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
(Page 2 of 8)
Contrary to the view that Neanderthals were evolutionary failures—they died out about 28,000 years ago—they actually had quite a run. “If you take success to mean the ability to survive in hostile, changing environments, then Neanderthals were a great success,” says archaeologist John Shea of the State University of New York at Stony Brook. “They lived 250,000 years or more in the harshest climates experienced by primates, not just humans.” In contrast, we modern humans have only been around for 100,000 years or so and moved into colder, temperate regions only in the past 40,000 years.
Though the fossil evidence is not definitive, Neanderthals appear to have descended from an earlier human species, Homo erectus, between 500,000 to 300,000 years ago. Neanderthals shared many features with their ancestors—a prominent brow, weak chin, sloping skull and large nose—but were as big-brained as the anatomically modern humans that later colonized Europe, Homo sapiens. At the same time, Neanderthals were stocky, a build that would have conserved heat efficiently. From musculature marks on Neanderthal fossils and the heft of arm and leg bones, researchers conclude they were also incredibly strong. Yet their hands were remarkably like those of modern humans; a study published this past March in Nature shows that Neanderthals, contrary to previous thinking, could touch index finger and thumb, which would have given them considerable dexterity.
Neanderthal fossils suggest that they must have endured a lot of pain. “When you look at adult Neanderthal fossils, particularly the bones of the arms and skull, you see [evidence of] fractures,” says Erik Trinkaus, an anthropologist at WashingtonUniversity in St. Louis. “I’ve yet to see an adult Neanderthal skeleton that doesn’t have at least one fracture, and in adults in their 30s, it’s common to see multiple healed fractures.” (That they suffered so many broken bones suggests they hunted large animals up close, probably stabbing prey with heavy spears—a risky tactic.) In addition, fossil evidence indicates that Neanderthals suffered from a wide range of ailments, including pneumonia and malnourishment. Still, they persevered, in some cases living to the ripe old age of 45 or so.
Perhaps surprisingly, Neanderthals must also have been caring: to survive disabling injury or illness requires the help of fellow clan members, paleoanthropologists say. A telling example came from an Iraqi cave known as Shanidar, 250 miles north of Baghdad, near the border with Turkey and Iran. There, archaeologist Ralph Solecki discovered nine nearly complete Neanderthal skeletons in the late 1950s. One belonged to a 40- to 45-year-old male with several major fractures. Ablow to the left side of his head had crushed an eye socket and almost certainly blinded him. The bones of his right shoulder and upper arm appeared shriveled, most likely the result of a trauma that led to the amputation of his right forearm. His right foot and lower right leg had also been broken while he was alive. Abnormal wear in his right knee, ankle and foot shows that he suffered from injury-induced arthritis that would have made walking painful, if not impossible. Researchers don’t know how he was injured but believe that he could not have survived long without a hand from his fellow man.
Single Page « Previous 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