Tweet
A piece of 50,000-year-old string - the oldest yet discovered - found in a cave in France has cast further doubt on the idea that Neanderthals were cognitively inferior to modern humans.
-
Searching the fields of NW Indiana and SW Michigan -
Interesting, surprised the string survivedNear the PA/Ohio state line -
Great article Greg. I think they were equal. TYLubbock County TxComment
-
Cool!Southern ConnecticutComment
-
Thanks Greg.
I have been following this with interest.
The researchers had previously reported (in 2013) that they had recovered what they believed to be short fragments of cordage at this same site… Abri du Maras in France. The site was first occupied by Neanderthals around 90,000 years ago, but the possible cordage was in deposits dated to Marine Isotope Stage 4 (c57,000-71,000 years). The fragments were too small to be directly dated, so we rely on MIS dating of the depositional layers (as for these latest fragments).
Those initial fragments were found ‘near some stone tools’, but this latest find was ‘adhering to the underside’ of a lithic tool. It was too small to say that it had in any way been wrapped round the tool since it was only 6mm long (the tool was 60mm).
As always, the press reporting has to be read carefully to interpret exactly what the researchers are and are not claiming. For example, in some second-hand reports it is (correctly) stated that Homo sapiens only arrived in Europe around 40,000 years ago; but then stated (incorrectly) that this means the Neanderthals must have independently developed cordage technology rather than copied it or learned it from early modern humans. Even more incorrectly stated in some places that they must have developed the technology before humans did. In some reports, the crucial words ‘direct evidence’ are also omitted completely.
There’s now a multiplicity of evidence that Neanderthals weren’t primitive dimwits and we now know that they walked in an upright posture like us… not with a hunched gait as originally believed. It’s a reputation that they never deserved in the first place but it dates all the way back to William King’s paper of 1863, presented to the British Science Association and further publications he made in 1864. He recommended that Neanderthals and modern humans be classified in different genera, comparing the Neanderthal braincase to that of a chimpanzee and arguing (with no justification apart from his own prejudices) that they were “incapable of moral and theistic conceptions”.
Despite their use of it, it’s unlikely that Neanderthals were the inventors of cordage, although not impossible that they invented it independently at a later date than humans. We have all kinds of indirect evidence for when cordage technology appeared in different cultures in different places, including things like the impressions left in clay (both pottery and cave floors), representations of textiles on Upper Palaeolithic carvings of females, and from perforated beads/pendants. There’s also this intriguing mammoth ivory artefact from a site in Germany that’s believed to be a rope-making tool (and which dates to c42,000 years ago):
[Picture from University of Tubingen]
The indirect evidence for cordage from perforated shell beads reliably dates back to a least 72,000 years ago from the Middle Stone Age Blombos cave complex in South Africa, 82,000 years ago from the Aterian Grotte des Pigeons site at Taforalt in Eastern Morocco and probably around 100,000 years ago from the Mousterian layers of the Skhul site in Israel. All three sites appear to be associated with occupation by Anatomically Modern Humans. Although some archaeologists contentiously place the Aterian in the Mousterian, it’s not a widely-held view. It’s also true that the Mousterian is principally associated with Neanderthals, but that reflects the situation in Europe. Outside Europe, it has wider associations with AMH.
This was one of the Moroccan finds:
And these were from Israel:
[Picture from Drs. Marian Vanhaeren and Francesco d'Errico]
Interesting that all of these shell beads prove to be marine snail Nassarius species, which are too small to have significant food value and often found sufficiently distant from the sea to suggest they were deliberately collected for conversion into adornments.
I keep six honest serving-men (they taught me all I knew); Their names are What and Why and When and How and Where and Who.Comment
-
Incredibly interesting. Got to admit that the story of the earliest types of people is huge hole in my knowledge.
Here's a newbie question.
When studying early sites, are funeral remains the way to distinguish between human types, or can it be determined by artifacts alone? -
Hi Tom... no we don't need human remains to determine which hominids occupied a particular site, but of course that would be absolute confirmation. There are many sites where we have no remains available. There are distinct lithic (and sometimes bone) tool industries that are either unique to particular cultures or so strongly associated with them that we only need the artefacts. For really ancient tools our determination can be a little presumptive and of course hominid evolution happened in a continuous manner, not as a series of distinct steps. Sometimes we need stratigraphic dating too. Acheulian industry axes for example were used over a very long period of time by more than one hominid type and the Mousterian industry also overlaps with certain other tool industries both at the beginning and end of its period of use. One or two lithic tools may not be enough, but when there's an assemblage that's usually pretty conclusive. -
I knew that Acheulian and Mousterian are the names of early tool industries and had assumed they were exclusively AMH when actually there is overlap and exchange between human types. I hate how much I don't know.
Quick google on those tool industries show pictures of tools no different than one's NAs were making 80,000 years later. That led me to Oldowan and I see utilized flakes and basic scrapers. Pretty mind-blowing perspective.Last edited by tomf; 04-15-2020, 12:12 PM.
-
-
Shucks ...All that detective work makes me hungry..P. S.nice work mod.Floridaboy.Comment
-
This is great post. I read recently that another previously-unknown hominid had been discovered somewhere. (Unfortunately, I cant remember specifics of article, so will look for it again!) The knowledge and views of our ancestry has vastly changed since a lot of us first discovered our personal affinities for archeology and/or anthropology. Again, I am so grateful for forum!Digging in GA, ‘bout a mile from the Savannah RiverComment
-
Homo luzonesis in Philippines last year. And, actually had the story lil’ screwed-up, as usual, since were already “known” but not as the species they are now. (Aren’t the Denisovans the Star Trek people who moved too fast for humans to see? Sounded like mosquitos to us....? Lol)Last edited by Cecilia; 04-21-2020, 03:57 PM.
-
How we learned to love Neanderthals....and a lot of other Hominids too:
Rhode IslandComment
Comment