# Any Synonyms of \_Homo sapiens\_? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [January 12, 2003, 7:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-synonyms-of-_homo-sapiens_/148106 "2003-01-12T07:04:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Sauroposeidon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c4cdca/32.png) [@Sauroposeidon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sauroposeidon)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2003, 7:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-synonyms-of-_homo-sapiens_/148106/1 "2003-01-12T07:04:07Z")
Has anyone ever proposed an alternative scientific name for modern humans? (No, I can’t imagine why they would, and yes, I know there are now rules to prevent this. Still, I’m curious.) ---
**Author:** ![Achernar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e274bd/32.png) [@Achernar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Achernar)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2003, 7:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-synonyms-of-_homo-sapiens_/148106/2 "2003-01-12T07:11:18Z")
Why on earth would they? There are now rules to prevent this, you know. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![susan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/susan/32/17537_2.png) [@susan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/susan)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2003, 7:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-synonyms-of-_homo-sapiens_/148106/3 "2003-01-12T07:45:38Z")
I’ve seen “homo sapiens sapiens,” where the last “sapiens” is a subspecies. ---
**Author:** ![Speaker\_for\_the\_Dead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c77e96/32.png) [@Speaker\_for\_the\_Dead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Speaker_for_the_Dead)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2003, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-synonyms-of-_homo-sapiens_/148106/4 "2003-01-12T14:57:14Z")
**Shosana** , I’ve heard that too. I was curious to know if you or anyone else knew what other subspecies would fall under Homo sapiens… ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2003, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-synonyms-of-_homo-sapiens_/148106/5 "2003-01-12T15:12:11Z")
Well, for a long time, Neanderthal man was considered a subspecies…Homo sapiens neanderthalis, which would make modern man Homo sapiens sapiens. I think Neanderthal man is usually considered a seperate species now, though. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2003, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-synonyms-of-_homo-sapiens_/148106/6 "2003-01-12T18:45:39Z")
There are many fossils that are refered to as “archaic Homo sapiens”. They aren’t neandertals, but they aren’t Homo sapiens sapiens either. They don’t exactly form a homogenous group, but are a sort of catch-all term. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2003, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-synonyms-of-_homo-sapiens_/148106/7 "2003-01-12T20:59:12Z")
A “synonym” in taxonomy is a name proposed by someone else not aware that the species in question has already been named and described by someone else, which therefore is reduced to “an improper but present-in-older-literature term for what is properly called by [the first, priority-holding name]” Since kids young enough to get giggles out of the “homo” part are aware that that’s been the taxonomic name for mankind since Linnaeus assigned it, there would be no point in coining a synonym. As various people have noted, certain prehistoric hominids were considered separate species by “splitter” paleoanthropologists and are referred to _H. sapiens_ by “lumpers.” Accordingly, their names are considered “synonyms” in the taxonomic sense. **Captain Amazing** gives the example that _H. neanderthalensis_ is now considered _H. Sapiens neanderthalensis_ – which makes _H. neanderthalensis_ a synonym for _H. sapiens_ in the taxonomic use of the term. I believe the same is true for _H. heidelbergensis_. ---
**Author:** ![Gjorp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c4cdca/32.png) [@Gjorp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gjorp)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2003, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-synonyms-of-_homo-sapiens_/148106/8 "2003-01-12T21:09:36Z")
> [@](#): > > (No, I can’t imagine why they would, and yes, I know there are now rules to prevent this. Still, I’m curious.) Rules? What rules? ---
**Author:** ![Darwins\_Finch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/darwins_finch/32/20304_2.png) [@Darwins\_Finch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darwins_Finch)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2003, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-synonyms-of-_homo-sapiens_/148106/9 "2003-01-12T21:39:02Z")
> [@](#): > > Rules? What rules? The rules, known as the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, made by [these guys](http://www.iczn.org/).