What is modern behaviour?

Reynolds, Tim

DANIEL KAUFMAN. Archaeological perspectives on the origins of modern humans: a view from the Levant. xii+141 pages, 5 figures, 10 tables. 1999. Westport (CT): Bergin & Garvey; 0-89789-578-9 hardback $72.95.

OFER BAR-YOSEF & DAVID PILBEAM (ed.). The geography of Neandertals and Modern humans in Europe and the greater Mediterranean (Peabody Museum Bulletin 8). x+197 pages, 69 figures, 31 tables. 2000. Cambridge (MA): Peabody Museum of Archaeology & Ethnology; 0-87365-958-9 paperback $25.

C.B. STRINGER, R.N.E. BARTON & J. FINLAYSON (ed.). Neandertals on the edge: papers from a conference marking the 150th anniversary of the Forbes' Quarry discovery, Gibraltar. xi+267 pages, 150 figures, 36 tables. 2000. Oxford: Oxbow; 1-84217-015-5 hardback 45 [pounds sterling].

It is now some 20 years since the `Out of Africa' hypothesis impacted on our views of modern human origins. The arrival of these three volumes together provides a timely opportunity to examine how far our understanding has developed since then. The volumes contrast in that one is a personal essay on the subject, one derives from a brief seminar and the third from a more formal conference with a theme derived from the anniversary of the Gibraltar skull finds. Despite this difference, there is much to be gained by reading them in conjunction, not least a better understanding of where these studies have reached. It is clear, for example, that the application of radiometric dating has opened up questions of contemporaneity between Neanderthals and modern humans and clarified the relationships between different lithic industries. It also shows the complexity of addressing behaviour and ecology across a mosaic of landscapes. In the elapsed time, the use of DNA for examining the relationships between hominids has also been informative: allowing for concern over extrapolating from a small sample, the mitochondrial DNA study of the Neander Valley specimen strongly suggests that Neanderthals are a separate species from ourselves. Equally important are the refinements in our understanding of the environmental changes since Oxygen Isotope Stage (OIS) 5. There were clearly times at: which the rate of change would have been memorable to generations of humans--the picture of huge ice masses and environmental turnover becomes, at times, of a human scale. It remains the challenge for these studies to identify what a `human' scale might be. A flier for one of the Dalrymple Lectures of 2001 by Professor Stringer read `even if the Neanderthals were not our ancestors, they were fully human'. As ever, the debate about Neanderthals falls quickly into the most fundamental question--what defines a `human'?

The question as to what is `human' behaviour is one touched on in most detail by Kaufman who, on the basis of lithic technology and ecology as interpreted from the archaeological record in the Levant, suggests that there was very little to separate Neanderthals from ourselves. In a well-ordered and thoughtful essay, he presents a position where the cultural similarities between Middle Eastern Neanderthals and Modern Humans are believed to be too close to disregard their potential interaction. Although he recognises the DNA evidence as important, interaction in the cultural sphere is stressed with all the `modern' cultural traits present in homini ds by OIS 5. Did Neanderthals give us something other than genes? What is important in this essay is the suggestion that although there appears to be rapid drawing together of `modern' cultural traits, this is because of a common and ancient ancestry belonging in the Lower Palaeolithic. This should become a wonderful starting point for a review of the Acheulean and is a challenge that now needs to be met.

Bar-Yosef & Pilbeam draw together a number of separate papers on the geography of Neanderthals and modern humans in the `Greater Mediterranean'. It is a shame that much of North Africa is dealt with so briefly in chapters 6 (Bar-Yosef) and 7 (Hublin), but this is a reflection of the need for more research in that area. What makes it all the more potentially interesting is the late survival of Neanderthals in Spain below the Ebro Valley, where it seems populations of modern humans were kept out for some 5-10,000 years. The Middle Palaeolithic industries of southern Spain have been likened to those of North Africa--flake cleavers, tanged pieces, etc.--does the new evidence refute these suggested links? Recent work by Barton et al. (2001) in Morocco has great potential to address some of these issues.

The paper by Carbonell et al. in this volume is a very useful synthesis of the new data but this issue is not dealt with effectively. It is, however, raised in the Gibraltar volume (Stringer et al.) where a number of papers present a wide range of data and discussion on the Ebro frontier theory and its implications (Zilhao, Raposo, Cabrera et al.) with more specific data presented by a number of other authors (Pacheco et al., Pan et al., Pasto et al. and Sanchez). The Iberian evidence shows a lag in colonization by modern humans and suggests the Aurignacian is intrusive, Neanderthals using Mousterian technology were able to compete for many generations and it is only with a significant and long-term environmental change that modern humans replace them.

The `classical' area of France is dealt with in both volumes by Mellars, who presents the chronological and lithic data and its implications in his usual clear manner. At the Gibraltar conference Mellars is complemented by a paper on the southern Mousterian by Szmidt, an area outside Mellars' key concern and supported by Rigaud working mostly within the Perigord. The Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition is seen as a revolution with the Chatelperronian being ascribed to Neanderthals adopting modern behaviour. Indeed, it is a question as to whether there is a `transition' or a replacement. Discussion of the Italian evidence matches that for France, with the earliest Upper Palaeolithic, the Ulluzian, being considered the product of acculturation (Kuhn & Bietti in Bar-Yosef & Pilbeam).

Kozlowski's paper in the latter covers a large geographical area with significant archaeological variability, and pattern seen to be difficult to discern. The paper would benefit from a little more intrusive editing. It is likely that this area is the origin of the Aurignacian and thus the pivotal location for understanding the Middle-Upper Palaeolithic transition. There does seem to a chronological pattern of east-west spread of the Aurignacian into western Europe associated with modern humans, but hominid fossils are rare and this still needs to be tested. The Afterword in the Bar-Yosef & Pilbeam volume presents summary maps for this that are useful (as indeed are much of the data presented in that work).

The importance of the Levant for this debate is unquestionable and the evidence is ably summarized by Bar-Yosef in both volumes. The comparison of this cultural `revolution' with a later one (the Neolithic) in the Gibraltar work is an interesting method of addressing the issues and of considering the nature of cultural change. In the Geography volume a great deal of useful data is described and made accessible. It should be stressed that this volume concentrates on the drawing together of much data so that an effective geography of the archaeology of Neanderthals and modern humans can be discussed. In this it is most successful. Whilst it raises significant questions, this work is an effective attempt at synthesizing material so that further investigation can be attempted.

A most significant question is that of Neanderthal/modern human interactions and this is addressed by Hublin in the Geography. The role of geography in these interactions is considered and identified for lithic technology but the notion that Homo neanderthalensis is a separate species is presented as a conclusion. The author believes there was cultural interaction but no significant genetic contribution.

The Gibraltar conference has many papers on the current work linking the Gibraltar sites to southern Iberia (Findlayson & Pacheo), summarizing the status of the skull and Neanderthal studies (Stringer), the dating of the sites and its implications (Pettitt & Bailey, Volterra et al. and Rink et al.). Taphonomy and environmental evidence is well presented and important at these sites, showing the role of different agencies in creating the deposits, the environments available to the inhabitants and the nature of the occupations (papers by Fernandez & Andrews, Macphail & Goldberg and Currant). Particularly informative are papers on the charred remains (Gale & Carruthers) and hearths (Barton), giving a rare insight into the use of fire in food processing. The introduction of quantities of shellfish to the site is also of interest--they must have come from an estuarine context some distance away. A discussion of containers and their role in both transport and storage is lacking but will no doubt be included in the on-going studies. A paper on chert sourcing (Volterra et al.) is of interest but the work is still at a preliminary stage. Also relatively new is the use of computer-assisted methods of reconstructing Neanderthal morphpology. Two papers on this demonstrate the potential of the techniques for extracting additional information from known specimens (de Leon et al. and Thompson & Illerhaus). A paper by Trinkaus on robusticity across the Neanderthal/modern human `transition' shows the subtle nature of morphological changes with a mosiac of differences across the skeleton relating to different elements. The final paper addresses the suggestion of craniofacial ontogeny, the differential rates of growth and development of the skull between Neanderthal and modern examples.

The first paper in the Gibraltar volume examined environmental change (Davies et al.) and I review it last as it has implications far beyond Gibraltar. The contrast between different stages of the last glacial and the highly variable rates of those changes must be stressed. The subtle development of the unique environments that earlier humans exploited is clear and the challenge now is to draw the fullest picture of this ecology. Only once this is done can the true nature of the interactions between Neanderthals and modern humans be effectively understood geographically.

The importance of Neanderthal/modern human studies lies in the essence of understanding the origins of ourselves. It is the one period of history where we, as anthropologists, can study both ourselves and another hominid in close juxtaposition. It is a testing ground for the applicability of both method and theory and should challenge our consideration of who and what we are. It should require us to examine not just the data but the underlying philosophies of what anthropology is attempting, how and why. The question referred to but never satisfactorily answered is what is `modern' behaviour?

Kaufman refers to this often whilst the other volumes present a considerable amount of valuable new studies with less synthesis. All are readable, valuable for the data presented and thought provoking. It is a cliche that it is the victors that write history; what these volumes cannot do is tell us whether, in this case, the losers could have written it!

Reference

BARTON, R.N.E., et al. 2001. Bridging the gap: new fieldwork in northern Morocco, Antiquity 75: 489-90.

Tim Reynolds, County Archaeology Office, ELH 1108 Castle Court, Shire Hall, Cambridge CB3 0AP, England. tim.reynolds@cambridgeshire.gov.uk