This was really interesting to learn about, and I was especially thrilled to find out that Hobbits, in one way, shape, or form, actually existed. But as I learned more about them, my interest switched from one of just being a geek to one of curiosity: who were they and how did they fit into our timeline?

The study of H. floresiensis greatly affected the human timeline, it creates almost like a hiccup in it. This was discussed in the article “How a hobbit is rewriting the history of the human race,” so I’ll just give a quick recap. Before, the story went that A. africanus led to H. erectus which then spread before the emergence of H. sapiens 100 thousand years ago. Now, however, with the enigma H. floresiensis, we are led to believe that apemen were conquering the world way before H. sapiens did, that someone came first. To me, this is one of, if not, the biggest contributions to the study of human diversity – there is more to Homo, more to us, than originally thought. Our story takes a previously unaccounted for turn with the discovery of H. floresiensis, and with it we see a whole new segment of activity inserted into the fossil record. Along with this, we also see different paths being taken in terms of human evolution (though I’ll wait to discuss this in the next section). What’s also interesting and was mentioned in the “Hobbit” article, is that some researchers wanted to dismiss this species entirely, citing it as a deformed modern human, born from disease. But, really, can you dismiss an entire species? We have the skeletons and material evidence of them and they obviously played a role in human history, or at least the history of Homo. 

Then there is the fact that H. floresiensis plays around with the evolutionary timeline. Of course, due to their isolation and access to different resources, H. floresiensis has different traits, such as being around three feet tall. However, what is interesting is that they have a smaller brain than H. erectus, who they are believed to have evolved from. One idea that scientists have used to explain this is “evolutionary dwarfism” which they’ve seen happen to other species who were isolated on other islands. But it’s interesting to think about such a large change between two groups where one evolved from the other. I also found the part about foot-to-thigh ratios interesting. Also, to draw a different comparison, if you look at H. floresiensis’ and compare it to a modern woman’s, they’re fairly similar. Hobbits have a 70% ratio and women average at about 55% (according to the same “Hobbit” article). Although this is about the only physical similarity we share, it still makes you think about the contact between H. floresiensis and H. sapiens – perhaps there was less isolation than originally thought, maybe there was a meeting of the two species, as the article did mention that it was a possibility that H. sapiens led to the decline of H. floresiensis, so it’s possible that we still have more to learn.