Product Description

Why are we the only members of the ape family who are hairless, walk upright, shed tears and communicate by a verbal language? Why are human babies plump, when the infants of other apes are skinny? Why is our sexual behaviour different? In the first full discussion of a theory propounded by the late Sir Alister Hardy, Elaine Morgan points to the dramatic similarities between ourselves and the aquatic mammals - whales, dolphins, seals, sea otters - and argues that the only theory of evolution which explains these satisfactorily is that we, alone among the primates, have returned to life on land after a period of adaptation to an aquatic environment. We were once aquatic apes.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #122845 in Books
• Published on: 1999-09-09
• Original language: English
• Binding: Paperback
• 208 pages

Margaret Drabble
"Controversial but highly attractive claims about human evolution
and our human love of water and the sea."

'Sunday Telegraph'
"More scientific than Genesis, more up to date than Darwin, more
fun than Ardrey... she writes better than Desmond Morris."

'The Observer'
"It was one of the most outrageous, improbable evolutionary ideas
ever proposed... now the idea... is becoming respectable."

Customer Reviews

this book ought to be on the syllabus in every school
Elaine Morgan presents in a highly readable form, a convincing collection of evidence showing that human beings went through a semi-aquatic phase in the course of our evolution and that this is what made us so different to other primates. For some reason I am unable to understand, the scientific establishment still rejects this hypothesis. The original idea, which I first heard about in 1972 at university, when studying biology, was that of Alistair Hardy, but he never attempted to publicise it, possibly for fear of damaging his reputation. Ms Morgan clearly has no such fears not being a professional scientist, and I trust her all the more for that. The evidence she presents - such as our relative hairlessness, our subcutaneous fat distribution and our 'diving reflex' - are simple observable facts for which no other explanation has yet been offered. I should be delighted to enter into correspondence with anyone who can explain to me what is so 'unscientific' about the aquatic ape hypothesis, or indeed with the author or any of her fans. I believe that this theory provides a poetic key to increasing our sense of connection to this poor battered planet, especially with the oceans which we treat so carelessly still. READ THIS BOOK!

A not-very-impartial review.
Elaine wrote this book to update the theory with the latest findings, and to answer many of the criticisms levelled at the hypothesis.

I, personally, think she did a good job. It's her most professionally laid out work to date. It's the best book on the topic that I know of. But then, I would say that - I'm her grandson :-)

I was reading her books back when I was eight and younger, and finding them fascinating reading even then. If you don't buy, then I can recommend them as good books to get from a library, too. At the very least, they'll make you think.

What's it about? The hypothesis that the differences in human bodies from those of the apes can be explained by our spending some time in the water after the split from the apes. This may even have caused the split.

Why is it better than her other books (The Descent of Woman, The Aquatic Ape, Scars of Evolution, The Descent of the Child)? It is more up-to-date and well-referenced.

Challenging and informative, highly readable
Elaine Morgan presents her arguements on the aquatic ape hypothesis (AAH), viz the idea that human anscestors went through a semiaquatic phase during their evolution, and that this explains many features that are unique to humans amongst primates.

A very easy to read book, which presents a copious quanity of evidence and arguements to support her case. It seems to me, having read this book, that the AAH gives a more coherent explanation of human physiological features than the alternative theories. The author does however spoil her case somewhat by trying to fit every single detail of the human anatomy into the straightjacket of her theory e.g. are we really expected to believe that humans can curl their upper lip (uniquely amongst primates) as this allows us to cover our nostrils when swimming?