Rethinking Neanderthals
Research suggests the so-called brutes fashioned tools, buried their dead, maybe cared for the sick and even conversed. But why, if they were so smart, did they disappear?
- By Joe Alper
- Smithsonian magazine, June 2003, Subscribe
Bruno Maureille unlocks the gate in a chain-link fence, and we walk into the fossil bed past a pile of limestone rubble, the detritus of an earlier dig. We’re 280 miles southwest of Paris, in rolling farm country dotted with long-haired cattle and etched by meandering streams. Maureille, an anthropologist at the University of Bordeaux, oversees the excavation of this storied site called Les Pradelles, where for three decades researchers have been uncovering, fleck by fleck, the remains of humanity’s most notorious relatives, the Neanderthals.
We clamber 15 feet down a steep embankment into a swimming pool-size pit. Two hollows in the surrounding limestone indicate where shelters once stood. I’m just marveling at the idea that Neanderthals lived here about 50,000 years ago when Maureille, inspecting a long ledge that a student has been painstakingly chipping away, interrupts my reverie and calls me over. He points to a whitish object resembling a snapped pencil that’s embedded in the ledge. “Butchered reindeer bone,” he says. “And here’s a tool, probably used to cut meat from one of these bones.” The tool, or lithic, is shaped like a hand-size D.
All around the pit, I now see, are other lithics and fossilized bones. The place, Maureille says, was probably a butchery where Neanderthals in small numbers processed the results of what appear to have been very successful hunts. That finding alone is significant, because for a long time paleoanthropologists have viewed Neanderthals as too dull and too clumsy to use efficient tools, never mind organize a hunt and divvy up the game. Fact is, this site, along with others across Europe and in Asia, is helping overturn the familiar conception of Neanderthals as dumb brutes. Recent studies suggest they were imaginative enough to carve artful objects and perhaps clever enough to invent a language.
Neanderthals, traditionally designated Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, were not only “human” but also, it turns out, more “modern” than scientists previously allowed. “In the minds of the European anthropologists who first studied them, Neanderthals were the embodiment of primitive humans, subhumans if you will,” says Fred H. Smith, a physical anthropologist at LoyolaUniversity in Chicago who has been studying Neanderthal DNA. “They were believed to be scavengers who made primitive tools and were incapable of language or symbolic thought.”Now, he says, researchers believe that Neanderthals “were highly intelligent, able to adapt to a wide variety of ecologicalzones, and capable of developing highly functional tools to help them do so. They were quite accomplished.”
Single Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next »
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.









Comments (5)
Reading up on Neanderthals is very interesting and I find it intriguing that present day academics are revisiting with an eye toward reinterpretation what has been handed down from previous generations on the subject. That's all well and good but as an average Joe I quickly tire of those who bring too heavy an approach to interpreting archaeological evidence. Chillax, dudes.
The Neanderthals had their time in the sun, they hung out and they moved on and faded away. IMHO there really isn't all that much more to be gleaned from the ash pits and caves that would be all that relevant to modern man. Will the next stunning revelation about some ancient peoples prevent the next war? I doubt it.
Posted by Daniel O'Hare on November 25,2011 | 03:18 PM
Neanderthal flint tools are often fashioned for left handed use. More interesting is how many of the tools fit the hand very closely, even cortexes tools still have other refinements for a more comfortable fit during use. The tools are very durable and often have course and fine cutting areas. It is clear to me after close study of these tools that a different mentality fashioned them other than a fully modern man. They saw a rock and fashioned it to be a tool but rarely did they fashion it 100%. It still looks like a rock but is in fact is a very easy to use tool. In modern man we see a piece of flint changed completely to a new form like an American Arrow head, the arrow head no longer resembles the original shape of the raw material it was fashioned from. The modern arrow head is not very durable, so for all the work put into an arrow head it is clear a more deliberate use of ART can be seen. Neanderthal man did not lack art but it is clear they did not see a completely different object from a raw material starting shape. As long as the tool was comfortable and workable Neanderthal man did not add any value in abstract art. These tools can be dated simply by seeing Neanderthal style along with strata and sandstone impregnation on previously worked areas. Please see the tools I collected.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/61060647@N04/page2/
Posted by Steve Brackmann on March 27,2011 | 09:19 PM
Good article about Neanderthals.
Posted by Kara on March 19,2011 | 02:30 AM
It's been known for 30 years or more that HS Neanderthalensis had a greater brain capacity than HS Sapiens, and were capable of toolmaking and artwork demanding a jeweller's loupe, as well as making and using bone and flaked stone tools. Why the sudden flurry of revisionism? Perhaps it's about time that the old ideas about HS Neanderthalensis were completely rewritten, with the boffins publicly eating their words. Even if you revise them as being 100% human, the die-hards will stick to their 'subhuman' theory, just as hundreds of Aboriginals were killed in 19thC Australia and many graves robbed to 'prove' Darwin's missing link: after all, if they're subhuman, killing and genocide isn't murder, is it?
Posted by Graham Stitz on December 5,2008 | 07:55 AM
This is interesting. Since my first Anthropology Class all of the "missing links" have been either done away with or modernized to sapian speciae. This means that Pilt Down, Java, Peking, et al. were personifications and imaginations. Poor science at best. Now I am reading that Neanderthal were actually sapien. This makes perfect sense if early gene pools diverged rapidly (Australoids, Negriods, Mongoloids, etc.) I am glad that Evolutionary and Anthropoligical Scientists are finally coming clean. ( I will miss brontosaurus though....)
Posted by Spencer on December 4,2008 | 07:49 PM