Record · Prehistory · East Asia · 146,000 BC

Found in 1933, named in 2021, identified in 2025: the Harbin skull

Edited by LETTER · Researched and written with AI assistance, checked against the sources below · How we make it

Published 2026-09-28

Quick facts

When

1933 (reported discovery) · 2018 (donation to Hebei GEO University) · June 25, 2021 (naming published) · 2025 (protein and mitochondrial DNA studies)

Where

Harbin, Heilongjiang Province, northeastern China, near the Dongjiang Bridge over the Songhua River

Who

Ji Qiang and Xijun Ni (Hebei GEO University, naming authors); Qingfeng Shao (dating); Qiaomei Fu (Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Chinese Academy of Sciences); Chris Stringer (Natural History Museum, London)

Outcome

The cranium was named the holotype of a new species, Homo longi, in 2021 and dated to more than 146,000 years old. In 2025 mitochondrial DNA drawn from dental calculus placed it within Denisovan genetic variation.

1933: a bridge, a fossil, and decades out of sight

The cranium’s donation record, filed by Ji Qiang, Wensheng Wu, Yannan Ji, Qiang Li and Xijun Ni, states that “the specimen was donated to Hebei GEO University (HGU) in 2018,” with the repository listed as “the Geoscience Museum of HGU, Shijiazhuang, China.” Between the reported 1933 find near Dongjiang Bridge and that 2018 donation, the original naming paper offers no narrative beyond “a long and confused history.” A widely repeated account of a laborer who hid the skull in a well to keep it from Japanese occupation forces, and whose family retrieved and donated it decades later, comes from the glossary of the Center for Academic Research and Training in Anthropogeny (CARTA) at the University of California San Diego, not from the 2021 papers themselves.

2021: a new species, argued in three papers

Ji Qiang and Xijun Ni named the fossil in a paper stating that “the species name is derived from the geographic name Long Jiang, which is a common usage for the Heilongjiang Province and literally means ‘dragon river,’” registering it formally as “Homo longi sp. nov. Ji & Ni” with ZooBank number urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:B2179E99-5CDF-44DA-A1F1-A2BBAFB47185. Their description put “the endocranial capacity… estimated as approximately 1,420 ml, falling in the range of H. sapiens and Neanderthals,” with a face they called “extremely wide, with large and almost square orbits” and a “supraorbital torus wide, massively developed, and gently curved.” The same paper distinguished the fossil from two other Chinese Middle Pleistocene crania, Dali and Hualongdong, writing that those two “should be referred to H. daliensis” while “the Harbin cranium, on the other hand, shows clear diagnostic features differing from the Dali and Hualongdong crania.” A companion paper by Ni and coauthors placed the skull on a family tree with those same relatives, concluding that “the Harbin cranium and some other Middle Pleistocene human fossils from China, such as those from Dali and Xiahe, form a third East Asian lineage, which is a part of the sister group of the H. sapiens lineage.” Xiahe, a mandible from Gansu Province already identified as Denisovan through protein analysis, appears again in the naming paper itself, which noted “the sister-group relationship between the Harbin cranium and the Xiahe mandible” and allowed that “both specimens belong to H. longi sp. nov.”

146,000 years, measured on the bone itself

Shao Qingfeng’s dating team worked from two directions. Uranium-series measurements taken directly on the cranium gave the minimum age of 146,000 years quoted above. Separately, the team matched the fossil’s chemistry to sediment near its reported find site, reporting that “the sediments adhered in the nasal cavity of the Harbin cranium have a 87Sr/86Sr ratio of 0.711898, falling in the variation range measured in a core drilled near the Dongjiang Bridge.” Regional stratigraphy placed the likely source layer, the Upper Huangshan Formation, within a broader window of 138,000 to 309,000 years old by optically stimulated luminescence. The Natural History Museum in London later summarized the naming without disputing the age, stating that in 2021 “Chinese scientists along with Professor Chris Stringer identified this skull as belonging to a previously unknown human species, which they named Homo longi.”

2025: protein, then mitochondrial DNA, then Denisovan

The Chinese Academy of Sciences announced in 2025 that its researchers, working with Fu Qiaomei of the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology and Ji Qiang of Hebei GEO University, had recovered “over 308,000 peptide-spectrum matches” from the cranium, confirming “more than 20,000 peptides” and “95 endogenous proteins,” among them “three Denisovan-specific variants.” Fu, Ji and coauthors then reported in Cell that they had gone further, extracting genetic material where earlier attempts had failed: “although no DNA could be retrieved from a tooth or the petrous bone, mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) could be isolated from dental calculus.” Their result was specific. “The mtDNA falls within Denisovan mtDNA variation and is related to an mtDNA branch carried by early Denisovan individuals in southern Siberia, previously observed in Denisova Cave,” they wrote, adding that the finding “suggests that Denisovans inhabited a large geographical range in Asia in the Middle Pleistocene.” The Natural History Museum’s account of the same result described how “researchers extract[ed] fragments of DNA from hardened plaque on the teeth of the Harbin skull,” and that “comparison with the DNA from the known Denisovan fossils unearthed in Siberia confirmed that they were the same species.”

Two names on one fossil

The Natural History Museum page states both facts side by side: the cranium is the Homo longi holotype and, in the museum’s words, “represents one of the most complete skulls of Denisovans found to date.” Stringer, quoted on genetic diversity within the Denisovan population rather than on the naming dispute directly, told the museum that “the different patterns found in people’s genomes today suggest divergences of up to 400,000 years between these Denisovan groups.” The 2021 naming team had already flagged the possibility that its new species and the Denisovan lineage might turn out to be the same population, writing that the Xiahe mandible and the Harbin cranium could both belong to Homo longi and that “further human fossils from the Middle Pleistocene of China and neighboring areas will test this idea.”

Key facts

• Ni et al. (2021) reported the cranium, HBSM2018-000018(A), as reportedly found in 1933 during construction of the Dongjiang Bridge in Harbin and donated to Hebei GEO University in 2018.
• Shao et al. (2021) dated the cranium directly by uranium-series methods (n = 10) to older than 146,000 years, with regional stratigraphy giving a broader range of 138,000 to 309,000 years.
• Ji and Ni (2021) named the species Homo longi, derived from Long Jiang (“dragon river”), and registered it with ZooBank.
• Ji Qiang’s team estimated the cranium’s endocranial capacity at approximately 1,420 milliliters, within the range of Homo sapiens and Neanderthals.
• The 2021 naming paper classified the related Dali and Hualongdong crania as Homo daliensis, while assigning Harbin to the new species Homo longi alone.
• The Chinese Academy of Sciences reported in 2025 that protein analysis of the cranium found 95 endogenous proteins, including three Denisovan-specific variants.
• Fu Qiaomei and coauthors reported in Cell (2025) that mitochondrial DNA recovered from the cranium’s dental calculus fell within Denisovan mtDNA variation, matching an early Denisovan branch from southern Siberia.
• The Natural History Museum, London, describes the Harbin cranium as both the holotype of Homo longi and one of the most complete Denisovan skulls found to date.

FAQ

Is the Harbin cranium Homo longi or a Denisovan?

Both names remain applied to the same fossil. Ji Qiang and Xijun Ni named it Homo longi in 2021 based on its skeletal anatomy. In 2025, Fu Qiaomei and coauthors reported that mitochondrial DNA from its dental calculus matched Denisovan variation. The Natural History Museum lists it as both the Homo longi holotype and a Denisovan skull, and no paper reviewed here has proposed retiring either name.

How old is the Harbin cranium?

Shao Qingfeng and coauthors dated it directly by uranium-series methods to more than 146,000 years, with regional stratigraphy placing its likely source layer between 138,000 and 309,000 years old.

Where was the Harbin cranium found?

It was reportedly found in 1933 during construction of the Dongjiang Bridge over the Songhua River in Harbin, Heilongjiang Province, though the naming paper describes the exact find site as uncertain because of what it calls a long and confused history after the discovery.

Sources

• Xijun Ni et al., "Massive cranium from Harbin in northeastern China establishes a new Middle Pleistocene human lineage," The Innovation 2(3), 100130 (June 25, 2021).
• Qiang Ji, Wensheng Wu, Yannan Ji, Qiang Li, Xijun Ni, "Late Middle Pleistocene Harbin cranium represents a new Homo species," The Innovation 2(3), 100132 (June 25, 2021).
• Qingfeng Shao et al., "Geochemical provenancing and direct dating of the Harbin archaic human cranium," The Innovation 2(3), 100131 (June 25, 2021).
• Center for Academic Research and Training in Anthropogeny, University of California San Diego, glossary entry "Harbin cranium (Homo longi or 'Dragon Man')."
• Chinese Academy of Sciences, "Key Evidence Links Harbin Individual's Nearly Complete Skull to a Denisovan" (June 2025).
• Qiaomei Fu et al., "Denisovan mitochondrial DNA from dental calculus of the >146,000-year-old Harbin cranium," Cell (2025), abstract via Europe PMC.
• Natural History Museum, London, "Denisovans: The enigmatic ancient humans who finally have a face."

More from Prehistory East Asia

• A handaxe on the Hantan River bank, 1978: the Jeongok-ri sitePrehistory · East Asia · 200,000 BC
• Two caves, two dates: earliest pottery at Xianrendong and YuchanyanPrehistory · East Asia · 18,000 BC
• Why did Japan's Jōmon foragers make pots and villages without farming?Prehistory · East Asia · 13,000 BC
• December 2, 1929: the first Peking Man skull and the casts that remainPrehistory · East Asia · 770,000 BC
• Stone tools below and above the Toba ash at Jwalapuram, since 2007Prehistory · South Asia · 72,000 BC
• Ibex horns around a child's skull, 1938, at Teshik-TashPrehistory · Central Asia · 70,000 BC

Meanwhile, elsewhere around 146,000 BC

• Stone tools below and above the Toba ash at Jwalapuram, since 2007South Asia · 72,000 BC
• What is the oldest known drawing, and who made it?Africa · 71,000 BC
• Ibex horns around a child's skull, 1938, at Teshik-TashCentral Asia · 70,000 BC

Cite this article

APA

LETTER. (2026, September 28). Found in 1933, named in 2021, identified in 2025: the Harbin skull. Our Earth's History. https://ourearthshistory.com/east-asia/prehistory/harbin-cranium-1933-songhua-2018-homo-longi-2021-denisovan-2025/

Chicago

LETTER. “Found in 1933, named in 2021, identified in 2025: the Harbin skull.” Our Earth's History, September 28, 2026. https://ourearthshistory.com/east-asia/prehistory/harbin-cranium-1933-songhua-2018-homo-longi-2021-denisovan-2025/.

MLA

LETTER. “Found in 1933, named in 2021, identified in 2025: the Harbin skull.” Our Earth's History, 28 Sep. 2026, https://ourearthshistory.com/east-asia/prehistory/harbin-cranium-1933-songhua-2018-homo-longi-2021-denisovan-2025/.

Text licensed CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Found an error? Tell us.