The 2002 meeting abstracts of the Palaeoanthropology Society are now out.
The papers that caught my eye cover the following issues.
The last Neanderthal in the Caucasus
Neanderthal symbolic abilities
More information on the genetic continuity between Neanderthals and modern
humans
Technological inventiveness of the earliest toolmakers at 2.5 myr ago
Evidence for an extremely early hominid migration out of Africa
The earlist out of Africa H. erectus
A chimpanzee stone tool archaeological site
A novel thought that hunting indicates symbolic thought
Neanderthal fishing and exploitation of the environment
The age of the original Neanderthal
The data contained here has implications for fossil man, his intelligence,
his humanity. As such, it needs to be incorporated in any apologetic. I
would refer anyone to my web site
http://www.glenn.morton.btinternet.co.uk/dmd.htm for information on fossil
man and his place in apologetics.
I will separate the topics by ----, the abstracts by ****begin*** and the
comments and asterisks or mark short quotes by quotation marks.
-----------------------------
D. S. Adler, N. Tushabramishvili, and G. Bar-Oz,"The latest Neandertals of
the southern Caucasus: new dates and new data from Ortvale Klde, the
Georgian Republic" This reports on the last known Neanderthals in the
Caucasus. They lasted there until 35,000 years ago. Based solely on tool
type, the authors conclude that the Neanderthals were abruptly replaced.
There is no report of Neanderthal bones at this site and until there is, one
can't rule out that anatomically modern man made the earlier stones. Prior
to 35,000 years, Neanderthals and modern humans made identical tools. See
Garraldo and Vandermeersch below.
------------------------
An interesting paper will be presented at the Paleoanthropological Society
meeting in Denver. It presents evidence for similarity in symbolic behavior
between Neanderthals and modern humans. Most authorities believe that the
use of body paint as a cultural symbol is an indication of symbolic
thinking. Thus to find that there is little difference in the use of such
pigments between Neanderthal sites and those of modern humans should
indicate that Neanderthals, like us, were capable of social and cultural
thinking.
****Beginning of d'Errico and Soressi abstract*****
Systematic use of manganese pigment by Pech-de-l’Azé Neandertals:
implications for the origin of behavioral modernity
F. d'Errico and M. Soressi
Institut de Préhistoire et de Géologie du Quaternaire, UMR 5808 du CNRS,
Université Bordeaux I, Avenue des Facultés, Bat. B 18, 33405 Talence cedex,
France.
The systematic use of pigment is generally considered evidence for symbolic
thinking and a hallmark of behavioral modernity. In recent years, the
observed increase in the number of ochre pieces during the MSA has been
used, along with other discerned changes in African hominid lifestyle, to
support the hypothesis that modern cognitive abilities gradually arose in
Africa in conjunction with the biological changes that mark the origin of
our species. Neandertals are seen from this perspective as unable to fully
develop symbolic behaviors in an autonomous way. Some aspects of their
material culture, potentially symbolic in nature, are interpreted as
resulting from long-distance cultural diffusion or contact with AMH migrants
at the end of the Middle Paleolithic.
Although pigments, mostly manganese dioxides, are reported from at least 15
Mousterian sites in Europe, little is known about pigment use by
Neandertals. Our analysis of the unpublished collection of 250 specimens of
pigment found by F. Bordes at the Mousterian of Acheulean tradition site of
Pech-de-l'Azé I demonstrates that Neandertal use of black pigment does not
differ significantly from that known from MSA sites. The majority of these
pigments clearly bear modification and use traces, namely scraping marks
and, more frequently, single or multiple facets produced by rubbing against
a soft material. Some pieces appear intentionally shaped into pointed
crayons. Microscopic analysis of the worn tips and experimental
reproduction of the traces suggest that they were used to draw linear
designs. Two pieces bear an engraved abstract pattern produced with a
lithic point.
In sum, early pigment use is not a peculiar feature of early AMH, and
Neandertal production of pigment seems to contradict the popular single
species model for the origin of behavioral modernity. Very close species
may behave similarly and, in the case of our close ancestors, our shared
features probably include many of the traits we have considered our
monopoly.
*****end D'Errico and Soressi abstract**
-------------------------
Another paper discusses physical and genetic continuity between Neanderthals
and modern men. The teeth of those who are called early anatomically modern
humans, are indistinguishable from those of neanderthal!
***begining of abstract************
-Neanderthal or modern human? The enigma of some Archaic and Early
Aurignacian remains from southwestern Europe
M. D. Garralda and B. Vandermeersch
U. D. de Antropología, Facultad de Biología, Universidad Complutense de
Madrid, Ciudad Universitaria, 28040 Madrid, Spain
Numerous and important archeological sites from southwestern Europe are
dated to the late Middle Paleolithic or the beginning of the Early Upper
Paleolithic. Absolute and chronostratigraphic dates place them around 40.000
BP, with an overlapping period ranging from ca. 45.000 to 35.000 BP. Only a
few of these sites have yielded human remains assigned to the late
Mousterian, the Chatelperronian, the Archaic and Early Aurignacian and the
Uluzzian. With the probable exceptions of the fossils assigned to the first
two cultures, the other remains are fragmentary and their allocation to
Neanderthals or to modern humans is highly problematic. Furthermore, in the
past their interpretation was conditioned by the assumption that “…if humans
are associated with Upper Paleolithic tools,… they must have been modern
humans”. This dictum, no longer valid, has been clearly disproved by the
Saint Césaire discovery.
Among these enigmatic remains, several were found in different French sites
(e.g., La Ferrassie Grand Abri, Les Rois, Isturitz…); while others were
discovered in Southern Italy (Cavallo) and in Northern Spain, at El Castillo
Cave (old and new excavations). In these specimens numerous archaic
morphological characteristics are found on the fragmentary mandibles and
teeth. In addition, our review of dental dimensions demonstrates that these
earliest Upper Paleolithic humans fall within the Neanderthal range of
variation. In our opinion, it is impossible to identify these fossils
unambiguously as Neanderthal or modern. However, we note that if most of
these specimens had been discovered in Mousterian layers, they would have
been unquestionably designated as Neanderthals. Our study complements others
which have shown evidence for continuity (or the blurring of taxonomic
features) across the Mousterian/Upper Palaeolithic divide.
******end of abstract***********
--------------------------
One fascinating paper on the earliest stone tools has strong implications
for the intelligence of these hominids 2.5 million years ago. Often the
earliest stone tool makers are portrayed as making their tools simply as an
outgrowth of some sort of genetic program, with little thinking. Stephen
Mithen is one advocate of this view:
"I believe that Early Humans experienced the type of consciousness when
making their stone tools that we experience when driving a car while engaged
in conversation with a passenger. We finish the journey with no memory of
the roundabouts, traffic lights and other hazards we negotiated and appear
to have passed safely through these without thinking about driving at all.
as Daniel Dennett has remarked, while this type of driving is often
described as a classic case of 'unconscious perception and intelligent
action', it is in fact a case of 'rolling consciousness with swift memory
loss'." ~ Steven Mithen, The Prehistory of the Mind, (New York: Thames and
Hudson, 1996), p. 148
However, technological creativity is not compatible with this view and that
is precisely what some new discoveries at Hadar, Ethiopia show. The abstact
says:
"While the Hadar assemblages resemble in their typological composition those
from Gona (Semaw, 2000; Semaw et al. 1997) and from West Turkana (Roche et
al. 1999), they exhibit a different combination of techniques of core
reduction than those seen in these broadly contemporaneous sites. " E.
Hover et al Late Pliocene archaeological sites in Hadar, Ethiopia," Abstract
Paleoanthropology Society 2002
What this says is that they used different techniques to manufacature their
tools even this early on! That requires THINKING.
--------------------
Dmanisi, Georgia continues to provide surprises. This is the site of the
earliest European, a Homo ergaster/erectus which dated 1.6 myr ago. D.
Lordkipanidze and A.Vekua in "A new hominid mandible from Dmanisi (Georgia)
" note the new mandible may indicate an even earlier migration out of Africa
than 1.8 myr. They say:
"D-2600 differs significantly from the mandible described earlier, both in
terms of its dimensions and the morphology of the corpus and teeth. The
specific combination of archaic features (characteristic of ancient African
Homo), together with some signs of relatively advanced evolution, also
distinguishes it from the mandibles of all other Early and Middle
Pleistocene hominids. This specimen could support the view that hominid
migration out of Africa took place even before the dispersal of the Homo
erectus/ ergaster group and indicates that there was quite possibly more
than one hominid expansion out of Africa in the Early Pleistocene. "
There have been some hints of this over the years at various places in China
etc, but usually these indications have been dismissed.
-----------------------
Another paper on Dmanisi suggests that there was occupation at the site
between 1.78 and 1.84 myr. The paper, M. Tappen, R. Ferring, and D.
Lordkipanidze, "Site formation and taphonomy of the Lower Pleistocene site
of Dmanisi, Republic of Georgia"
says:
" New excavations continue to recover fossils, stone tools and manuports
within sediments with reversed polarity that date to about 1.7 Ma, as well
as evidence for occupation within the earlier normal sediments, dating to
between 1.84-1.78 Ma. "
This means that Homo erectus is found in Europe almost as early as he is
found in Africa! Dmanisi is as early as the Java erectus which dates
slightly greater than 1.77 myr. The oldest erectus in Africa is 1.95
myr.(see Alan Walker and Pat Shipman, The Wisdom of the Bones, (New York:
Alfred Knopf, 1996), p. 240)
-------------------------------
J. Mercader et al,"Chimpanzee-produced stone assemblages from the tropical
forests of Taï, Côte d’Ivoire " cites an archaeological excavation of a
chimpanzee stone tool site in the Cote d'Ivoire. In this part of Africa
Chimpanzees uses anvil stones to crack open nuts. Occasionally the stones
break, flaking off tools that look somewhat similar to the earliest stone
tools in East Africa. It will be interesting to see exacly how similar these
accidental flakes are to tools when the article is finally published. It is
certain that some will seize this as evidence of the stupidity, or
non-humanness, of the early tool makers, but if, as noted above, those early
tool makers were using different debitage techniques to manufacture their
tools, this approach won't work.
--------------------------
One article caused me to think of a novel interpretation of the stone tool
record which I have not heard before.
J. O’Connell, K. Hawkes, K. Lupo, and N. Blurton Jones, "Male strategies and
Plio-Pleistocene archaeology " write:
"Archaeological data are frequently cited in support of the idea that big
game hunting drove the evolution of early Homo, mainly through its role in
offspring provisioning. This argument has been disputed on two grounds: 1)
ethnographic observations on modern foragers show that although hunting may
contribute greatly to the annual average diet, it is an unreliable
day-to-day food source, pursued more for status than subsistence; "
The thought which struck me in reading the above is that if hunting is
pursued more for status than for food, that hunting is a symbolic/status
act. If so, then could it be that the very existence of stone tools,
evidence for the need to cut meat and hide, is evidence also of the need for
staus! If so, the manufacture of tools itself could represent the onset of
symbolic thought.
----------------------
Neanderthals were more capable exploiters of the environment than has
previously been suggested. They were able to exploit fish(species which we
still fish for today), edible frogs and other resources which had apparently
been overlooked in earlier excavations. The widespread exploitation of the
environment requires knowledge and the ability to plan ahead.
***********begin abstract of Paunovic and Smith*************
Taphonomy of lower vertebrates from Vindija cave (Croatia): delicacy on the
Neandertal table or animal prey?
M. Paunovic and F.H. Smith
This study deals with paleontology and taphonomy of lower vertebrates
collected from the Pleistocene levels of the cave Vindija (NW Croatia)
ranging in age from OIS 6 to OIS 1. Among 554 recently identified skeletal
remains the majority belongs to fresh-water fish taxa and amphibians,
reflecting different micro-habitat requirements but not short- or long-term
changes in the immediate surroundings of the cave. At the same time,
analysis of modifications (breakage, digestion) of bones shows a
homogeneity of patterns for all studied samples which indicate a uniform
accumulating agent and taphonomic trajectories as well as specific origin of
the material. The majority of the identified remains belongs to the (also
today economically, or better to say dietary) prized taxa such as trout,
pikeperch or edible frog, and was found in sediments together with
Neandertal bones as well as in association with Mousterian and Aurignacian
artefacts dated to OIS 3. Thus, in contrast to previous theories of
long-distance following of herbivores, a territorial model of exploitation
of all animal sources is more plausible for Middle and Upper Paleolithic
people, i.e. Neandertals, from Vindija cave.
***********end abstract of Paunovic and Smith*************
--------------------
In 2000 new searches in the Feldhofer area (the area of the site of the
original Neanderthal man) found pieces which fit into that 150 year old
fossil. The abstract says:
"Direct AMS 14C dating provides age estimates of 39,900 ± 620 BP for the
type specimen and 39,240 ± 670 BP for the second individual. Mt DNA
analysis of the second individual has also been conducted. " R.W. Schmitz,
G. Bonani, and F.H. Smith New research at the Neandertal type site in the
Neander Valley of Germany , 2002 Paleoanthropology Society meeting.
----------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 06 2002 - 11:49:37 EST