Being “chattered” into oblivion: the case of the Neanderthals.

[Jacques Cinq-Mars]

All,

Here is a National Geographic summary of Mellars’ recent (Nature) review of what really caused the so-called demise of the Neanderthals:

Neandertals Beaten by Rivals' Word Skills, Study Says

James Owen
for National Geographic News
November 24, 2004

Ever since evidence of Neandertals was discovered in Germany in 1856, the question of what happened to them has captured the popular imagination.

This hairy, thickset species of human vanished some 35,000 years ago. Neandertals' disappearance coincided with an influx of modern humans (Homo sapiens) to Europe and western Asia, leading scientists to speculate that the two events are closely linked.

Now a new study, published tomorrow in the journal Nature, suggests that the modern humans' more sophisticated communication skills may have helped to finish off the Neandertals (Homo neanderthalensis).

The study's author, Paul Mellars, professor of prehistory and human evolution at Cambridge University in England, bases his theory on existing evidence.

Click HERE for the full article.

… and here are Mellars’ actual views, as presented in Nature.

Mellars, Paul. 2004.  Neanderthals and the modern human colonization of Europe. Nature 432,:461 – 465.

The fate of the Neanderthal populations of Europe and western Asia has gripped the popular and scientific imaginations for the past century. Following at least 200,000 years of successful adaptation to the glacial climates of northwestern Eurasia, they disappeared abruptly between 30,000 and 40,000 years ago, to be replaced by populations all but identical to modern humans. Recent research suggests that the roots of this dramatic population replacement can be traced far back to events on another continent, with the appearance of distinctively modern human remains and artefacts in eastern and southern Africa.

Click HERE for the full article.

I have yet to do a careful read of Mellars paper, but one way or the other, it is definitely packed with useful information and is worthy of discussion.

Jacques Cinq-Mars

[Mikey Brass]

All,

Here is a National Geographic summary of Mellars’ recent (Nature) review of what really caused the so-called demise of the Neanderthals:

Bah, beat me to it.

Sorry for the repeat everyone.

[Jacques Cinq-Mars]

Well, Mikey, things like this happen. Your "repeat" message is being deleted.

Jacques

[Robert Henvell]

   This article appears to be a revision of data that has been in the authors files for a considerable period of time.It seems to be a task that the author completed on time and there are no indications of enthusism for the topic or originality.

 The demise of the Neanderthals is extremely complex and can in all probability be attributed to a combination of many factors that can vary between regions.It is not a topic that should have a completion deadline.

[Mikey Brass]

"Studies of both mitochondrial and Y-chromosome DNA patterns"
- Only 2 of the 6 papers cited for this are genetic papers. Mellars has selectively selected.

"anatomically modern populations in different areas.
Discoveries at Herto in Ethiopia reported just over a year ago7
confirm the presence of early forms of anatomically modern
humans in Africa by about 160,000 yr BP,"
- Uncritical acceptance of White et al's determination, despite the archaic features of the cranium.

Mellars doesn't acknowledge the studies of Templeton, Takahat et al, etc.

Where are citations of Hawkes, et al. Nowhere.

Where is Hayden's 1993 JHE paper or Henry's published site report on Neanderthal behavioural patterns. Nowhere.

Mellars claims that the Neanderthal brains were structured differently from ours, but neither of the three cited references are of physical anatomical studies.

"To suggest that the scarcity of well-documented skeletal
material from the Aurignacian period argues against the association of these populations with anatomically modern humans would be an obvious scientific non sequitur. To suggest that this instead favours an association with Neanderthals would be even less defensible."
- I re-read this twice. Mellars is making an assumption based on the lack of evidence and then claiming that his opponents must be wrong. It's news to me that lack of evidence counts as strong supportive evidence. Frankly, I think this statement is unbecoming of a scholar of his reputation and stature.

I fail to see how his mention of the fragmentary maxilla from Kents Cavern, dated to c. 30kya, is reinforcement for the "overwhelming" migration claimed to have taken place 10 000 years previously.

"This conclusion is reinforced by all the recent studies of both mitochondrial and Y-chromosome DNA patterns in present-day human populations,"
- This is plainly false. There are numerous studies in the published literature which argue against the simplistic conclusions which Mellars is drawing.

[Robert Henvell]

  The demise of the Neanderthal is a complex topic and there are multiple factors that warrent consideration.In the Levant circa 100ka,when small groups of the two hominid species may [?] have occupied proximal caves,the Neanderthals were able to compete with Homo sapiens.Although the cultural development of the later may have progressed at a faster rate,the Neanderthals were probably not significantly disadvantaged
The relative size of the two populations about 40ka might have been more significant.The eventual influx of relatively large concentrations of Homo sapiens might have furthur fragmented the widely dispersed small groups of Neanderthals,which could have adversely affected their potential to maintain a viable society.
In southern France and other areas where their were larger concentrations of Neanderthals,different factors may have played a more important role in their extinction.There is an extremely remote possibility,that the new comers introduced a virus,which the native inhabitants immune system could not cope with---indigenous Americas were decimated by European diseases.
If the Neanderthals were not prolific breeders,unbalanced hybridization might have contributed to their demise.D Levin [2002] discussed the hybridization of flora and fauna.When the hybrids of an abundant species and a minority species survive and reproduce,the former can overwhelm the latter.The hybrids can supply a conduit for the movement of genes from the abundant to the minority species,which contaminates the latters gene pool.Eventually all the organisms are tainted,with alien genes.This could have been a contributing factor to the extinction of Neanderthals in Portugal,where the remains of a hybrid child post date the last [?] Neanderthals fossils by millennia.
M Roberts [2002] reported that a family can have offspring with very different characteristics,which can be transmitted to the next generation.A number of descendants with specific traits may survive in a new envirment,while others with different characteristics do not endure.Over time these features may contiue to vary and subsequent generations may not be able to cope with new conditions.Gene change could have a substantial impact on small widely dispersed groups and at some locales there may not have been adequate numbers to maintain a genetic lineage.Low production rates can decimate a widely dispersed population.
 
This topic needs a lot more research.

[lagarvelho]

Robert:

I'll say this topic needs a "lot" more research.  I rather doubt that early "moderns" could talk any better than Neandertals, and I rather doubt that some "brain mutation" would have been responsible for this supposed advantage.  I kind of favor the idea that Neandertals were a rather small, scattered population in most places(except possible in SW France and on the Iberian peninsula), but if, like many organismis in northern or "difficult" climates, they tended to have fewer children, then they would have been at a disadvantage in comparison to "modern" humans *unless*(as was possibly the case in the Dordogne Valley), they had a particularly abundant food supply.  This, BTW, is one of the reasons there are so many polar bears around the town of Churchill, Manitoba, who, until recently, with the advent of global warming, tended to have more offspring than polar bears elsewhere.  I don't see why Neandertals operating in such "marginal" circumstances would have been any different than any other organism in this respect, so they may well have been "swamped" genetically by any "modern" incomers.
Anne G

[Daryl Habel]

The demise of the Neanderthal is a complex topic and there are multiple factors that warrent consideration.
[SNIP]
This topic needs a lot more research.

Robert,

I'm in near-complete agreement with you.  Thanks for the fine comment.  I'll also note the irony in the title of this thread: "Being 'chattered' into oblivion".  Maybe Neanderthals were the strong, silent type? In "the case of the Neanderthals" (the second half of thread title), Mellars offers up an interesting theory that inter- and intra-group communications was better organized in "modern" humans than in those antedeluvial Neanderthal silent types.

Cheers,
Dar