This series introduces, through the lens of biological anthropology, how hominins have evolved and survived since their first appearance on Earth long ago—explained in a way that blends brain science with archaeology. The previous series, Human Exploration Report, showed how the exploration team from planet Aure lived alongside humans on Earth and observed them, revealing why humans think, perceive, and behave the way they do. Through this, readers got a taste of the essence of brain science. This newly planned series, Humankind Exploration Report, aims to introduce readers to the field of "biological anthropology"—or, more precisely, "archaeo-neuro-bio-anthropology." In other words, this series goes beyond present-day humans to explore what kind of brains hominins had hundreds, tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands of years ago, and how they evolved and survived on Earth, told through a blend of brain science and archaeology. We want to introduce readers to the discipline that uses biological principles to imagine humanity's past. The name sounds intimidatingly complex, but through it, we are actually uncovering fascinating answers about how humans lived tens of thousands of years ago. If Human Exploration Report was "a brain science project for children," then Humankind Exploration Report is a project that introduces, for the first time, "the brain science of Homo sapiens." History truly is an incredibly scientific subject—we hope even children who love history will enjoy this series! While Human Exploration Report was a book that children who love brain science and science in general could immerse themselves in, Humankind Exploration Report adds history into the mix, making it a book that history-loving children can enjoy as well. History is often considered a humanities subject, seemingly far removed from science, but in truth, history is one of the most scientific disciplines of all. To understand how our ancestors lived, we must imagine and reconstruct their lives in our minds using small fragments of evidence and historical clues—and for that reconstruction to be plausible, a scientific approach is absolutely essential. This is why biological anthropology may be considered the very essence of science, more so than any other field. We created this series hoping that readers would get a taste of that scientific essence. The human ancestors depicted and described in this book are not presented as absolute truth. Just as we infer "humans must have lived this way" based on small clues—surviving bone fragments, the shape of skulls, and the ruins and artifacts they left behind—this book is structured much like a modern forensic investigation team tracking down a suspect using only the clues left at a crime scene. In that sense, we hope every reader can become an anthropological detective, picturing our ancestors' past in their own minds. To understand how humankind built today's vast civilizations, and what makes us different from other great apes, an understanding of biological anthropology is essential. Why should children be introduced not only to brain science, but also to a field that sounds so difficult just by its name—biological anthropology? When we study what scientists have recently discovered about the differences between humans and other great apes, we find something astonishing about humanity. Very young great apes—orangutans, chimpanzees, gorillas—show little difference from two- or three-year-old human children. Scientists have found that they are remarkably intelligent and engage in many intellectual behaviors much like we do. So how is it that we have built such an enormous intellectual civilization and enjoy life in a complex modern society, while they remain at a primitive stage? And why did other hominins, like Homo neanderthalensis, Homo erectus, and Homo habilis, fail to survive and ultimately go extinct? To find clues to these questions, we needed to examine how the brains of early Homo sapiens differed from those of great apes, and how they differed from other, now-extinct hominins. And what we discovered was that brain size wasn't the key factor. Having a larger skull or greater brain volume wasn't what mattered most, either.