The prevailing theory about Homo floresiensis (the Hobbit) is Island Dwarfism—the idea that a population of Homo erectus arrived on Flores and gradually shrank over hundreds of thousands of years to conserve energy.
However, based on the recent findings at Mata Menge regarding that 700,000-year-old humerus fragment, we now know they were already tiny (around 100 cm) much earlier than we thought. In fact, they were actually smaller than the later specimens found at Liang Bua which were about 106 cm. I want to propose a different hypothesis: The Founder Mutation and Social Exclusion Theory.
What if they didn't shrink on the island? What if they were already Hobbits before they even arrived?
My points:
1.Pre-existing Genetic Mutation: A dominant genetic mutation like Laron Syndrome or Achondroplasia appeared within a population of Homo erectus in mainland Asia or Java.
2.Social Exclusion: In a society of 170cm-tall Homo erectus, individuals with this mutation might have been marginalized or excluded. This outcast group was forced to move to marginal environments, eventually ending up on the coast and crossing the sea to Flores.
3.The Island of Dwarfs: Instead of the island making them small, Flores acted as a sanctuary. On the mainland, their size was a disadvantage, but on an island with limited resources, being small became a massive survival advantage.
4.Reverse Growth Trend: The data shows they went from 100 cm at Mata Menge to 106 cm at Liang Bua. If Island Dwarfism was the driver, they should have kept shrinking. The fact they got slightly larger suggests that once they mastered their environment, their biology began to optimize.
Basically, Flores wasn't a shrinking machine—it was a refuge for a group that was already different. They didn't lose their height; they gained a kingdom where being small was a superpower.
What do you guys think? Does this "Outcast" model fit the timeline better than gradual dwarfism?