ABSTRACT
Comparison of the Hadar and Laetolil postcranial material with other Plio-Pleistocene remains is hampered at this time by difficulties in associating cranial and postcranial material found at other sites. The debate illustrates the difficulties encountered when interpreting the East African collections in a framework devised for the South African fossil hominids. Although clearly hominid in their dentition, mandibles, cranium, and post-cranium, these forms retain hints of a still poorly known Miocene ancestor. With the demonstration of two evolving lineages in the early Pleistocene of eastern Africa, it is necessary to reassess the phylogenetic affinities of the South African fossil hominids. The South African gracile australopithecine group lacks elements in the suite of primitive characteristics described for the Hadar and Laetolil hominids. The interpretation of the South African gracile australopithecines is based on a consideration of the available sample characteristics for the fossil hominids.
