Louis S.B. Leakey, alongside co-authors Phillip Tobias and John Napier, published the first paper on H. habilis in Nature in 1964. That work addressed three key elements to meet the definition of Homo ...

And what a skull it is. It suggests that the earliest known members of the Homo genus (H. habilis, H. rudolfensis and H. erectus) may not have been distinct, coexisting species, at all.

Meet the digital handy man. This is a reconstruction of the skull of one of the first known members of the human genus, Homo habilis, which means “handy man”, from about 1.8 million years ago.

Skull 5, which comes from an ancient human ancestor found in Dmanisi,Georgia, implies that all Homo species were once one It was thought that different characteristics among the Homo fossils ...

Skull 5 provides the first evidence of how the face and jawbone of the full-grown early Homo was “oriented and positioned relative to the braincase,” according to the study.

In 2000 Leakey found an old H. erectus complete skull within walking distance of an upper jaw of the H. habilis, and both dated from the same general time period.

But the Homo erectus skull, dating back 1.55 million years, was slightly older than the Homo habilis jawbone, which was found to be 1.44 million years old, the scientists said.

Delve into whether Homo habilis should be classified as a human species or more appropriately placed within the Australopithecines. Join us as we explore these fascinating questions, supported by ...

Phillip V. Tobias, The species Homo habilis: example of a premature discovery, Annales Zoologici Fennici, Vol. 28, No. 3/4, Björn Kurtén — a memorial volume (1991), pp. 371-380 ...

Anatomically speaking, it was also relatively similar to H. habilis, although fossil evidence shows the species had a notably bigger skull. This similarity has led to debates among ...