Two re-analyses of hominid skeletal material from sites dated to the transition between Middle and Upper Paleolithic in Europe reported in the journal Nature on Thursday have added to the debate over when early modern humans first arrived and spread into Europe, and how much of the creative invention which marks the Upper Paleolithic can be attributed to Neanderthals.
Early modern humans in Europe. Replicas are (left to right): St Césaire Neanderthal (France, about 38,000 years old), the Kent's Cavern maxilla (about 42,500 years old) and Mladec 1 early modern human (Czech Republic, about 35,000 years old).
The Upper Paleolithic period in Europe began about 45,000 years ago, and it is generally blamed on the entrance into Europe of early modern humans from Africa. The new arrivals brought a suite of stone and bone tools and by 40,000 years ago, that suite included a whole range of ideas and artifacts that archaeologists recognize as behavioral modernity, including the use of projectile points, collaborative hunting techniques, and personal ornamentation.
In a handful of sites (the Châtelperronian, Uluzzian and Szeletian cultures in different parts of Europe), these types of behaviors are found in association with Neanderthals. Because the sites appeared to predate the arrival of African humans into Europe, a debate about the source of those behaviors arose. Did the Neanderthals invent modern behaviors or their own, or did they copy/borrow/imitate their new African neighbors? The new research at Kent's Cavern in the UK and Grotta del Cavallo in Italy establishes the presence of African modern humans in Europe some time before the dates of these cultures.
The research will not as yet put to bed the ideas concerning Neanderthal innovations: for one thing, the dates on many of the Châtelperronian, Uluzzian and Szeletian sites are problematic, but it does add to the growing research on this interesting time in our prehistory.
- Guide to the Châtelperronian
- Saint-Cesaire (Châtelperronian in France)
- Grotte du Renne (Châtelperronian in France)
- Kostenki (Uluzzian in Russia)
Higham T, Compton T, Stringer C, Jacobi R, Shapiro B, Trinkaus E, Chandler B, Groning F, Collins C, Hillson S et al. 2011. The earliest evidence for anatomically modern humans in northwestern Europe. Nature advance online publication.
Benazzi S, Douka K, Fornai C, Bauer CC, Kullmer O, Svoboda J, Pap I, Mallegni F, Bayle P, Coquerelle M et al. 2011. Early dispersal of modern humans in Europe and implications for Neanderthal behaviour. Nature advance online publication.
Comments
“Upper Paleolithic period in Europe began about 45,000 years ago, and it is generally blamed on the entrance into Europe of early modern humans from Africa.”
“Blamed?!?!” So, what is with the value judgements? Let’s try to use a less emotionally suggestive and loaded word. How about “attributed”, or even “ascribed”.
Oops–I forget that I have a bad speech impediment. My tongue was in my cheek.
Kris, Nice response! I have the same impediment.
-AF
Thanks for reanimating archaeological interest about Kents Cavern: I was there 10 years ago but …what a shame to see it being hijacked by a sillyest image (Cavog) I ever met in an archeological site. Moreover: I was there in order to see the acheulean traces said to be found inside, but nothing was exhibited nor the local cave’s guides knew about this oldest presence.
I rather liked the “tongue in cheek” way of making a point. I guess you’re just too nuanced for some tastes, Kris. No offense, Jeff.
By the time african humans arrived in Europe I wonder if
they had undergone any physical changes in their
appearence regarding skin changes in terms of their
evolutionary development along with other physical considerations?
If by “nuanced” you mean “smart aleck”, I totally agree with you Max! (I’m usually as subtle as a sledge hammer).
Kris
‘Smart alec’ eh?!
Is that no writ large across Ptolomey(?)s map o roman Caledonia….
Smertae – right across the tap
a grand lineage Kris
Language evolves through “common usage” but I find it deplorable that the word DEVASTATE is being replaced with DECIMATE in reports & on radio/TV/internet, particularly when the information being supplied is from a respected source and may very well be used as educational.
A population, coastline, forest “decimated” means 10% was lost, however DEVASTATED, DESTROYED or even ANNIHILATED is obviously what is meant.