Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
The Puzzler

Stan Gooch & The Neanderthal Legacy

294 posts in this topic

Hi Puzzler,

Sorry to be so long in responding, it's been a bit of a hell week,working out of town and getting back just in time to watch over my grand-daughter so that my daughter could work some extra shifts to make some travel money for her holiday.So now I will have a few days to catch up on the reading and links that everyone has added since I was last able to sit back and absorb.And thanks I will be asking more questions.

jmccr8

:tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting stuff....

Thus we see that the man created after the seventh day differs from the man created on the sixth day, in two important respects. The man created on the sixth day, was created by "God," as part of a natural progression beginning with simple creatures. This first man, however, was unable "to till the land." The man fashioned after the seventh day, after "God" had rested, was created by the "Lord God" after all the natural sequential acts of creation had come to an end. And, this new man, created after the seventh day was able to till the gardens, and was provided with a "living soul."

Because the Earth was already swarming with these more primitive humans, Cain (the son of Adam and Eve) worried aloud to the Lord God, that he may be killed: "I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass that everyone that findeth me shall slay me... And the Lord Set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him" (Genesis, 4: 14-15).

Thus we may presume that the first men and women did not possess a "living soul," were exceedingly primitive and violent, and lacked the intellectual capability to perform the tasks assigned--at least, as stated by the Sumerians and echoed in Genesis. "There was not a man to till the ground." They were like animals. They had no souls. They were Neanderthals.

By contrast, the second creation resulted in men and women who were not only created in the image of the Gods, but who were highly intelligent, and who received something of God, becoming a "living soul." Unlike the men and women created on the sixth day, this newly created woman and man were so creative, intelligent, and demonstrated such wisdom, that the "the Lord God..." proclaimed "man had become as one of us, to know good and evil."

AND ON THE 6TH DAY, GOD CREATED NEANDERTHALS:

Neanderthals, archaics, and other peoples of the Middle Paleolithic were not very smart and used simple stones for tools. In fact, they constructed and made essentially the same stone tools over and over again for perhaps 200,000 years, until around 35,000 B.P., with little variation or consideration of alternatives (Binford, 1982; Gowlett, 1984; Mellars, 1989). Neanderthals greatly lacked in creativity, initiative, imagination, and tended to create simple stone tools that served a single purpose.

As neatly summed up by an ardent defender of Neanderthal cognitive capabilities (Hayden, 1993, p. 139), "as a rule, there is no evidence of private ownership or food storage, no evidence for the use of economic resources for status or political competition, no elaborate burials, no ornaments or other status display items, no skin garments requiring intensive labor to produce, no tools requiring high energy investments, no intensive regional exchange for rare items like sea shells or amber, no competition for labor to produce economic surpluses and no corporate art or labor intensive rituals in deep cave recesses to impress onlookers and help attract labor."

Neanderthals, tended to live in the "here and now," with little ability to think about or consider the distant future (Binford, 1973, 1982; Dennell, 1985; Mellars, 1989, 1996); the only notable exception, the future life after death.

http://brainmind.com/CroMagnonChildrenOfGod.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This notable dichotomy is in part a function of the differential evolution of the frontal versus the temporal lobes. The frontal lobes are the senior executive of the brain and is responsible for initiative, goal formation, long term planning, the generation of multiple alternatives, and the consideration of multiple alternative consequences (Joseph, 1986a, 1988a, 1999b). The frontal lobes are the source of creativity and imagination, whereas the temporal lobes are the seat of the soul. It is the temporal lobes which were maximally developed in archaic and Neanderthals, whereas the frontal lobe would increase in size by a third in the transition from archaic humans to Cro-Magnon woman and man.

Based on a gross analysis of the skull and casts made of the inner surface of skull as well as other evidence some of which will be reviewed here, it is apparent that "archaic" Neanderthal men and women possessed a well developed inferior temporal lobe whereas the frontal lobe is sloped and stunted (Joseph, 1996, 2000a). It is the temporal lobes, and the limbic structures buried within which are directly implicated in the generation of personal, emotional, and religious experience including the ability to from long term emotional attachments and to feel intense love (Gloor, 1997l Joseph, 1992a, 1999b, 2000a; MacLean, 1990).

In fact, Neanderthals provided loving care for friends and family who had been injured or maimed, enabling them to live many more years despite their grievous injuries. For example, the skeleton of one Neanderthal male, who was about age 45 when he died, had been cared for a number of years following profoundly crippling injuries. His right arm had atrophied, and his lower arm and hand had apparently been ripped or bitten off, and his left eye socket , right shoulder, collarbone, and both legs were badly injured. Obviously someone loved and tenderly cared for this man. He was no doubt a father, a husband, a brother, and son, and someone in his family not only provided long term loving care to make him comfortable in this life, but prepared him for the next life as well.

Neanderthals were unable to fashion complex tools or think complex thoughts, yet they were people of passion who experienced profound emotions and love; made possible by the limbic system and temporal lobe. In fact, it is because they had the limbic capacity to experience love, spiritual awe, and religious concerns, that these expressions of love continued beyond death. Thus the Neanderthals carefully buried their dead, providing them with food and even sprinkling the bodies with seven different types of blooming, blossoming, fragrant flowers.

------

The origins of the Cro-Magnon peoples, however, are completely unknown. There are no transitional forms that link them with Neanderthals or the still primitive "early modern" peoples of the Middle Paleolithic who were decidedly more archaic in appearance. Neanderthals did not evolve into Cro-Magnons, and they coexisted for almost 15,000 years, until finally the Neaderthals disappeared from the face of the Earth, around 30,000 years B.P. (Mellars, 1996). Indeed, the Neanderthals were of a completely different race; and not just physically, but genetically, for when they died out, so too did their genetic heritage and all traces of their DNA (Ovchinnikov et al., 2000).

By contrast, although modern human DNA differs significantly from Neanderthal DNA,"modern" human DNA traces it ancestral lineage to ancestors living in Africa about 250,000 years ago (Stoneking & Cann, 1989; Vigilant et al. 1991). Moreover, this later date is almost identical to that given by the people of ancient Sumer, for according to the Sumerians Kings lists, the Anunnaki created these first god-kings, over 240,000 years ago (Roux, 1992).

Thirty thousand years ago, and with the demise of the Neanderthals, the Cro-Magnons gained dominion over the earth. And it is thirty thousand years ago that the ancient Egyptians claim that first kings came to rule Egypt, and that these kings were gods.

In comparison to all those who had come before them, and the Neanderthals who still lived in adjacent lands, the Cro-Magnon were so physically, intellectually, technologically, culturally and genetically advanced, and had such a huge brain, and they appeared so suddenly upon the Earth, that they may well have been created by God and in the image of the Gods.... knowing good and evil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, that's good to clarify, I am accepting that Neanderthals were not going around mating with HSS all over Europe but wanted to establish how the result would have occurred by the small amount of early mating, so, circa the time frame modern humans were leaving Africa, (either 100,000BC or maybe even as late as 70,000BC according to Toba theory), the HSS females mated with some Neanderthal males, the children, who would have been females (because of the dna result?) then mated with HSS males, this would leave no Neanderthal Y DNA, but only nuclear DNA (why no Y DNA from the original mating, bred out?) nor mtDNA because no Neanderthal females were in the mix...

Because any males that might have made it past the gestation period would have been sterile.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A question I've always wondered, since first reading about modern human genetics and genetic migrational patterns, is this: Knowing that Neanderthals were around for such a long time, how many Y Chromosome and mitochondrial DNA haplogroups were there in their genetic lineage? And how does that compare to the total from both groups for HSS, especially since we're a younger line? That's something I'd like to know.

cormac

Cormac - Do not know if you have encountered the below. These would tend to indicate a rather low range of diversity. It will be interesting to follow the continuing research/growing data base.

http://www.pnas.org/.../108/1/250.full

http://www.talkorigi...homs/mtDNA.html

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cormac - Do not know if you have encountered the below. These would tend to indicate a rather low range of diversity. It will be interesting to follow the continuing research/growing data base.

http://www.pnas.org/.../108/1/250.full

http://www.talkorigi...homs/mtDNA.html

.

Thanks for these Swede. I understand and agree that the evidence shows low diversity amongst Neanderthals. I just wonder as to how low in comparison to the approximately 3500 mtDNA haplogroups/subgroups. So far, from what I've read, we have perhaps a dozen different mtDNA samples for Neandertal. So, not even 1% of the quantity for HSS. That's not just low diversity IMO. That's almost non-existant diversity in comparison to HSS. IF (and I do stress the word "IF") this were the norm for Neandertals, then it's a wonder they ever made it as a species for as long as they did IMO.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for these Swede. I understand and agree that the evidence shows low diversity amongst Neanderthals. I just wonder as to how low in comparison to the approximately 3500 mtDNA haplogroups/subgroups. So far, from what I've read, we have perhaps a dozen different mtDNA samples for Neandertal. So, not even 1% of the quantity for HSS. That's not just low diversity IMO. That's almost non-existant diversity in comparison to HSS. IF (and I do stress the word "IF") this were the norm for Neandertals, then it's a wonder they ever made it as a species for as long as they did IMO.

cormac

Agreed, and yes, an interesting factor. As noted by Foley (2011), the following mtDNA figures may need to be considered:

The diversity of the three Neandertal mtDNA sequences (3.73%) is lower than that of chimpanzees (14.82+/-5.7%) and gorillas (18.57+/-5.26%), and similar to that of modern humans worldwide (3.43+/-1.22%). If modern humans are sorted into continental groups, the diversity of the three Neandertals is similar to (within one standard deviation of) that for Africans, Asians, native Americans and Australian aboriginals, and Oceanians. Modern Europeans, who live in approximately the same region as the Neandertals, have less diversity than the Neandertals. (Foley 2011).

When one puts the previous into a temporal perspective, the apparent lack of diversity may not be too irregular.

One could also construct quite a number of hypotheses in regards to the long term effects of environmental impact, population density/distribution, and the potential for population exchange, in regards to genetic diversity.

There is also the aspect noted by Strauss (1999) in respect to varying mtDNA mutation rates in some lineages.

And we are, of course, still dealing with a comparatively small sampling.

As previously noted, it will be interesting to follow the likely expansion of the data base. Such information could potentially add, at least somewhat, to an expansion of the diversity range. That said, the DNA preservation issues in earlier specimens may still be a limiting factor.

Fascinating times indeed.

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Swede,

Thanks for the response,part of the reason that I am curios is in the area of whether or not they had a common deity/deities or if their regional distribution gave rise to different deities or rites? Has science observed any differences/similarities given the geographic dispersion of Neanderthals?

I suspect that at one time there may have been a much larger population of Neanderthals and Hs,that have been destroyed and that for both species those events created stories of gods.There always have been major earth events that have obliterated life around them, are we observing these species as survivors,and do we understand what their social structure would have been like if they had larger populations in some areas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Swede,

Thanks for the response,part of the reason that I am curios is in the area of whether or not they had a common deity/deities or if their regional distribution gave rise to different deities or rites? Has science observed any differences/similarities given the geographic dispersion of Neanderthals?

I suspect that at one time there may have been a much larger population of Neanderthals and Hs,that have been destroyed and that for both species those events created stories of gods.There always have been major earth events that have obliterated life around them, are we observing these species as survivors,and do we understand what their social structure would have been like if they had larger populations in some areas.

In part of the article I linked a few posts back some comments were made about how 'barbaric' Neanderthals really were but for one exception...

They were able to understand a life after death, which is a concept very old in our own religious ideas, maybe this concept came from Neanderthals and therefore may have included deities like Hades or underground, renewal Gods, such as Osiris, just thinking.

Neanderthals, tended to live in the "here and now," with little ability to think about or consider the distant future (Binford, 1973, 1982; Dennell, 1985; Mellars, 1989, 1996); the only notable exception, the future life after death.

Neanderthals were unable to fashion complex tools or think complex thoughts, yet they were people of passion who experienced profound emotions and love; made possible by the limbic system and temporal lobe. In fact, it is because they had the limbic capacity to experience love, spiritual awe, and religious concerns, that these expressions of love continued beyond death. Thus the Neanderthals carefully buried their dead, providing them with food and even sprinkling the bodies with seven different types of blooming, blossoming, fragrant flowers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Puzzler,

We may at present hold the view that they we barbaric,however most of what I am seeing does not show that they were creatures without calculation.They understood that they needed to branch out to other communities/groups in order to mate,this indicates that they understood that inbreeding would cause a negative impact on their chances of survival. They seem to have held some form of belief that they showed reverence to,it is possible that this species did adapt both socially and to a degree culturally.

There may have been pockets of Neanderthals that were procuring Hs females by whatever means be it trade or raid in order to maintain or advance their species.We don't know how long of a time span this may have happened,if it was a brief time period we would expect that the effect of this may be fairly insignificant however if it was a situation that spanned over many generations the effect might have had more impact.

Did each species whether Cro-magnum,Neanderthal,and Homo-sapiens have one language for each species or did the distances between groups evolve different languages within each of the species so that all of these species were multi-lingual?Or did they become multi-lingual through the process of inter-species inteaction?if Neanderthals were mating with Hs females then is it safe to assume that they became bi-lingual,and if they did this shows another area of adaptation?In hunter/gatherer cultures female talked while gathering in order to identify their positions,as well they would teach their offspring while attending to the daily tasks and duties.I can see a lot of planning and organizing occurring while the females progressed through these activities.Stories have always been a means of educating and amusement, they would probably be of great deeds and others may pertain to religious insights.

If there were some settlements that had a higher percentage of Hs females than Neanderthal females and that this was a trend that carried on for several generations the cultural effect may have given rise to new languages,gods,social norms,as well as adapted physical features.Over a period of time we may find that there was little physical difference between the blended species and Hs, other than they may have been lighter skin/hair or larger in body size.As these hybrids intergrated with other Hs groups assimilation of religious ideologies and social structure would change both groups until they where wholly one group with a common identity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Puzzler,

We may at present hold the view that they were barbaric,however most of what I am seeing does not show that they were creatures without calculation.They understood that they needed to branch out to other communities/groups in order to mate,this indicates that they understood that inbreeding would cause a negative impact on their chances of survival. They seem to have held some form of belief that they showed reverence to,it is possible that this species did adapt both socially and to a degree culturally.

There may have been pockets of Neanderthals that were procuring Hs females by whatever means be it trade or raid in order to maintain or advance their species.We don't know how long of a time span this may have happened,if it was a brief time period we would expect that the effect of this may be fairly insignificant however if it was a situation that spanned over many generations the effect might have had more impact.

Did each species whether Cro-magnum,Neanderthal,and Homo-sapiens have one language for each species or did the distances between groups evolve different languages within each of the species so that all of these species were multi-lingual?Or did they become multi-lingual through the process of inter-species inteaction?if Neanderthals were mating with Hs females then is it safe to assume that they became bi-lingual,and if they did this shows another area of adaptation?In hunter/gatherer cultures female talked while gathering in order to identify their positions,as well they would teach their offspring while attending to the daily tasks and duties.I can see a lot of planning and organizing occurring while the females progressed through these activities.Stories have always been a means of educating and amusement, they would probably be of great deeds and others may pertain to religious insights.

If there were some settlements that had a higher percentage of Hs females than Neanderthal females and that this was a trend that carried on for several generations the cultural effect may have given rise to new languages,gods,social norms,as well as adapted physical features.Over a period of time we may find that there was little physical difference between the blended species and Hs, other than they may have been lighter skin/hair or larger in body size.As these hybrids intergrated with other Hs groups assimilation of religious ideologies and social structure would change both groups until they where wholly one group with a common identity.

Am not sure who your use of the word "we" entails, as more often than not that term is used by either fringe adherents or people with little to no current understanding of what is known about such distant times and peoples. Certainly the scientific community as a whole doesn't consider them "barbaric".

You're assuming that it was a planned idea, when it may have been as simple as "because they could". The problem here is that while it evidently happened, there's no way for us to know "why" it happened.

Cro-magnon isn't a species, but actually a pretty much defunct term used for the earliest Homo sapiens sapiens in Europe.

Why would it be safe to assume they were bi-lingual when it hasn't even been determined, and possibly can't be, that the children born of such a union lived with their Neanderthal relatives as opposed to their HSS ones?

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Cormac,

I am not all that knowledgable about the subject so I would fall into that catagory of the ones that you so graciously provide for clarification,I hope that that removes the confusion for you.I suspect that would be the classification for most of us who are reading this thread.

With respect to your second comment I am not sure as to what you are referring to, if it is in regards to taking Hs females for maintaining population it may have been a plan driven by instinct for self preservation,which could amount to no plan what so ever,just survive.

How many cultures can you provide where a male takes a mate,impregnates her and goes off to live with a group of other males and leaves his mate and offspring to the people that they were originally found.If they were raised within a hunter/gatherer culture,then to abandon a component of their social structure does not seem credible if they are to survive.

I used the term Cro-magnum as it has been used in several links provided throughout this thread, some provided by yourself so I thought to include them.Some of the articles that I have read in these pages have expressed the idea that mating of other hominid species may have had an impact on the development of Hs .

I realize that some of the questions that I ask at this time may be beyond what is currently known{notice that I id not use we},but they are questions that come to mind while reading so they are contributed for discussion and not to vex the souls of the enlightened.Thanks

jmccr8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[

Hi Swede,

Thanks for the response,part of the reason that I am curios is in the area of whether or not they had a common deity/deities or if their regional distribution gave rise to different deities or rites? Has science observed any differences/similarities given the geographic dispersion of Neanderthals?

I suspect that at one time there may have been a much larger population of Neanderthals and Hs,that have been destroyed and that for both species those events created stories of gods.There always have been major earth events that have obliterated life around them, are we observing these species as survivors,and do we understand what their social structure would have been like if they had larger populations in some areas.

Hi jmccr8 - Given the realities related to the research of the past, some aspects of your questions may be difficult to answer with any degree of authority. Let us begin with the latter section of your question.

Current understandings would tend to indicate that the maximum Eurasian Neandertal population would fall into the range of some 70,000 individuals. These populations were spread over a land area that can be conservatively estimated to have encompassed some 4,320,000 mile2. This would yield an average population density of ~ .00088 individuals/mile2. See below:

http://anthro.paloma.../mod_homo_2.htm

Based upon other research, it is rather likely that the early population of H.s.s. that initially migrated from Africa was notably smaller and were composed (as were the Neanderthals) of small family/extended family groups.

As to your queries regarding belief systems, we would promptly encounter quite a number of difficulties. Amongst these would be:

1) Given the time span and incorporated preservational aspects of the period involved, the accurate determination/interpretation of belief systems becomes quite problematic.

2) If one were to utilize much more contemporary models, the diversity of belief systems, on even a rather microscopic scale, can be quite diverse.

3) It would be highly presumptive to speculate that either early H.s.n. (?) or H.s.s. had any form of "unified" belief system.

Apologies for the brief reply. Time constraints. Will be happy to elaborate if desired.

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They way I looked at it there is no such thing as speice. Homo sapian came from all life on the planet, as in all life, there were just many different lines.We`ve always had a little Neanderthal DNA.but they did go extint and the only way any life goes extint the off spring dies off.

Edited by docyabut2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Cormac,

I am not all that knowledgable about the subject so I would fall into that catagory of the ones that you so graciously provide for clarification,I hope that that removes the confusion for you.I suspect that would be the classification for most of us who are reading this thread.

With respect to your second comment I am not sure as to what you are referring to, if it is in regards to taking Hs females for maintaining population it may have been a plan driven by instinct for self preservation,which could amount to no plan what so ever,just survive.

How many cultures can you provide where a male takes a mate,impregnates her and goes off to live with a group of other males and leaves his mate and offspring to the people that they were originally found.If they were raised within a hunter/gatherer culture,then to abandon a component of their social structure does not seem credible if they are to survive.

I used the term Cro-magnum as it has been used in several links provided throughout this thread, some provided by yourself so I thought to include them.Some of the articles that I have read in these pages have expressed the idea that mating of other hominid species may have had an impact on the development of Hs.

I realize that some of the questions that I ask at this time may be beyond what is currently known{notice that I id not use we},but they are questions that come to mind while reading so they are contributed for discussion and not to vex the souls of the enlightened.Thanks

jmccr8

Hopefully you're of the latter group, as the former (fringe) like to represent our knowledge of ancient humans as if they were barbarians in order to show themselves as having special knowledge to the contrary. It only makes the former group look more foolish.

That's just it, "no plan whatsoever" is not a plan. Survival is an ingrained instinct IMO.

Considering that the populations of both Neanderthals as well as modern humans (HSS) are evidenced as having been small, and scattered over an immense territory, your argument as to culture is moot. We're not talking about groups of 10's or 100's of thousands of people living together in one specific culture. We're talking of several dozen to possibly a few hundred people, at most, living together. Too few a population and they wouldn't survive while too many and they couldn't be as actively mobile as evidenced. And since the gestation period of humans obviously isn't overnight and both groups were mobile, there's no reason to think that Neanderthals necessarily stuck around, nor that they would have cared for any offspring that weren't fully Neanderthal.

Just as long as you realize Cro-magnon is not a species designation. And the way you wrote it amounts to "a species of ourselves mated with ourselves". Of course modern humans mated with modern humans.

Mating with other species of humans has had an impact.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Cormac,

I am just a guy who spends some spare time to come here follow arguments and read links to expand myself in some way.This area of discussion does not seem to be very hot subjects like aliens,through the links that posters here contribute,I am better able to understand a part of our history. I understand that we can make some calculation as to their population though certain given periods of time given available data.However when I read an article like this,300mya tropical forest found in a coal mine in China,and I consider the many events that have ensued since then I am left wondering what percentage of the data survived.

I am not suggesting advanced metropolitan cultures,I am questioning if groups of settlements might have been within half-day/day walk and a runner or series of could create a network of sorts,after all they were family and extended family. I suspect that as you moved closer to their point of origin the population might have been denser as they would be larger and closer together.These paths that lead to that point of origin would probably follow waterways and pose certain risk depending on location.Oops this is the link for the forest

'Chinese Pompeii': 300m-year-old forest preserved by volcanic ash found in Wuda | Mail Online

I find it interesting that both Neanderthals and Hs practiced head-binding and used ochre,why would two separate species find a significance in this?It would also display a sense of self awareness,as well as some form of social structure,which is dependent on some form of religious practice.As we move away from point of origin there may have been new languages/religious ideologies that evolved.We are not talking about complex societies so we are able to identify who,what,where,when,we may see certain commonalities within these groups that might give some insight as to their way of life.

I wouldn't consider myself as fringe,I do look at what science gives of the interpretation of the available facts and accept it as such.I also realize that this knowledge is fluid and will change as we find more data to add to what is known.As always Thanks Cormac and Swede

jmccr8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am not suggesting advanced metropolitan cultures, I am questioning if groups of settlements might have been within half-day/day walk and a runner or series of could create a network of sorts, after all they were family and extended family.

The assumption you're making here though, from what I can see, is that Neanderthals would have seen it that way. And just based on the fact that we modern humans, in many ways and many parts of the world, can't seem to accept people who are different from us for one reason or another and that Neanderthals were likely very similar to us then it stands to reason that they'd be no different.

There's also the problem of the women impregnated by Neanderthal men only giving birth to girls (or sterile males, if males ever survived). Neither situation would be good for them as the men were responsible for hunting. A reduced number of men would equal a reduced chance for survival.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Cormac,

I am not suggesting that Neanderthals and Hs. are identical,however based on the facts that they created tools used fire,cooked food,created art,paid respect for the dead and cared for the afflicted does tend to lead me to believe that they had something going on there that that merits considering them as an evolved species.The fact that their mating with Hs.females was counter productive for their species may have played a part in their demise.Sterile males would still grow into able bodied and productive adults,who still need to eat so I am quite sure that they would still be proficient hunters.

Unless they had some understanding of biology they may not understand why they are no-longer producing males able to reproduce,and continue mating with Hs.females.I realize that I can only speculate,and that is part of my learning process.jmccr8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it interesting that both Neanderthals and Hs practiced head-binding and used ochre

jmccr8

Hi Jmccr8, Me too! ... and it appears as if both made cave paintings?

Edited by lightly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Neanderthals were our consins out of Africa, why would there be to much difference?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Lightly,

Yes they did make cave paintings,and it is because of these expressions of self awareness that has lead me to wonder if they might have been something more than group of wandering primates with no purpose.It makes me wonder if I have been raised with a species-centric attitude that has clouded my understanding of their significance in our past.

jmccr8

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Lightly,

Yes they did make cave paintings,and it is because of these expressions of self awareness that has lead me to wonder if they might have been something more than group of wandering primates with no purpose.It makes me wonder if I have been raised with a species-centric attitude that has clouded my understanding of their significance in our past.

jmccr8

It hasn't been confirmed they made cave paintings - it has been suggested and it would not be a suprise if they did. Both Neanderthal and early Hss moved into the niche cold climates of eurasia that forced selection pressures on them including larger capacity for planning (organisation of hunting, storing food for winter, creating/finding shelter etc) i.e. larger brain, an environment with high energy mega fauna meat to fuel such a large brain, resistence to new adversities such as cold and disease. A hominid cannot be stupid and survive in ice age or cold climate eurasia. Even early heidelbergensis in europe would more than likely be very formiddible. In many other animal species moving into a new niche environment selects adaptive advantages including intelligence such as the whales and dolphins which were once land mammals moving into the oceans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it interesting that both Neanderthals and Hs practiced head-binding

I have not seen evidence Neanderthals practices head binding. Can you provide a link?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. Seems a bit odd everyone would head into Asia though, from Africa, after this massive eruption in Asia.

Maybe it was the perfect opportunity. Many species flourish or gain an advantage after disasters or environments are disturbed. Plus it's the easy coastal route as a matter of course. Humans are far more likely to follow waterways and coasts then trek straight up into forbidding mountain ranges (ie Caucaus, Zagros, euro spline, himilaya Kush interconnected jumble). Also the Toba eruption's fallout was carried west covering an oval shaped area that extended over southern India, middle east and africa. There is also some evidence for a comet/meteor strike in Iraq around this period judged by a significant crater seen on satelite imagery and geologic dating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Dragonwind,

Here are a couple of links regarding headbinding.

Artificial Cranial Modification: Head Shaping

Artificial cranial deformation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I lost another link that I was going to add and somehow lost it,I will look for it and add it later.I am also adding a couple of links for Neanderthal art.

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Neanderthal 'face' found in Loire

With Science, New Portrait of the Cave Artist - NYTimes.com

Neandertals and Art

La Ferrassie Cave, Neanderthal Cupule Art: Description, History, Date: Middle Paleolithic Petroglyphs

I realize that a couple of these links are from wiki,but I thought that they were fine so I added them,I hope that these will be of some use to you.

jmccr8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.