An important announcement from the Neanderthal Museum.

[Jacques Cinq-Mars]

Some of you may fondly recall that there was some exchange of information, on the old Palanth-l list, on the the three-day workshop entitled "Central and Eastern Europe from 50.000 - 30.000 B.P.", that was held at the the Neanderthal Museum, in March 1999.

While the PDF versions of the abstracts or synopses are still available, at: http://www.neanderthal.de/e_thal/fs_4.htm, it is now possible to purchase the “follow up” publication which should be of interest to anyone really interested in finding out more about the so-called “MP-UP” transition. Not to mention that, in contrast to many of the much less essential publications on such topic, the price appears to be quite right.

For those of you who may have difficulties accessing or reading the Neanderthal Museum info on this publication, here is the rather impressive table of content:

Jacques Cinq-Mars

Jörg Orschiedt, Gerd-C. Weniger (Eds.)
“Neanderthals and modern Humans: Discussing the Transition. Central and Eastern Europe from 50.000 - 30.000 B.P.”

21x29,7 cm, 138 fig. 320 p. (41 EUR – approx. 45.00 US$, plus postage and packaging)

Content:

Gerd-Christian Weniger and Jörg Orschiedt. Preface.

Gerd-Christian Weniger and Jörg Orschiedt. New Answers to Old Questions?

Olaf Jöris and Bernhard Weninger. Approaching the Calendric Age-dimension at the Transition from the Middle to Upper Palaeolithic in Europe.

Philip Allsworth-Jones. Dating the transition between Middle and Upper Palaeolithic in Eastern Europe.

D. Richter, B. Mauz, U. Böhner, W. Weissmüller, G. A. Wagner, G. Freund, W. J. Rink, and J. Richter. Luminescence Dating of the Middle/Upper Palaeolithic sites 'Sesselfelsgrotte' and 'Abri I am Schulerloch', Altmühltal, Bavaria.

Claus-Joachim Kind. Red Deers, Reindeers, and Sidescrapers. The Middle Palaeolithic Site Kogelstein Cave.

Mark Leney. Bear feet in the Pleistocene: Ecological heterogeneity in Croatian Ursus and its comparative and co-evolutionary implications.

Rudolf Musil. The Environment in Moravia during the Stage OIS 3.

Janusz K. Kozlowski. Southern Poland between 50 and 30 Kyr B. P., Environment and Archaeology.

Gilbert Tostevin. The Middle Upper Paleolithic Transition from the Levant to Central Europe: in situ development or diffusion?

Clemens Pasda. The Schwalbenberg near Remagen: late Middle Palaeolithic artefacts at the end of the middle Würmian.
Jürgen Richter. Social memory among late Neanderthals.

Thorsten Uthmeier. Stone Tools, "Time of Activity", and the Transition from the Middle to the Upper Palaeolithic in Bavaria (Germany).

Petr Neruda. The Cultural Significance of Bifacial Retouch. The Transition From the Middle to Upper Paleolithic Age in Moravia.

Ivor Karavanic. Olschewian and appearance of bone technology in Croatia and Slovenia.

Brian Adams. Archaeological Investigations at Two Open-Air Sites in the Bükk Mountain Region of Northeast Hungary.

Tsoni Tsonev. Factors for Middle/Upper Palaeolithic Transition in Eastern Balkans.

Marin Cârciumaru and Mircea Anghelinu. The Carpatian Mousterian and the Transition from Middle to Upper Palaeolithic in Southern Romania.

Victor P. Chabai. The Evolution of Western Crimean Mousterian Industry.

Anthony E. Marks and Katherine Monigal. The Middle to Upper Palaeolithic Interface at Buran-Kaya-III, Eastern Crimea.

Francesco d'Errico and Veronique Laroulandie. Bone Technology at the Middle-Upper Palaeolithic transition. The case of worked bones from Buran-Kaya III level C (Crimea, Ukraine).

Andreas Pastoors. Standardization and Individuality in the Production Process of Bifacial Tools-Leaf-shaped Scrapers from the Middle Paleolithic Open Air Site Saré Kaya I (Crimea) A contribution to understanding the method of Working Stage Analysis.

P. E. Nehoroshev and L. B. Vishnyatsky. Shlyakh - A new late Middle Paleolithic Site in the South Russian Plain.

Ralf W. Schmitz and Jürgen Thissen. First archaeological finds and new human remains at the rediscovered site of the Neanderthal type specimen. A preliminary report.

Miriam Noël Haidle. Neanderthals - ignorant relatives or thinking siblings? A discussion of the "cognitive revolution" at around 40,000 B. P.

Silvia Condemi. The Neanderthals: Homo neanderthalensis or Homo sapiens neanderthalensis? Is there a contradiction between the Paleogenetic and the Paleonthropoligical Data?

Alfred Czarnetzki. The Significance of Pathological Changes for Judging the Morphology of Classical Neanderthals.

Frank Tschentscher, Christian Capelli, Helga Geisert, Heike Krainitzki, Ralf W. Schmitz and Matthias Krings. Mitrochondrial DNA sequemces from the Neanderthals.

Michael Scholz, Lutz Bachmann, Graeme J. Nicholson, Jutta Bachmann, Sylvia Hengst, Ian Giddings, Barbara Rüschoff-Thale, Josef Klostermann, Alfred Czarnetzki and Carsten M. Pusch. How different are the genomes of Neanderthals and anatomically modern man? A DNA hybridization approach.

To place your order: Museum@neanderthal.de

[Dale Hoogeveen]

Some of you may fondly recall that there was some exchange of information, on the old Palanth-l list, on the the three-day workshop entitled "Central and Eastern Europe from 50.000 - 30.000 B.P.", that was held at the the Neanderthal Museum, in March 1999.

While the PDF versions of the abstracts or synopses are still available, at: http://www.neanderthal.de/e_thal/fs_4.htm, it is now possible to purchase the “follow up” publication which should be of interest to anyone really interested in finding out more about the so-called “MP-UP” transition. Not to mention that, in contrast to many of the much less essential publications on such topic, the price appears to be quite right.

For those of you who may have difficulties accessing or reading the Neanderthal Museum info on this publication, here is the rather impressive table of content:

Jacques Cinq-Mars

Hi Jacques,

Thank-you for reminding me of the Neandertal museum site.

In browsing it, I noticed one image of a Neanderthal with a muscle builders physic.  This is one of my persistant gripes with Neandethal reconstruction.  Normal use muscles don't develop in the same way as those of body-builders.  It is inconceivable to me that any normal Neanderthaler or any other human in the normal course of activity would develop broad shoulders, a narrow waist waist (with "6-pack abs for pete's sake) and bulked out upper arms and thighs.  That development takes a specific exercise regiment that would have been highly unlikely for any subsistance level human.  Furthermore prior to posing for competitions, body builders "pump" muscles for display bulk and have special exercises to develop distinctions between the muscle masses.  Seeing a Neanderthaler represented as a bulked and divided example of a posing body builder makes no sense to me.

It seems to me that there is a large natural variation in modern human muscle strength that is genetic.  Extremely strong musculature without excess bulk which would still require extra strong bone attachment points is both possible and common in some family lines in current humans.  They are far better basic models for developing robust representations than are body builders who are usually special-case gracile types, anyway.  

Far better to go into a warehouse for normal strength models than into a "body-beautiful" competition.  

Dutch

[lagarvelho]

Dale:

Re some of these Neandertal reconstructions, I think what you get depends a good deal on what notions of "robusticity" or whatever, the reconstructor brings to his or her job.  IOW, if the reconstructor thinks Neandertals were sort of "Neanderbrutes", then he or she will tend to reconstruct them in a way that makes them look heavy and kind of "apish".  If, on the other hand, the reconstructor thinks Neandertals were closer to "us" in some way, then they are more likely to make them "look" human(that is, more like "us") than "apish.  For an example of this in action, you might want to  consult (a), the January 2000 cover of Scientific American, and then jump to the April 2000 article in the same journal, "Who were the Neandertals?"  I think you will find the contrast, well, *interesting*.
Anne G

[Jacques Cinq-Mars]

While I am glad to see that the Neanderthal Museum (book) announcement has elicited two responses, I would just like to note that, like the Links, the Bookyard should be primarily used for "announcements", and appropriate, follow up comments and/or questions directed at the topic(s) at hand.

I suggest that, if a Bookyard announcement triggers -- as happened in the case of Dale Hoogeven'post (and Anne Gilbert's subsequent comments) -- responses that do not directly correspond to the purpose of the Bookyard, such discussion be moved to a more appropriate Board of your choice. Thus, on the matter of Neanderthal "reconstructions", it could well be posted, for example, in Human Palaeontology and by creating a new Topic.

Thanks,

Jacques Cinq-Mars