The OH 36 ulna derives from Upper Bed II in the Olduvai Gorge, and is dated to circa 1.1-1.2 Myr. Multivariate analyses incorporating data from samples of modern humans, common and pygmy chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans, and two other early hominin ulnae, Omo L40-19 and KNM-BK 66, suggest that OH 36 belonged to an individual with powerful forearms consistent with a locomotor repertoire that included arboreal locomotion. However, there is no compelling evidence that it made regular use of its forelimbs as supports when travelling on the ground. When compared with levels of intra- and intertaxon size and shape variation in the comparative sample (humans, chimpanzees, gorillas), the differences between OH 36, KNM-BK 66, and Omo L40-19 are compatible with OH 36 differing from the other two fossil hominin ulnae to the extent that modern humans differ from modern great apes. KNM-BK 66 and Omo L40-19 differ from each other in overall size and shape only to the degree that would be expected within any of the individual modern comparative samples. Based on these analyses, there is no evidence to support the hypothesis that OH 36 and Omo L40-19 belong to the same species of fossil hominin, or to two species that shared a similar forelimb locomotor repertoire. We suggest that OH 36 has the greater claim to be assigned to Paranthropus boisei, and we recommend that for the time being the latter be referred to the tribe Hominini gen. et sp. indet. The surprising result of these analyses is the overall size and shape similarity between Omo L40-19 and KNM-BK 66, two fossils that are separated in time by more than 1.5 million years, and which have traditionally been assumed to represent hominin species with quite different locomotor patterns.