessdate=23 May 2018 |date=3 December 2010}}</ref> Writing in ''Wired'', Black added that "There is perhaps no other illustration that is as immediately recognizable as representing evolution, but the tragedy of this is that it conveys a view of life that does not resemble our present understanding of life's history."<ref>{{cite web |last1=Black |first1=Riley |title=The March of Progress has Deep Roots |url=https://www.wired.com/2009/11/the-march-of-progress-has-deep-roots/ |publisher=Wired |accessdate=23 May 2018 |date=11 April 2009}}</ref>
==Parodies and adaptations==
The ''March of Progress'' has often been imitated, parodied, or adapted for commercial or political purposes.<ref name="Gould1989" /> The cover of the 1972 Doors album ''Full Circle'' references the ''March of Progress'', as does the 1985 Supertramp album ''Brother Where You Bound'', while the poster for the 1992 comedy film ''Encino Man'' shows an ape evolving into a skateboarder.<ref name="Barringer 2006, Op. cit.">Barringer (2006), ''Op. cit.''</ref> The December 2005 issue of ''The Economist'' depicts hominids progressing up a flight of stairs to transform into a woman in a black dress holding a glass of champagne to illustrate "The Story of Man".<ref>{{cite news |title=The Story of Man |url=https://www.economist.com/leaders/2005/12/20/the-story-of-man |newspaper=The Economist |access-date=23 May 2018 |date=20 December 2005}}</ref><!--This is NOT A LIST; more examples, specially uncited, are not needed-->
[[File:Huxley - Mans Place in Nature.jpg|thumb|upright=1.2|The frontispiece to Thomas Henry Huxley's 1863 ''Evidence as to Man's Place in Nature'']]
==Predecessors== {{further|Orthogenesis}}
Thomas Henry Huxley's frontispiece to his 1863 book ''Evidence as to Man's Place in Nature'' was intended simply to compare the skeletons of apes and humans, but its unintentional left-to-right progressionist sequence has according to the historian Jennifer Tucker "become an iconic and instantly recognizable visual shorthand for evolution".<ref name="Tucker2012"/>
An illustration, with the caption "Evolution", showing two sequences of four images, each illustrating a gradual transformation of an animal into a human, appeared in the 1889 edition<ref>[http://www.gutenberg.org/files/86/86-h/86-h.htm Project Gutenberg text], search for second appearance of the word "crusher." Title page image shows "New York: Charles L. Webster & Company. 1889.</ref> of Mark Twain's ''A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court''.
{{wide image|Connecticut yankee evolution.jpg|caption="Evolution" in Mark Twain's ''A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court'' (1889)|500px}}
==References== {{reflist}}
==External links== *{{Commonscatinline|March of Progress}}
{{Portal bar|Evolutionary biology|Paleontology|Science}}
Category:1965 works Category:Human evolution Category:Paleoart Category:Science in society Category:Science education Category:Infographics