Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Ancient and ArchaeologyΒ  permalink

Neanderthal Demise

• Message 1.Β 

  Posted by henvell (U1781664) on Tuesday, 18th July 2006

  The Neanderthals may have been their own worst enemy.Post 50Ka the climate of Europe frequently fluctuated between warm amd cold and during the frigid eras hominids had to migrate to warmer refugia.The Neanderthal expanded too rapidly with too few people over the southern extent of Europe and into the Near East.Their maximum population is unlikely to have been in excess of 10000 people.
  During cold eras they became fragmented in small groups,which made them vunerable to extinction during periods of population decline.The reasons for their demise varied temporally and regionally.The above may have been a contributing factor.

  Link to this forum: Neanderthal Demise

  Report message1

• Message 2

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by thegoodbadugly (U2942713) on Wednesday, 19th July 2006

  a lot of people died out through misplaning,
  machu pichu for one,and a lot of other civiliseations died out like this as well,the difference with neanderthals is they had no citys of towns or villages they were wanderers with no farming so in the winter if it was a bad winter then a lot of them cannot hunt so it was only with the advent of farming that the human race survived at all,even today we rely heavily on farming for our supply of fresh food through out the winter that and the fridge is what keeps out society together and alive.
  
  i think.

  Link to this forum: Neanderthal Demise

  Report message2

• Message 3

  , in reply to message 2.

  Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Thursday, 20th July 2006

  Bit of a difference between the death of a civilisaiton and the disappearance of a species of human. Macchu Picchu was an Inca city whose civilisatiopn, although not indiginous population, was destroyed by the Spaniards. I know there are some theories of Neanderthal inter-breeding with Homo Sapiens and thus not really dying out, but I suspect that failure to adapt to changing climate had a lot to do with it. There were probably not huge numbers of the m and if the birth rate fell it would not take long for them to reach the brink of extinction. From th ebrink it was only a small step to a .

  Link to this forum: Neanderthal Demise

  Report message3

• Message 4

  , in reply to message 3.

  Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Friday, 21st July 2006

  Neaderdal indeed spread from France up to Kazakstan, Iraq and Syria but then he did not do that with the same speed as Homo Sapiens was spreading. Scientists say that in his heyday, Neaderdal counted 100,000 population which would be a very small population even for western Europe. Of course it is not necessary that he lived in all those vast areas at the same time.
  
  Neaderdal lived in very small groups (of 10-15 members) which rarely interacted with other groups due to their sparse arrangement and since it seems that they travelled much less than Sapiens: usually a neaderdal in his maximum 40-45 years life would live within a 60km-80km radius, a place where he could find animals to hunt to satisfy his 80% dependence on meat (almost a full carnivore). Since he ate mainly meat, lived in colder climates he adapted into a stocky muscular body with shorter hand&legs/body analogy which did not allow him for great wanderings (tired too easily), while he hunted mainly using traps and encircling the animal, thus all landascapes would not do for him. Also another important fact was that since he had a shorter life-time he did not have much chance to meet his grandparents, a main way of transfer of knowledge in the Sapiens spiece that often lived more than 60 years old.
  
  I fully agree it was the low numbers and the sparse small communities arrangements that were responsible for his extinction more than the change of climate or the genocide by Sapiens that can only had played a local influence rather than a total one. Here extinct by illnesses, there killed by Sapiens, elsewhere by changing climate and diminuishing animals to hunt also further diminuished by the arrival of Sapiens - it does not take a lot for a tiny society of 10-15 members to be wiped out.
  
  Now, it seems that Neaderdals spoke (based on the anatomy of their phonetic chords) - and actually they had a more female-like voice (quite funny for muscular guys like them!), they certainly had language of their own (many animals have, small vervet monkeys have been proved to have several words like 'eagle', 'snake' and even use them to lie!!!) especially developped for their style of hunting (that needed some coordination). Being descendants of Erectus (like Sapiens) they used Erectus inventions: fire and stone working, better than Erectus but not so good as Sapiens revealing that they had not Sapiens' dexterity in fingers (hinted also by the fact that they used often their teeth during work). Their brains were a bit bigger (1500cc compared to the 1350-1400cc of Sapiens) but scientists claim that had a bit more simple structure (not that brain size or structure is an absolute measure of intelligence) - which of course is not any solid theory: Homo Sapiens was for endless thousands of years in the same cultural state as Neaderdal not to mention that the latter had managed to adapt into more difficult environments. Neaderdal used clothing, he had some social organisation, he cared for the elder and for injured members of his society (a characteristic human feature) thus he was aware of family-relative ties and such, he even seem to bury the dead and why not have some primitive religion of his for such ceremonies?
  
  The fact that he did not evolve his culture should be mainly attributed to the fact that he did not travel a lot, he lived in tiny societies with little interaction, he had a shorter life and did not meet his grandparents thus there was little knowledge transfer... things are rather obvious into that. However, it seems that in those places he met the by then more advanced Sapiens he tried to emulate (though with varying degrees of success) the better tooling of this strangers... thus showing a degree of intelligence: he realised he was left behind, that those strangers were more advanced than him and this is by no means an animal feature but purely a human one. Had Neaderdals lived in larger and more often interactiing communities and counted greater overall numbers, I think his culture would had progressed more.
  
  Now, the Sapiens-Neaderdal contact must had been an up-side-down experience for both but especially for Neaderdal who was losing the battle. In France the last bastion of Neaderdals it seems that Sapiens wherever he went he took the best places and actually preferred the higher places to control the lowers (greater visibility for his hunting, best defense) while Neaderdal struggled in the lowlands (of no use to him since he did not cultivate!). In a body fight Neaderdal had the upper hand but since Sapiens would fight with spears and even bows he could rather easily cope with this 'strange creature' in case the spirits were heated! For both the 'other' would had been 'a beast', a 'weird game of nature' or at least 'a weird stranger' but then that does not mean that some communities did not live in peace minding their own businesses. It is natural to assume that a few kinky minds from both spieces would have tried 'making love not war'.
  
  Since the vast majority of scientists affirm that Neaderdal was a cousin spiece of Sapiens but not so close and certainly not a direct ancestor but another branch from the Erectus family, we can assume that no children could have been born out of such a union. On the other hand the horse and donkey give the mule which is no spiece but a crossbreeding that has no capability of reproducing. The same can do a lion and a tiger. Could it be that actually Neaderdals and Sapiens could give birth to a non-reproductive crossbreeding?
  
  Some scientists claim that certain skeletons found in the final age of Neaderdals present features of cross breeding with Sapiens. Could it just be non-reproductive beings like the mule? Or was it just a natural change in Neaderdal spieces? Or ws it that Neaderdals though very different actually belonged to the Sapiens family (the latter is excluded by the vast majority of scientists). Personally I think it could be the first assumption. On other hand, I do not know if two different spieces (even if having the same ancestry) can join and give a new spiece or that one different spiece enters another - I think that is not possible in nature. In case Neaderdal could normally reproduce with Sapiens (being the same spiece) then it is natural to think that Europeans are the population most closer to neaderdals. The anthropologic tribe with the shortest hand&legs/body analogy I think is the Mediterraneans (to which I belong myself) not to mention that they are also the most hairy of all (quite strange for the hot climates they lived for 10,000 of years) while their head to body analogy is generally higher than other sapiens tribes. Not that all these are any hints at all enough to form a theory... personally I support the theory that claims that Mediterraneans are the oldest habitants of Europe but I do not think that these had much to do with Neaderdals since the latter were a completely different spiece.
  
  PS; Could it be that all those stories in most nations about monsters, trolls, demons, forest creatures derive from a distant misty memory of our cousin Neaderdal?

  Link to this forum: Neanderthal Demise

  Report message4

• Message 5

  , in reply to message 4.

  Posted by neanman (U5040914) on Thursday, 24th August 2006

  
  
  There is always a danger in retro-projection of modern values, what is norm now
  was not the same 1000 yrs ago let alone in prehistory
  It is highly probable that as soon as females were sexually active there would
  be breeding and giving birth many years younger than modern times
  In this scenario it is probable that even at the age of 40 prehistoric family
  groups knew their grandparents, even great grandparents and so it would be
  sensible to see how knowledge would be passed on
  These groups may even have functioned on a system of grandparents caring for
  young while the prime movers in the band hunted and collected
  Nean had survived in eurasia some 120,000 (k) years from oxygen isotope stage
  (ois) 6 glacial period, through ois 5 including the eemian interglacial, ois 4
  to glacial max at 70k, ois 3 with warming and cool phases then ois 2.
  In these dramatically changing conditions nean pops were forced out of
  northern areas to take refuge in warmer climates south, but after the ice
  retreated their prescence was reestablished, therefore to put their demise down
  to climate alone would seem impossible to consider at the last event, some
  other factor must have been involved.
  It is also very easy to imagine prehistoric events on timescales we appreciate
  in our lifetime, ie by looking at a calendar or watching the fingers on a clock
  go around.These events happened on a phenomenaly long time scale,even though
  the archaeological record shows a sudden change.Too detailed a piece to quote
  here but well worth a look at is ESWARAN'S ARGUMENT for diffusion of the modern
  human species, which calls into play a well described assimilation model.
  Modern Humans (MH), therefore spread westward on their journey out of Africa
  encountering nean sites in the levant for one initial zone previously occupied,
  here occupation fluctuated between nean and mh, whether or not overlapping
  , but the fact remains that occupation did ebb and flow between the 2
  speices over a period of many thousands of years in this area alone shown by
  the archaeological record.
  In mh spread the record shows that in areas where the 2 are found once in
  EUROPE it is mh who favour the low river ground(fishing, hunting gathering) and
  nean who keep to to higher ground for their hunting of larger prey at close
  quarters.
  Evidenece at Grotte du Renne. Arcy sur Cure show chatelperronian culture, this
  interpreted as nean acculturation, ie adapting and advancing there culture
  perhaps after coming into contact with mh. In any event the levallois
  advancement seen in nean technology in later millenia shows that their tool use
  advancement seen in nean technology in later millenia shows that their tool use
  did not remain the same throughout their existence.
  Also at Peche l'Aze cave is evidence of black manganese oxide use, perhaps an
  indication ofindependent symbolic purpose prior to the arrival of mh.
  It seems too much of a coincidence to be able to mirror the advancement of mh
  across europe with a similar timeframe albeit some millenia later for the
  decline of nean populations. SW spain incidently , south of the river Ebro
  being their last refuge. my notes on ethnic movement and or warring are that we
  ought to see a pooling of nean pops ahead of the advancing mh in this SW
  region.
  If these latter factors of conflict had taken part in the demise of the nean
  populations, as far as I am aware there is no archaeological evidence in SW
  spain or Portugal for increased last stand populations.
  In summary therefore perhaps assimilation or on the complete reverse disease
  carried by mh played a part in the extinction, more than likely though it
  would proabably have something to do with competition for food, since again
  evidence shows that nean and mh went after the same prey at the time of their
  demise, and mh wre probably the cleverer and more ingenious coming across from
  africa eg blombos cave with thiei aurignacian assemblage of tools, culture and
  ideas.
  The fact remain though that nean occupied eurasia for 120k years, mh have only
  been in europe so far for 40k years max
  

  Link to this forum: Neanderthal Demise

  Report message5

• Message 6

  , in reply to message 5.

  Posted by jllb0221 (U3587794) on Thursday, 7th September 2006

  If the Neandrothals traveled in small groups of 10-15 made up of grandparents, parents & children, with whom did they reproduce? Was incest common? If so, then could that have contributed to their decline? Could they have bred themselves out of existence?

  Link to this forum: Neanderthal Demise

  Report message6

• Message 7

  , in reply to message 5.

  Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Thursday, 7th September 2006

  I do not know on the above, however incest is quite common among many mammals without the often negative effects presented in species like the human. Ok I am not a specialist but from what I know I think its like that. Of course, several primates as well as other mammals avoid mating with relatives of the first kind but cousins will do just nicely. Afterall don't you know that Homo Sapiens also was for long in that practice... how do you think human races were born? Differentiation comes mainly due to isolation prolonged isolation (a case where marriages within families occur) and only on a secondary reason due to climatic reasons.
  
  I do not think those 'close marriages' were any reason for Neaderdal's demise though a bit more active contact among more groups would indeed help reproducing populations with increased resistance to illnesses and perhaps a bit more intelligence (that due to the social contact).
  
  Above neanman has said that Neaderdal chose the high places and Sapiens the low places but as far as I remember (I remember quite clearly) from a french documentary, a specialist was arguing that when Sapiens established in numbers in western Europe, being more mobile he took all the high places in order to control the area and 'supervise' the motion around him (animal migrations, enemy populations etc.) while Neaderdal being less mobile kept in the lowlands in his traditional 50km radious around his house (sorry, his cave!).
  
  I see that neanman seems to be quite informed, myself I am only a layman thus I will not argue - I really do not find hard to believe that on many cases Neaderdal kept the highlands and Sapiens the lowlands, for me it seems in general that Sapiens managed to win most times due to its increased numbers (first) and (then) due to its intelligence and (thus) get the best places for him.
  
  My opinion is that even in those places where there were "a lot" of Neaderdals, their really small numbers (teams of 8-15 people) would mean that Sapiens would rarely come in contact with them and in many cases there would be for long some distance 'of safety' between them, thus giving birth to myths of 'exotic creatures' that we see pretty much in all mythologies.

  Link to this forum: Neanderthal Demise

  Report message7

• Message 8

  , in reply to message 7.

  Posted by neanman (U5040914) on Thursday, 14th September 2006

  Just so has not to mislead anyone ,it would seem no one picked up on my stating that nean lasted into ois 2
  they of course were all gone by this stage at 20k.
  A good publication for anyone interested in these events is the stage 3 projects data and results now available in hardback.This deals with the total picture of oxygen isotope 3 and its environmental, faunal, climatic, hominid interactions, land loss due to rising sea levels and the events that were occuring at the time of the nean demise.
  

  Link to this forum: Neanderthal Demise

  Report message8

• Message 9

  , in reply to message 8.

  Posted by neanman (U5040914) on Thursday, 14th September 2006

  To add to the debate there is also evidence coming out of gibralter at the moment saying that layers relating to nean have been found which could be 10k later than previous occupations.
  The articles I have seen have not said how the layer was dated.
  

  Link to this forum: Neanderthal Demise

  Report message9

Back to top