The Painted Skull - Preview

The neolithic peoples of the Middle East practiced a strange burial ritual between 7,000 and 6,000 BCE (9-8 kya). They took the skulls of their ancestors and added decorations, or covered it in plaster and paint. These otherworldly portraits of the death graced a prominent spot inside people's houses. Soon, I will be releasing a post on the subject, exploring its birth and significance within neolithic society. To peak your interest, here's a picture of some of these skulls...

Two skulls from Jericho, made around 9 kya. 2spooky

Also here's a fun map of the region and timeline, by myself. It's markers on a piece of paper, there's no silly copyright.

Cultural sites in the Middle East from 12-7 kya. Red: Natufian sites (Jericho ca. 12 kya, Gobekli Tepe ca. 11.5 kya). Purple: PPNB sites (Catalhoyuk ca. 9.5-7.7 kya, Umm Dabaghiya ca. 8.5-8 kya). Yellow: Late Neolithic and Early Chalcolithic sites (Eridu ca. 7 kya, Hassuna ca. 8-7.2 kya, Halaf ca. 7.5-6.8 kya, Faiyum ca. 8 kya). The dotted line in the Gulf is the modern shoreline.

So stay tuned, and Happy Halloween!

Exploring the Neanderthal Mind - Update!

While my focus and attention have moved on and the process of research continues...smatterings of Neanderthal information which had slid under my radar continue occasionally show themselves. I've added two more pictures to the Neanderthal post, one in The Birth of Technology, and another in The Evolution of Art.

This first picture is a hand axe found in Hoxne, Suffolk, England. It was made around 400 kya by either Homo Erectus or Homo Heidelbergensis. Either way, it is a wonderful example of many of the topics I raised in the piece. The hand axe is remarkably colorful and intriguing to the eye. The most recognizable feature is its brutally straight lines. Since this excessive amount of straightness was not practically necessary, this piece is good evidence that around 400 kya hominins were adding obvious symmetry and well-defined straightness to their hand axes. This was certainly not practical, and served some other purpose. Pieces like this allow the onlooker to vividly enter the mind of our ancestors - they were aiming to create straight lines, an object not found in nature but invented within our mind. Hundreds of thousands of years later, hominins can still look at this piece and immediately detect the latent geometry held within.

This second picture is much more controversial. It is called the Mask of la Roche-Cotard. It was found with Mousterian tools and was at that time dated to 35 kya (which now should be around 40 kya). This small flint object was carried around by these Neanderthals. Originally it was only another piece of rock, but at some point someone forced a piece of bone through a hole in the center. On the side of the "face" are marks indicative of intentional force. In addition to that manipulation, the top and the sides of this object were scraped and leveled, also done with hominin intent. 

This object was a manuport and was carried around for some reason, specifying which reason is where the controversy lies. Many people [citation needed] claim that it is because it looks like, well, a face! Although this argument may be correct, it is entirely anthropomorphic and suspiciously unverifiable. Besides that argument, there is no other hypothesis I am aware of which would explain why a Neanderthal would carry this object around. As of 2014, this object is entirely cloaked in mystery, explained only through questionable hypotheses and without consensus.

Enjoy! More updates, history posts, and old pictures to come.

Exploring the Neanderthal Mind, an Introduction

What do you see when you look at the object above? In one view, it is completely unremarkable. It is simply a stone cutting tool used be prehistoric people, a basic technology made by hitting rocks with other rocks. Stonework like this is our first, and our least complex technology. Switching to another view, it is completely unlike any other stone tool you've ever seen. Your eyes have already spotted the fossil in the center of the piece. This tool was designed to cut things, but it was also designed for you to see that fossil. The stone from which this was made was chipped away in such a manner as to bring that fossil to the surface. The fossil was not only intentionally revealed, but was intentionally centered so as to draw your focus. This simple hand axe raises a difficult question: Does this object look beautiful?

I'm curious as to what people today see in this object because I hope it can shed light on a related, yet much more difficult question. You see, there is a problem – this hand axe found in Norfolk England was not made by the English, I'm not asking whether we see this as beautiful, because we didn't make it. It was made around 200,000 years ago by a Neanderthal. Special rocks, such as this, were traded between far flung Neanderthal groups, sometimes 100-200 miles. It is revealing that regular old hand axes were not traded in this way, they did not have the same value. The question I really want to know is why. Why did Neanderthals incorporate fossils into their hand axes? What made these hand axes so different than all the others, what was their extra-ordinary value?

Those questions hinge on Neanderthal behavior, the question can be reformatted as: What is it about their behavior which motivated them to incorporate fossils into objects. This question relies on a simple premise, that their physical behavior is indicative of mental behavior. Neanderthals treated these rocks differently because they thought about them differently. This is the deeper question I'm trying to ask: What did a Neanderthal see when they looked at this hand axe? Did they, as we might now, see something aesthetically pleasing or beautiful?

This is partially an impossible question, as it asks for facts about the mental phenomena of long dead individuals in a long dead species. This question may at first glance seem unanswerable, but that premise is not my starting point. If such questions were outright unanswerable then the discussion would promptly cease. While I obviously cannot answer questions about the Neanderthal mind with scientific assurance, I will try to get as close to answering them as I can. To construct a lexicon of the Neanderthal mental capacity necessitates understanding their behavioral repertoire...all of which requires an extreme amount of context! To slow chip away at the obfuscated mountain of the Neanderthal mind, we must be cognizant of their behavior, physiology, culture, and genome. Hopefully, employing context can reveal which Neanderthal behaviors necessitate certain thoughts. So let us begin...

Chris Stringer's hypothesis of the family tree of the genus Homo, published 2012

Models of three hominin faces. Homo Erectus (left), Homo Heidelbergensis (center), and Homo Neanderthalensis (right). By Paleoartist John Gurche

The easiest way to comprehend such large scales of time is through the notation kya (thousand years ago). Compared to the present, I was born 0.025 kya. The first World War began 0.1 kya, and Columbus led Europeans to the New World 0.5 kya. 1 kya Byzantine Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism split as the Pope and Patriarch excommunicated each other, and 2 kya the Roman Emperor Tiberius was purging his Praetorian guard wholly unconcerned with the crucifixion of radical preachers in Judaea. Mentioned in my previous post, the first human megalith at Gobekli Tepe was constructed around 11.5 kya. Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis existed from around 250-28 kya. We split from a common ancestor around 400-350 kya, most likely from Homo Heidelbergensis. Oh, who could guess where Homo Heidelbergensis was first discovered? Heidelbergensis originated around 1,300-800 kya and lived til around 200 kya, ranging over eastern/southern Africa, Europe, and western Asia. As groups of Heidelbergensis became more and more spread out across their landscape, their lineage began to diverge. Around 400-350 kya African Heidelbergensis started to make physiological moves towards modern humans. It was around the same time when the Eurasian branch started to move towards Neanderthals. Heidelbergensis also spawned Denisovans in the modern day steppes of Russia, and a fourth unknown lineage presumably in south-east Asia.

The evolution and timeline of early Hominins

Giving such precise dates as 250-28 kya is completely impossible. Many people debate both of those numbers. The first emergence of Neanderthals is impossible to pin down – all we have are a collection of Neanderthal traits emerging around 300-200 kya, with Neanderthals becoming genetically distinct between 400-300 kya. The last Neanderthals are also impossible to pin down, generally they died out around 40-28 kya, completely depending on which carbon dating results you accept. The assumption that Homo Heidelbergensis is our common ancestor with Neanderthals is also up in the air: a recent study from 2013 which examined 1200 molars from 13 hominin species found results contradictory to anthropological orthodoxy. “None of the species that have been previously suggested as the last common ancestor of Neanderthals and modern humans has a dental morphology that is fully compatible with the expected morphology of this ancestor.” -Aida Gomes-Robles. The species thrown out are all of the common suspects: Heidelbergensis, Homo Erectus, Homo Antecessor. This would suggest that our common ancestor with Neanderthals existed more than 1 million years ago, instead of 300-400 kya. “The study tells us that there are still new hominin finds waiting to be made...fossil finds from about 1 million years ago in Africa deserve close scrutiny as the possible ancestor of Neanderthals and modern humans.” -David Polly. Now it would be unreasonable to radically alter our timeline from one study, but the gist is that it's complicated. For now, I will assume the general timeline and that Heidelbergensis is our common ancestor with Neanderthals.

The range of Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis (or is it Homo Neanderthalensis?)

Northwest Europe during the Paleolithic period, showing its radically different shoreline. The present shoreline of Europe did not become recognizable until about 9 kya

During their lifetime, Neanderthals ranged throughout central Asia and Europe. The Neanderthal population was spread out unevenly, with the greatest amount of contact between groups in central Asia. This is because this area shows the greatest diversity in Neanderthal DNA, giving evidence to idea that their homeland was in Asia with occasional branches entering Europe. How in the world can we say anything about Neanderthal DNA? Surprisingly enough we can say a lot, their genes tell a strange and previously unknown story which has only recently been deciphered. Svante Paabo (Svante Pääbo) started working with DNA in 1981, extracting samples from Egyptian mummies. No one thought it was possible to get a real workable sample, but he did. He moved on to extracting DNA from extinct cave bears and ground sloths, which again no one thought would be possible. He proved them wrong. Moving on from extinct bears to extinct hominins, most recently in 2010 Svante Paabo and colleagues (56 other researchers) at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology uncovered the Neanderthal genome. In 2013 they discovered all 3 billion base pairs, and since then research has been slowly piecing together the consequence of this discovery. This groundbreaking research from 2006-2010 catapulted him to fame. Now (in 2014) we can read the Neanderthal genome side by side to our own, an insane feat of modern science thought impossible merely 10 years ago. If Neanderthals became genetically distinct from our common ancestor between 400-300 kya, how has the intervening years changed their genome?

The Genome and Body

Our Neanderthal Inheritance

The family tree of the four groups of Hominins living in Eurasia around 50 kya, and the lingering genetic heritage due to interbreeding

Svante Paabo

The Neanderthal genome contains many secrets: their genealogy, muscle development, digestive system, diseases they carried, and their immunology. All of these aspects of Neanderthal lives were invisible from the study of their bones. As it turns out, 97% of our DNA is from Homo Sapiens, the other 3% is from Neanderthals. “Think about it in terms of numbers, today there are about 6 billion people living in the world outside of sub-Saharan Africa, 3% of their ancestry traces to Neanderthals, we're talking around about 200 million Neanderthals. Neanderthals today are more successful than they ever were when they actually existed.” -John Hawks. The 3% figure is actually an average, Neanderthal inheritance varies dramatically between human populations. Humans whose ancestors lived in paleolithic Europe and Asia are much more related to Neanderthals (up to 5%) than humans whose paleolithic ancestors lived in sub-Saharan Africa or the Americas (down to 1%). While this average may vary, all humans share some amount of Neanderthal genes. Specifically we share nuclear DNA but not mitochondrial (maternally transmitted) DNA. This prompts the hypothesis that female humans and male Neanderthals produced offspring, but male humans and female Neanderthals were either rare, absent, or sterile. The simple acknowledgment that our DNA is not wholly resultant from other Homo Sapiens shows that we, as a species, had no scruples interbreeding with other hominins. It is also solid evidence that we interbred with Neanderthals at all, which was heavily in dispute until these findings. While we obtained genes from Neanderthals, these studies also show us which genes are owned solely by ourselves, and no one else.

The most ridiculous picture of John Hawks I could find on the internet

The most important genes we inherited deal with the HLA (human leukocyte antigen) system. These HLA genes are fundamental to creating our immune system and vital to fighting off disease. Through inheritance, we adopted these genes which developed specifically within the Neanderthal immune system. Their immune system had evolved to fight off ice age diseases, which we (as recent transplants from Africa) had no immunity to. This environmental upgrade was first developed within the human population by Neanderthal and Human hybrids. These hybrids had quite the advantage of those without this enhanced immune system, enough of an advantage to slowly bring these genes back into the human population...and spread them across the world.

In a 2014 study by Liran Carmel and Eran Meshorer, which reconstructed the Neanderthal and Denisovan epigenome, researchers found human-unique genes involved with brain development (which makes sense), but also with our immune and cardiovascular systems. They discovered certain genes, like those related to our digestive system, which were shared in common with Neanderthals and humans. A 2010 study led by Liran Carmel found genes related to Alzheimer's, autism, and schizophrenia which had been (through epigenetic markers) “turned off” for Neanderthals and “turned on” for humans. This might mean that Neanderthals and humans did not share these mental illnesses, but that they are a human phenomenon. While this may be the case, epigenetic markers vary wildly between populations due to climate, diet, and a range of other factors. This individual Neanderthal did not suffer from these illnesses, it may not be emblematic of the population at large.

In a separate 2014 study by Sriram Sankararaman and David Reich, they found that we inherited Neanderthal genes related to the susceptibility for Crohn's Disease, Lupus, and Type 2 Diabetes. In addition to diseases, Neanderthals and ourselves share a susceptibility towards certain cancers. A study by David Frayer analyzed a rib bone from Krapina, Croatia and found fibrous dysplasia. This type of cancer is still found in the modern population 120 thousand years later. “They probably were sleeping in caves with burning fires...inhaling a lot of smoke...So the air was not completely free of pollutants.” -David Frayer. It is remarkable that we can come to find such similarities with Neanderthals, even if it is only to understand the pain of a disease shared in common.

Over the course of thousands of years, the internal structure of our bodies was slowly reformatted by our genetic interaction with Neanderthals. As our internal bodies changed, so did our epidermal layer. We inherited the BNC2 gene from Neanderthals, this gene specifically deals with skin pigmentation. This discovery implies we Homo Sapiens inherited our pale skin from Neanderthals! This genetic change took thousands of years to fully take hold, beginning its spread throughout European humans at most only 7 kya. In addition to inheriting genes for pale skin, we also inherited the gene for red hair from our Neanderthal cousins. The level of our shared genetic heritage has been fluctuating as well, slowly decreasing as time marches on. Otzi, the Ice-Man, who died around 5.3 kya in the Alps, shares more DNA with Neanderthals than modern Alpine humans. Thousands of years after the extinction of the Neanderthals, the last remnant of their time on earth, their genes, slowly recedes from the world.

A model of Otzi

Pandora's box has been opened, and 3 billion base pairs fell out. The small steps we've made in the last 4 years have shown great advances in both our technological limits and our understanding of Neanderthals. The provisional reconstruction of the Neanderthal and Denisovan epigenome this year (in 2014) is the first step towards an entirely new science. The researchers in that study have already planned to reconstruct the epigenome of Natufians to see how early agriculture effected our epigenome. Whatever they find, it will not be boring. If diseases such as autism and schizophrenia turn out to be a human-unique phenomenon, it would add interesting detail to the evolutionary history of our frontal lobe. All of this changes how we see ourselves – what makes us human is not only the usual suspects (such as brain size or language), but also our mental health and our epigenome. This field of research is incredibly new and fast paced...so watch out! It may all be completely different in 5 years.

Svante Paabo and the skull of a rival geneticist

Their Bones and Body

The Neanderthal genome is a beautiful example of what can be reconstructed from the fossil record, but our search for information does not end there, don't discount the bones! The majority of what we understand about Neanderthals comes from their fossils, and to understand the Neanderthal mind we must ask what is so special about their bones? Neanderthal bones are similar to human weight lifters, not bulky but wiry. Their bones were shorter, denser, thicker, stronger than ours – very well adapted to a life of strenuous activity. Their bones are also more effected by osteoarthritis than ours. Neanderthals lived a brutish life comparatively, 2/3rds are dead by age 30. The maximum age of Neanderthals is 45-50, and by that time their bodies were as run-down as an elderly human. Neanderthals also had larger brains than humans, which strangely enough has no bearing on intelligence. In fact, “more of the Neanderthal brain appears to have been dedicated to vision and body control, leaving less brain to deal with other functions like social networking.” -Eiluned Pearce. On the outside of the body, genetics has shown that Neanderthals would be pale skinned and some had red hair. A 2007 genetic study found that Neanderthals had a version of the MC1R gene, which helps us produce more vitamin D and absorb more calcium from food. While that trait is certainly beneficial, the gene also gives us red hair! In humans this varies between red and dark hair (blond hair is a different genetic change). Sadly we don't know all the genes which contribute to pigmentation, so any assertion is only a likelihood and far from certain.

A computer illustration of the facial geometry of a Neanderthal compared to modern Homo Sapiens

A reconstruction of Shanidar 1, by paleoartist John Gurche

A model of a Neanderthal presumably experiencing happiness. From the Neanderthal Museum in Mettmann, Germany

This pale red headed stocky fellow was also kind of short. 27 limb bones from Atapuerca (near Burgos) Spain were examined in a 2012 study by Carretero Diaz to estimate the height of Pleistocene hominins. Heidelbergensis were a little taller than Neanderthals, with the average Neanderthal height being 5'3”. Heidelbergensis and Neanderthals were a similar height to modern Mediterranean humans. In fact, most hominins stayed about the same size for around 2 million years (Habilis in Africa, Georgicus in Georgia, Floresiensis in Indonesia were short and the exceptions to the rule). While the average height stayed the same, “Amongst every population we have found a tall or very tall individual.” -Researchers with the study. Our Homo genus stayed the same height until about 200 kya when African Sapiens made their entrance to the scene. We were significantly taller on average than all of our predecessors, a hunting band of Homo Sapiens must have been quite a sight to a short Neanderthal. “The explanation is found in the overall morphological change in the body biotype that prevailed in our species compared to our ancestors. The Homo Sapiens had a slimmer body, lighter bones, longer legs, and were taller.” -Researchers with the study.

A height comparison of Heidelbergensis, Neanderthals, and Homo Sapiens, from Plataforma SINC

A model reconstruction of a Neanderthal (named Wilma) from the El Sidron Cave in Spain, next to a living Homo Sapiens (named Marina Allende)

The changes in our body morphology were extremely helpful...we had better thermoregulatory, obstetric, and nutritional systems. Overall we had definite increases in endurance and energy. “Larger legs, narrower hips, being taller and having lighter bones not only meant a reduction in body weight (less muscular fat) but a bigger stride, greater speed, and a lower energy cost when moving the body, walking, or running.” -Carretero Diaz. This extreme physical gap between us and them put Neanderthals at quite the disadvantage, which we will examine later. 

The Paleo-Diet

The Paleo-Diet

This stout muscular Neanderthal body required a lot of nutrition, exactly how many calories is debated, but we do know what they ate. They hunted rhinoceroses, bison, brown bear, red deer, and horses, eating the meat and bone marrow. Neanderthals would focus on prime-aged adult prey as opposed to juveniles or older adults, with this behavior starting around 250 kya from evidence at Hayonim cave in Israel. Neanderthals would sometimes focus on a single species, like at Mauran France, where a Neanderthal butchery site contained around 4,000 bison remains. Other places in France and Germany were specialized bovid kill sites. At Salzgitter-Lebenstedt Germany there is a Neanderthal hunting site dedicated to reindeer, and it was only used in early Autumn during their annual migrations. What Neanderthals hunted depended entirely on the local climate, in warm forests they hunted solitary game but in colder tundra they hunted herds.

Neanderthals hunting a rhinoceros

Neanderthals also famously hunted mammoths, as evidenced by the site at La Cotte de St. Brelade, Jersey. In our popular imagination, this site has spawned the idea that Neanderthals herded mammoths off cliffs as if they were giant furry elephantine lemmings. This idea attempted to explain the severe damage seen in mammoth leg bones at the site, which would have been difficult for Neanderthals to accomplish with tools. While this is still unexplained, the area is most likely a mammoth processing site. Bone heaps are arranged in patterns, with some heaps containing mainly skulls and ribs, and others containing limbs and pelvic bones. “I can't imagine a way in which Neanderthals would have been able to force mammoths down this slope and then up again before they even got to the edge of the headland...and they're unlikely to have got up there in the first place.” -Beccy Scott. Since the bone piles were intentionally divided, it is most likely a result of butchering and organizing. Burnt bone charcoal has also been found, signaling that the bones were used for fuel. The site is amazingly well preserved, stemming from fine silt dust which blew over the site after its abandonment.

Neanderthals hunting mammoths off the cliffs at Jersey, which definitely still happened regardless of what Beccy Scott or any informed scientists say

After big game meat, Neanderthals ate any living creature they could get their hands on. Tortoises, shellfish, hares, rabbits, birds, molluscs, seals, dolphins were all eaten when Neanderthals had the opportunity. “Neanderthals harvested live molluscs on the rocks for eating, transported them to their living sites in wet algae bundles, and discarded their shells after eating the flesh...They did this with limpets, mussels, and topshells.” -Joao Zilhao. The Neanderthal diet is not only carnivorous, but opportunistic and omnivorous, very similar to our own.

More recently, we have greatly expanded our understanding of the Neanderthal diet. Not only did they eat meat, but they also ate plants! Evidence from fecal remains at El Salt in Spain show phytosterol (a compound similar to cholesterol found in plants). “It would take a significant plant intake to produce even a small amount of metabolized phytosterol.” -Ainara Sistiaga. While it is possible that they obtained phytosterol from eating the stomachs of herbivores, other evidence does not support this idea. Microscopic analysis of fossilized tartar on Neanderthal teeth has found starch granules, cattails, oats, and grains. Not only eaten raw, but cooked! The process of cooking changes the structure of these grains, which is still apparent after fossilization. Cooking grains would require a container, which (as seen in modern humans) would most likely be either a stuffed animal stomach or a bundle of large wrapped up leaves.

Ainara Sistiaga

Other evidence points to plant use outside of nutrition, “The evidence indicating this individual [Neanderthal] was eating bitter-tasting plants such as yarrow and chamomile with little nutritional value is surprising. We know that Neanderthals would find these plants bitter, so it is likely these plants must have been selected for reasons other than taste.” -Stephen Buckley. Selected for reasons other than taste leaves quite a large margin for theorizing. The simplest answer is that Neanderthals developed a taste for bitterness, not so far removed from the actions of people today. This points to Neanderthals collecting food based on criterion other than immediate practicality, an interesting mental shift related to culture. The other, more outlandish claim, would be that Neanderthals ate bitter plants as medicine. All indigenous human cultures have an understanding of the use of regional plants, and since Neanderthals discovered edible plants through experimentation it is not unreasonable to say that they too had this knowledge. Since neither explanation has much evidence, the simplest wins for now – they may have just enjoyed bitter food.

Hunting goes hand in hand with technology. Not only do animals provide meat, but the entirety of their bodies are used to complement all aspects of daily needs. Modern humans make needles, awls, and spear heads from animal bones. Sinews, gut, and tendons are used to bind tools or wooden hafts. Stomachs are used as bags for carrying water or blood. Fat is used to waterproof leather boots and clothing. Grease is smeared on exposed skin for insulation or to ward off insects. Hair is twisted to make thread. Skins are used to make bags, cloths, shoes, blankets, and shelters. While Neanderthals probably did not do exactly all these things, they must have used the animal to the best of their capabilities.

A group of Homo Erectus butchering an elephant

The Original Social Contract

The Original Social Contract

So far, the life of an individual Neanderthal is coming together. We know their genome, physiology, and diet. Yet the most important piece of the puzzle is missing: their social life. Neanderthals are just like humans in this regard, we are both extremely social. No individual is an island, and to look into the mind of a Neanderthal is to see one thinker within a thinking group. They lived in groups of 5-10, made up of their immediate family (humans lived in groups of 20-30 made up of relatives as well as close family). These familial clans occupied a small territory and rarely strayed from it except to trade. The population of Neanderthals in Europe peaked at around 70,000 individuals, with only around 7,000 reproductive females. Sometimes, multiple Neanderthal families would gather around a large kill site (like at La Cotte, Salzgitter-Lebenstedt, and Molodova), but this was temporary and as soon as the meat was gone, the group disbanded. At Molodova Ukraine there were multiple huts and wind breaks suiting maybe 20-40 Neanderthals at one area.

Living Together

In the same way that humans do, Neanderthals divided their living spaces in accordance to their needs. In open spaces like at Tor Faraj, there are multiple separate sections: butchery, primary stone processing, bone/antler work, final stone/plant processing, trash dump, a wind-break made of brush, straw bedding area, and a central activity area complete with a hearth. This is a clear sign of the social behavior of Neanderthals, they structured their area because they structured their behavior. Neanderthals did this not only in open spaces, but in caves as well. At Riparo Bombrini Italy, Neanderthals located butchering, tool-making, and fire use in different parts of their cave. Neanderthals were conservative in land use, with small clustered living sites even when outside. When living in a cave, Neanderthals occupied a small part at the entrance, and only slightly ventured deeper.

The Neanderthal living space at Lazaret Cave in southern France, by Libor Balak

When Neanderthal clans met it meant three things: communal butchery, trading, or warfare. Neanderthals traded precious stones, obsidian, and fossil shells over hundreds of kilometers. While not nearly as developed as early human trade, it is still remarkable that distant trading is not a uniquely human phenomenon. Large butchery sites and trading show interpersonal connection between clans, but just as with humans...spears are not only for hunting but for warfare. At Saint Cesaire France a Neanderthal burial circa 36 kya showed evidence of violence. This individual at some point had a serious head wound which had healed. The wound was made by a sharp object, and the location of the wound points toward violence as opposed to accident. Neanderthal clans competed over resources just as much as humans and chimpanzees do. The evolution of warfare is not unique to humans.

While contact between different clans led to violence, the social development within a clan is remarkable. The Neanderthal family group comprised multiple generations, with children and the elderly receiving special treatment. An elderly Neanderthal (around 40 years old) buried at the Shanidar Cave survived under extreme stress. This individual (who lived around 60-80 kya) was blind in the left eye from a severe wound, had a crippled right arm (which was withered and caused paralysis), and had a deformed lower right leg and foot. This individual could not hunt, but was cared for by its family for years. At La Chapelle-Aux-Saints a Neanderthal was found who only had two teeth. This individual could not chew food yet survived to be 40-50 years old. Most likely, this individual had food chewed for it by another family member multiple times every day for years. It is surprising to find love and affection in the fossil record, yet here it is. It is undeniable that these individuals were loved and cared for by their families.

Model of a Neanderthal at a American Museum of Natural History, D.C.

Neanderthals are not the only species to care for the injured, an elderly Homo Erectus in Dmanisi Georgia (around 1 million 750 kya) did not have teeth and probably had food chewed for it as well. At Atapuerca Spain a Homo Heidelbergensis was found with a severely deformed skull. This was a child, who lived with this deformity for 8-12 years. This child could not hunt, yet was fed and cared for by its family til its death, around 530 kya. Also at Atapuerca Spain another Heidelbergensis was found with a hobbled spine, this individual could not hunt either yet was cared for for years until its death around 500 kya. The care for the elderly goes hand in hand with what makes us human, yet it is not a uniquely human trait. This complex use of the emotion of sympathy began not even with Neanderthals, but with Homo Erectus about one million years ago. In this way, the mind of the Neanderthal creeps out, if only because this part of its mind is shared by both its evolutionary predecessor and us today.

Childhood

Children and infants were also treated differently, they were given much more elaborate graves than most Neanderthals. “There is evidence that Neanderthals cared for their sick and injured children for months and often years.” -Penny Spikins. In the small and relatively isolated groups in which Neanderthals lived, children were much more important and valuable to the group's survival. Selection pressure focused on creating close emotional connections within such a small group. Humans have an extremely slow maturation rate compared to other hominins, “The slow development in children is directly related to the emergence of human social and cultural complexity.” -Jean-Jacques Hublin. While the average reproductive age of chimpanzees is 13, and humans 19, Neanderthals were somewhere in between. The rate of mental growth and generally the experience of a Neanderthal childhood would also have been somewhere in between those extremes. “We moved from a primitive 'live fast and die young' strategy to a 'live slow and grow old' strategy and that has helped make humans one of the most successful organisms on the planet.” -Tanya Smith.

A model of a Neanderthal child at the Neanderthal Museum in Krapina, Croatia

Model of a Neanderthal child by Elizabeth Daynes, at the National Museum of Prehistory at Les Eyzies

While Neanderthals cared deeply for their children, 39% of Neanderthals suffered significant periods of poor nutrition as infants, making hunger and famine somewhat common. While this may look like a rough upbringing, “There is a critical distinction to be made between a harsh childhood and a childhood lived in a harsh environment.” -Penny Spikins. Historically, 38% of prehistoric northern Canadian Inuit children had the same rates of famine. Neanderthals weren't bad providers, they provided the same amount of food as early modern humans. Gathering in such cold and harsh environments as Ice Age Europe was risky in and of itself. “Neanderthals were not as technologically sophisticated as the Inuit; that they were able to achieve comparable levels of nutrition with simpler tools is a testament to the success of their more physical, dangerous approach to daily life.” -Thomas Wynn, Frederick Collidge.

Illustration of a Neanderthal child (Ferrassie 8), by Emmanuel Roudier

Communication

We speak on average 16,000 words a day, language either spoken or in thought constitutes the majority of our inner lives. Is this the same for Neanderthals? Neanderthals could make the same range of phonemes as humans, we both have a peculiarly placed hyoid bone. Most animals have their hyoid bone located deep in their throat, allowing for only barking and bursts of uncontrollable force. Humans and Neanderthals are different, our hyoid bones are located in the upper part of our throat. This does two things: it gives us expert control over our vocal muscles which creates the panoply of phonemes we hear today, and it allows us to choke easily on food. The evolutionary benefit of complex language far outweighs the cost of an increase in choking deaths. At least when we're choking, we can use language to call for help!

There were some phonemes Neanderthals could not make. They lacked a mental protuberance, which is the point at the tip of the chin. The mentalis muscle helps move the lower lip and allows for bilabial phonemes in humans, as well as the bilabial click. While some Neanderthals do have a mental protuberance, it's not in the same shape as modern humans. With this information, we can scientifically prove the Neanderthal name Brokk was never used.

While Neanderthals could make complex sounds, how do we know they used them for communication? Their ancestors Homo Heidelbergensis had complex and well developed auditory tracts, with similar complexity as modern humans. This is evidence that Heidelbergensis had adapted to listening for complexity, which certainly is evidence of complex language. These features were passed down to Neanderthals and ourselves, evidence that the invention of language was far far in the past. Neanderthals also had the FOXP2 gene, alleles of which are associated with comprehending grammar and controlling mouth movements when producing words. Neanderthals also had well developed Broca's areas and Wernicke's areas in their brains, both of which play a role in complex language. All of this evidence points towards complex language use.

The location of Broca's Area, Wernicke's Area, and the hyoid bone in Homo Sapiens

If Neanderthals had complex language, what exactly did it sound like? The only academic trying to answer this question with something other than we don't know is Steven Mithen. In his 2006 book he contends that Neanderthal language would have been a proto-linguistic system of communication developed before the splitting of music and language into two separate forms of cognition. This is summed up as Hmmmmm: Holistic (non-compositional), Manipulative (utterances are commands or suggestions not descriptive statements), Multi-Modal (acoustic as well as gestural and mimetic), Musical, and Mimetic. While this is extremely theoretical and requires a lot of philosophizing, it is an interesting first step.

Steven Mithen

The context of language use is also vitally important to early humans. Humans built huge bonfires, and keep them going throughout the day and night. Thomas Wynn and Frederick Collidge in their book How to Think Like a Neanderthal explain that this novel use of fire is related to the invention of ritual and the birth of storytelling. For early humans, large fires were the central locus of their camps, and at night became the locus of group bonding and conversation. Neanderthals did not build large fires like this, and thus did not treat them as opportunities for storytelling and ritual. Fires were used only in a practical sense, as hearths for cooking, and nothing else. Neanderthals could still have ritual or stories but the context would be very different to how we perceive those uses of language. Neanderthals had few interactions with outsiders, and probably did not have different linguistic modes conveying politeness. “Neanderthal language was direct and task-relevant. It was capable of referring to events in the past, or future, or at distant places, but only in ways connected to a context shared with the listener.” -Thomas Wynn, Frederick Collidge.

Human language fractures and divides itself naturally as humans spread and lose contact with one another. Neanderthal language evolved in the same manner, yet with even smaller groups and even less outside communication. For humans the next valley over would have a different dialect, for Neanderthals the next family would have a different dialect. Neanderthals did not venture far outside of their clan territory – why was this the case? Was it caused by the inability to communicate over long distances? Or did the isolation of small family groups create the lack of long distance language? It is impossible to know, and certainly impossible to assign any causality. The more reasonable answer is that the Neanderthal personality and their language habits were one and the same. Two sides of the same coin, inseparable and feeding off one another, creating a feedback loop of xenophobia and familial dialects.

Burial and Ritual

The Consequence of Life: Burial

Neanderthals intentionally buried their dead. This statement has been controversial ever since the 1908 discovery of a burial at La Chapelle-aux-Saints France. Every detail of that burial has been questioned skeptically since its discovery, but an immense 1999-2012 study of Neanderthal burials by New York University and France's National Center for Scientific Research has shown that not only was that a burial but it is by no means the only one or the most complex. Neanderthals treated their dead unlike any animal before them, understanding why is key to understanding their mind.

Shanidar Cave, in Iraqi Kurdistan

At Shanidar Cave in Iraqi Kurdistan, an adult Neanderthal male was killed in a rockfall. Near to the rockfall, his family built a small pile of stones (a tumulus) with some chert stone points placed on top. They also build a large fire nearby. Another burial at Shanidar Cave, famously called The Flower Burial, is a male aged 35-40 years laying on his left side in the fetal position. His body is surrounded by flower pollen, which were the remnants of flowers placed around his grave. These were placed there intentionally, whether by a Neanderthal or by a Persian jird (a type of gerbil-rodent) is highly debated. These specific flowers have medicinal properties which lends weight to the Neanderthal side, yet pollen is strewn through multiple layers from jird activity...and the consensus (as far as I can tell) is that team jird has won.

Looking out from the Shanidar Cave

The dastardly Persian Jird

At La Chapelle-aux-Saints, two children and an adult Neanderthal were buried around 50 kya. Their family dug pits in the cave for the burials, and the children face each other possibly for ceremonial reasons. Their bodies are also surrounded by animal bones. For years people thought the bones and bodies had washed into natural cavities, but the geology “cannot be explained by natural events...there is no sign of weathering and scavenging by animals.” -William Rendu. This is a sign that the bodies were immediately covered after burial, lending serious weight to the idea of a burial practice. The adult has a tumulus of stones built on top of its grave, stones which came from outside the cave. A Neanderthal burial at La Ferrassie cave included a large stone slab over the body. All of these items of evidence: the immediate covering of the body, the creation of a tumulus, and funerary slabs are examples of burial practices. This behavioral phenomenon requires a complexity of thought presumed to have been uniquely human.

The Neanderthal burial site at La Chapelle-aux-Saints cave, France

Le Regourdou

The most impressive Neanderthal burial is at Le Regourdou cave. Here, a Neanderthal was buried (around 70 kya) surrounded by stone points and brown bear bones. This burial has some of the best evidence for grave goods, the stone points were possibly weapons, and the brown bear bones were possibly hunting trophies or trinkets. The human practice of leaving grave goods is tied to the idea of an afterlife and symbolic reasoning. If Neanderthals left grave goods, were they thinking the same thoughts? There are 33 known Neanderthal burials, with more than half associated with stone tools or animal bones, and at La Ferrassie cave a bone fragment has a series of intentional parallel cuts. “Grave goods may or may not relate to metaphysical notions of an afterlife or bodily extension; they probably speak more of self-expression and concepts of ownership. It may well be that neither existed in Neanderthal societies.” -Paul Pettitt.

Le Regourdou Cave under excavation in 1964

The uniqueness of this burial does not end there, on top of the grave is a giant (850 kg/1870 lbs) limestone slab, a true funeral slab. Built on the slab was a tumulus of large stones, and on top of that was a layer of burnt sand and various artifacts including more brown bear bones. Regourdou is the first tomb. Yet the strangeness does not even end there. Around the grave are about 20 man-made ditches. These are either lined, filled, or covered with stones, and their purpose is unknown. The only clue is one such small ditch, carefully lined with stones and covered with a limestone slab and a tumulus. Inside, is a nearly complete brown bear skeleton. “It is difficult to see how this could be a natural accumulation.” -Eugene Bonifay. The entire grave site is spectacular. It includes a Neanderthal tomb complete with grave goods and a fire ritual, along with multiple brown bear tombs. This burial is radically different than other Neanderthal burials, possibly connoting an elevated social status or the individual's symbolic relation to bears. Who was this person? Who took the time to built such an elaborate tomb, complete with little bear tombs? Since Neanderthals came together in extended clan groups of up to 40, it is possible that this Neanderthal was the leader of one such group. It is also just as possible that this Neanderthal's clan of 8-15 took years or decades to build the tomb. This tomb raises many strange and unforeseen questions...is this evidence of a social hierarchy? What relation did bears have to this person? How did Neanderthals lift a funeral slab weighing around 1900 pounds? Explaining this tomb is the deepest mystery in all of anthropology.

Brown Bears are kept at the Regourdou site as a tourist attraction

How Neanderthals Treated Death

In general, most Neanderthal burials are simple compared to ours, and were “body-centered” -Jean-Jacques Hublin. The most locationally unique Neanderthal burial is at Sima de los Huesos Spain, where deep within the cave around 30 bodies were tossed into shafts as a burial. This occurred around 500 kya, and is disputed whether these were Neanderthals or Heidelbergensis. The first undisputed burial evidence is from around 90 kya. Most burials are shallow graves dug into soft midden soil, near the living areas at the mouths of caves and rock shelters. While originally burials were not separated from the rest of a site, at Kebara cave there is evidence that bodies were buried deeper within the cave over time. Eventually Neanderthals began to associate certain areas of a cave with burials. Neanderthals tended to bury their dead within the cave or by the entrance, whereas humans mainly buried their dead by the entrance or on the terrace of caves.

Kebara Cave, at Mount Carmel, Israel

While many bodies were put in a fetal position, not all were. Some bodies had bones stained with hematite (rust-red iron ore), which was either sprinkled or painted on the body (when mixed with vegetable seed oil or animal fat). There is evidence of defleshing at burials, either for ritual or for cannibalism. Sometimes a body was disarticulated to fit in a grave. At Mount Cerceo Italy around 57 kya, a Neanderthal's head was bashed in to reveal the brains, and the hole was later enlarged and the edges smoothed so it could be used as a bowl. Other evidence of cannibalism points towards a general similarity with animal butchery, like at El Sidron cave in Spain a family of 12 was overwhelmed by another clan, killed, and eaten. While funerary slabs show respect for the dead, cannibalism shows that sentimentality was fleeting and at times hunger prevailed.

Mount Cerceo, Lazio, Italy

The construction of tombs and nutritional cannibalism were not practiced everywhere at all times. Neanderthal burial practices were just as varied as contemporaneous human burials. There were burials of individuals (sometimes only parts of individuals) and burials of groups. Groups were either buried at the same time (as in La Ferrassie), or not (as in Shanidar). Most burials were dug into the cave floor, but some used natural fissures or depressions, and some even widened natural pits. Strangely enough, at some places bones were unceremoniously pushed away from the living space, not even buried at all. “Aquitaine and Levant contain relatively large numbers of burials as well as places of multiple burial, which might suggest that burial was practiced more widely in these areas and that, by contrast, Neanderthals in other regions either did not bury their dead, or did not practice it frequently.” -Paul Pettitt. A universal feature is that children and infants were given more elaborate burials, and there was no distinction between male and female burials. While the most famous burials are within caves, just as many burials were by rock shelters. “If there was any general means of disposal of the dead in Neanderthal society we shall never recapture it as it is obviously archaeologically invisible.” -Paul Pettitt.

Illustration of the burial of Ferrassie 5, including the stone points associated with the burial as grave goods. By Emmanuel Roudier

If there is any rhyme or reason to the location of Neanderthal burials, it may be due to inter-clan competition. “These are regions...that Neanderthals were particularly numerous, and it is tempting to suggest that the practice of burial may have been connected to population size and perhaps to a sense of territoriality.” -Paul Pettitt. While this is an interesting thought, since we only have around 30 burials of a species which included millions of individuals over hundreds of thousands of years, the most insightful burials have probably not even been found. We do know that they continued burying their dead up until the last Neanderthal.

There was no single Neanderthal mindset towards burial. Their treatment of the dead exists in a gray area between elaborate stone tombs and no burial at all. While tombs and grave goods are reflective of the idea of an afterlife, “...as if they recognized some stage after death.” -Eric Delson, cannibalism and the lack of burial signify that bodies immediately lost their connection to the individual. Tombs and grave goods may only signify memorials and the idea of individual possession, not symbolizing an afterlife at all. Since there is so much local variation, it is possible that some Neanderthals recognized an afterlife and other did not. The understanding of an afterlife may have been a cultural trait, passed down from generation to generation within a family group. If Neanderthal linguistic variation was centered around the family unit, it is conceivable that cultural variation in burial practices were also. The burial at Le Regourdou is the most confusing...what was the connection between that individual and brown bears, and why did that connection have to be formalized in death? We will never know for sure.

The Cult of the Cave Bear

A sketch of a Neanderthal next to cave bears, by Emmanuel Roudier

The connection between bears and Neanderthals is not isolated to Le Regourdou. In the early 20^th century, there were multiple discoveries of cave bear bones in strange positions, the most famous of which is Drachenloch cave. Drachenloch was famously excavated by Emil Bachler and Theophil Nigg. At the time their discoveries were revolutionary, but in the intervening years everything they did has been disavowed and undone by the archeological community.

Drachenloch Cave

They found cave bear bones placed in strange positions, surrounded by stones. They found ditches filled with bear bones and topped with slabs. They found a cave bear skull with a bone stuck through its cheek, and skulls placed on top of rocks. As it turns out, cave bears scratch out nests, making bones and small rocks collect in crevices. Those bones and rocks are then saved from erosion, giving the impression that they were placed there. Due to rockfalls, large slabs then fall on collections of bones, forming the impression of a burial. With thousands of bones in a single cave, and thousands of years of bear activity, it is not impossible that one bone would be lodged through another.

The infamous cave bear skull

Emil Bachler began his excavation already believing in the cult of the cave bear and didn't leave detailed records of context. He wasn't even there most of the time. The lead excavator Theophil Nigg was there most of the time and his notes completely contradict Bachler's. Bachler said that the bear graves were “obviously man-made”, had slabs laying on them, and that small walls were associated with the bear graves. Nigg's notes report the exact opposite of all these claims.

“It was a small chamber with sloping walls...the bears...dug out their lair, forming, with the complicity of the sloping walls, the most beautiful trap for prehistorians one could imagine. When the overlying material had been removed, the little chamber was surrounded by a circle of bear skulls, oriented in all directions, but for the most part horizontal and lying in place...The work of the bears and the unconscious elimination of all the little bones had sufficed to produce a structure such that one could hardly doubt the intervention of man.” -Andre Leroi-Gourhan (speaking about the cave at Les Furtins)

The idea that Neanderthals had a cave bear based religion was popular in academic circles throughout the 1960s and 70s, and popularized by the book The Clan of the Cave Bear. While many parts of that book still stand...the Neanderthals have names which include bilabial phonemes, and only use sign language (the book was written in 1980, and the Neanderthal hyoid bone was found in 1983). The cult of the cave bear has also not stood up to modern research. Reality is much more ridiculous than fiction, the true meaning of the actual bear graves at Le Regourdou is completely unknown. While Drachenloch is a Neanderthal burial, the fantasies of Emil Bachler live on into the 21^st century.

“All relevant conceptions of that kind are either products of a certain mental climate at the time of the discovery of the fossils or of ideologies...the discussion of religious customs among recent hunter gatherers proves that what remains of the practice of their cult differs markedly from the fossil remains found in the Mousterian bear caves. An examination of fossil bone formations...makes clear that supposed ancient bear cult sites are bone beds of natural origin. The characteristic appearance of the sites is a result of the activities of the bears themselves and of geological and sedimentary processes.” -Ina Wunn

Ina Wunn