David Lordkipanidze is Head of the Geology and Palaeontology Department of the State Museum of the Republic of Georgia and one of the people responsible for the archaeological excavations in Dmanisi, which became famous throughout the world as a result of the discovery of the oldest human fossil remains in Europe, estimated to be 1.7 million years old. The discovery, which was published in Science on 12 May 2000, broke many of the firm tenets of the scientific community, such as the idea that the Homo genus had left the African continent much later after acquiring more complex technology than that found in Dmanisi. As the son of a world-renowned Georgian archaeologist, Lordkipanidze has been attracted to excavations since he was a young boy. He believes that human evolution is an attractive subject for everyone because it provides new data on human origins and helps satisfy the curiosity inherent to the human species.

Question: The Dmanisi discoveries stirred up a lot of controversy. Why is it so difficult for the scientific community to change its preconceived notions?
Answer: Actually, the remains that were found completely invalidated the date of when the first humans had left Africa and that alone caused more than a flurry of controversy. First we found a human mandible in 1991, which led to considerable debate because the results of dating indicated that it was 1.7 million years old and it was hard to accept the possibility that there were human beings outside Africa at that time. However, I always say that the cranium was created by God, whereas the mandible was created by the Devil because it is much less diagnostic when it comes to specifying a date. Finally, in 1999 we discovered two craniums of the same age as the mandible that had many similarities with the specimens of Homo ergaster identified in Eastern Africa and other specimens prior to Homo erectus, which were believed to be the first species to leave Africa. And we were also lucky at Dmanisi because we not only found human fossils, but also lithic tools and remains of fauna that coincided with the analysis of the sediments they contained and supported the theory that they were the first European settlers.

Q: Why did primitive humans abandon the Africa continent?
A: This is a very controversial theory and a highly speculative one. I believe it is due to a number of factors, such as anatomical features and the ecological characteristics of the area, but the most important question is when it happened. The Dmanisi remains prove that there was at least one wave of migration 1.7 million years ago and that date coincides with anatomical changes in the human body, as well as palaeoclimatic changes that took place at the same time. What I mean is that the territory became more extensive and humans took over new ecological niches. The human body also seems to have increased spectacularly, along with cranial capacity, and a bigger brain needs more fuel, which could explain why primitive man became a carnivore, another factor that facilitated expansion into other physical spaces.

Q: What were these humans from Dmanisi like?
A: They were about one and a half meters tall and were less developed than Homo erectus. But more importantly, the lithic tools found at the same excavation site prove that their technology was very primitive, Oldowayan, just like African populations. They made simple tools that only required a few operations - between one and five - to be made, whereas the tools made using the Acheulian technology of Homo erectus demonstrate a familiarity with the concept of symmetry and are much more sophisticated and complicated to produce because they require between 20 and 25 operations.

Q: How did these first European settlers evolve?
A: That's a complicated question. There are many gaps in time between Dmanisi and Atapuerca, where the most developed human fossils have been found, but I believe that these lacunae will be filled in by new findings. We can speculate as to whether there were many migrations or local changes, but what is clear is that there were different waves of migration from Africa to Europe and back, at least to the Near East. However, we have very little information and in a way that's good because if we solve all the problems, we palaeoanthropologists will be out of a job.

Q: Why does it seem that the world of palaeoanthropology has so many stars and controversies?
A: That is more a question of media hype than reality because in the end what counts is what is published in specialized journals. What I have noticed is that human evolution is becoming more popular. Science ranked the Dmanisi remains the third-most important discovery of the year. Prehistory is also becoming more and more interdisciplinary. It is becoming a science in which it is difficult to determine where geology ends and palaeontology begins, and that's a good thing, especially for young researchers, because they have the chance to learn much more.