a river stone, which looks like a humanoid head, was found at an Australopithecus living site. this was not an artifact, but a natural object. however, it must have been carried a considerable way. this is the earliest known example of 'found art', and shows that these early hominids had some aesthetic sensibilities.
hell no are you kidding me
No, they are far too early
Australopithecus didn't wear any clothes
There is no direct evidence to suggest that Australopithecus, an early ancestor of humans, created art. The earliest known art forms are generally attributed to Homo sapiens, specifically to the Upper Paleolithic period. While Australopithecus did have some capacity for symbolic thought, it is unlikely that they engaged in complex artistic expression as seen in later human species.
There is no evidence of Australopithecus fabricating ANYTHING. They did not make tools, they did not make containers, they did not make clothes. They wore nothing contrived.
balls
Australopithecus didn't wear any clothes
Australopithecus did not wear any clothes. If they did, they would only have animal skin draped over their shoulders.
Australopithecus according to my socials textbook existed from 4 million to 1.2 million million years ago. I'm not sure about Australopithecus anamenis
They did not make any tools.
they did a burial
Australopithecus is a latin name.Australopithecus literally means "southern ape". "Austral" southern or South from Latin and "pithecus" from "pithēkos" meaning "ape" in greek. The name now applies to many different species besides africanus including Australopithecus anamensis, Australopithecus afarensis, Australopithecus garhi, Australopithecus boisei, Australopithecus robustus and Australopithecus sediba.