Figure 3 - uploaded by Pat Shipman
Content may be subject to copyright.
1909 reconstruction of the La Chapelle-aux-Saints Neandertal by Kupka published in L'lllusfrafion.26 based explicitly on the study of the specimen by Boule. 

1909 reconstruction of the La Chapelle-aux-Saints Neandertal by Kupka published in L'lllusfrafion.26 based explicitly on the study of the specimen by Boule. 

Contexts in source publication

Context 1
... based his conclusions largely on the spectacular fossils from La Chapelle-aux-Saints (discovered in 1908) and La Ferrassie (discovered in 1909 and1910), plus those from Ne- andertal and Spy. He strove primarily to reject the Neandertals from modern human ancestry, hence opening the way for contemporaneous or older (but essentially unknown) human fos- sils of more modern aspect to serve as our ancestors. Fully cognizant of the pathological lesions on the La Chapelle-aux-Saints skeleton, Boule used its normal portions supple- mented by the other skeletons at his disposal to elaborate on the image of apishness already portrayed by Frai- pont and Lohest. Bode built his now classic image of the semi-human Ne- andertal ( Fig. 3) by ignoring evidence to the contrary which had been pro- vided by Charles, Cunningham, Le- boucq, Martin, and Manouvrier. Whereas such a reconstruction would have fit most late 19th centuryprecon- ceptions of an ancient human ances- tors, Boule's reconstruction was the chief weapon used in expelling the Ne- andertals from modern human ances- try. He was more than happy to have primitive creatures in our ancestry but, please, not so recently at the later Despite the readily apparent flaws in Boule's and Keith's arguments- many of which were recognizable even in the early 20th century-few objected to and most enthusiastically embraced their central thesis. The consensus was simply that modern humanity was too special to have evolved from something anatomically (and, by inference, mentally and be- haviorally) primitive if that form had lived as recently as the Late Pleisto- cene. In France, this view was explic- itly couched as a rejection of the progressive ideas of Manouvrier and de Mortillet of the Ecole d'Anthro- pologie. Elsewhere, the sociopolitical context of the acceptance of the Boule- Keith thesis is less transparent. In any case, it represented a reaction against the liberal views of the 19th century, a retreat to a more secure world in which things that should be have long since ...
Context 2
... to serve as our ancestors. Fully cognizant of the pathological lesions on the La Chapelle-aux-Saints skeleton, Boule used its normal portions supple- mented by the other skeletons at his disposal to elaborate on the image of apishness already portrayed by Frai- pont and Lohest. Bode built his now classic image of the semi-human Ne- andertal ( Fig. 3) by ignoring evidence to the contrary which had been pro- vided by Charles, Cunningham, Le- boucq, Martin, and Manouvrier. Whereas such a reconstruction would have fit most late 19th centuryprecon- ceptions of an ancient human ances- tors, Boule's reconstruction was the chief weapon used in expelling the Ne- andertals from modern human ...

Similar publications

Article
Full-text available
A brief report is presented of fieldwork in 1999 at this Middle Palaeolithic site with Neanderthal human remains.
Book
Full-text available
Коллективная монография. Под редакцией В. Н. Степанчука и С. В. Васильева. Киев: ЧП "Издательство "Слово", 2018. – 228 с. Монография посвящена итогам изучения III и IIIa слоя многослойной стоянки Заскальная VI (Колосовская) в Крыму. Рассматриваются вопросы стратиграфии и планиграфии, характеризуются тафономические аспекты палеонтологических наход...

Citations

... These restricted mobility, ability to perform manual tasks, and perception . Solecki (1971), and later Trinkaus and Shipman (1993), argued that he could not have survived without daily provision of food and assistance. Trinkaus and Zimmerman even commented (1982: 75) that Neanderthals 'had achieved a level of societal development in which disabled individuals were well cared for by other members of the social group' . ...
Chapter
Full-text available
In Hidden Depths, Professor Penny Spikins explores how our emotional connections have shaped human ancestry. Focusing on three key transitions in human origins, Professor Spikins explains how the emotional capacities of our early ancestors evolved in response to ecological changes, much like similar changes in other social mammals. For each transition, dedicated chapters examine evolutionary pressures, responses in changes in human emotional capacities and the archaeological evidence for human social behaviours. Starting from our earliest origins, in Part One, Professor Spikins explores how after two million years ago, movement of human ancestors into a new ecological niche drove new types of collaboration, including care for vulnerable members of the group. Emotional adaptations lead to cognitive changes, as new connections based on compassion, generosity, trust and inclusion also changed our relationship to material things. Part Two explores a later key transition in human emotional capacities occurring after 300,000 years ago. At this time changes in social tolerance allowed ancestors of our own species to further reach out beyond their local group and care about distant allies, making human communities resilient to environmental changes. An increasingly close relationship to animals, and even to cherished possessions, appeared at this time, and can be explained through new human vulnerabilities and ways of seeking comfort and belonging. Lastly, Part Three focuses on the contrasts in emotional dispositions arising between ourselves and our close cousins, the Neanderthals. Neanderthals are revealed as equally caring yet emotionally different humans, who might, if things had been different, have been in our place today. This new narrative breaks away from traditional views of human evolution as exceptional or as a linear progression towards a more perfect form. Instead, our evolutionary history is situated within similar processes occurring in other mammals, and explained as one in which emotions, rather than ‘intellect’, were key to our evolutionary journey. Moreover, changes in emotional capacities and dispositions are seen as part of differing pathways each bringing strengths, weaknesses and compromises. These hidden depths provide an explanation for many of the emotional sensitivities and vulnerabilities which continue to influence our world today.
... Neanderthals have long fascinated scientists and historians, seemingly occupying a liminal space between human and nonhuman (Corbey 2005;Corbey and Theunissen 1995). The fossilized bones of Neanderthals have been examined by scientists longer than any other prehistoric human and, indeed, much has been written about the history of these objects (Tattersall 1995(Tattersall , 2015Drell 2000;Spencer 1984;Trinkaus and Shipman 1993b;Schmitz and Thissen 2000;Reader 2011;Sommer 2007;Wiber 2006;Haraway 1989;Corbey and Roebroeks 2001;Delisle 2007). Yet, works that discuss the Neanderthal image have not taken seriously the Feldhofer specimen's role-or, indeed, the role of any Neanderthal fossil from the nineteenth century-in the construction of the creatures' brutish image, instead focusing on the conception beginning with Boule. ...
... The discussion of race in the context of this paper is somewhat vague, just as it was often unclear in nineteenth and twentieth century naturalists' own minds. Here, race refers more closely to variety of human-but not a variety that strayed so far from the norm as to be labeled a separate species other than Homo sapiens. 2 In this context, the Feldhofer skeleton is generally considered interesting only insofar as it failed to be interpreted in an evolutionary framework, despite its close contemporaneity with Charles Darwin's publication of On the Origin of Species (Drell 2000;Trinkaus and Shipman 1993b). It was merely part of nineteenth-century naturalists' "tendency to comfortably integrate most … human fossils at the base of, or within the history of, the living varieties of humankind" (Bowler 1986, p. 546). ...
... A talented paleontologist, the story goes, made a massive mistake in his misinterpretation of a skeleton, dooming Neanderthals to a lowly image. This narrative appears in a wide range of literature, from popular histories to scholarly works by historians and sociologists of science (Trinkaus and Shipman 1993b;Wood 2011;Brace and Montagu 1977). Seeking explanations of Boule's mistake, scholars have attempted to explain his work by examining factors such as the social context of France, Boule's institutional setting, and his research paradigm (Hammond 1980;Hammond 1982;Van Reybrouck 2002). ...
Article
Full-text available
The extinct human relatives known as Neanderthals (Homo neanderthalensis) have long been described as brutish and dumb. This conception is often traced to paleontologist Marcellin Boule (1861–1942), who published a detailed analysis on a Neanderthal skeleton in the early twentieth century. The conventional historical narrative claims that Boule made an error in his analysis, causing the Neanderthals to be considered brutish. This essay challenges the narrative of “Boule’s error,” arguing instead that the brutish Neanderthal concept originated much earlier in the history of Neanderthal research and was, in fact, an invention of the earliest analyses of the first specimen recognized as a Neanderthal in the mid-nineteenth century. I argue that temporally relocating this conception of Neanderthals allows for a better understanding of the interconnected nature of the study of fossil humans and the science of living human races during the nineteenth century. This new view of the brutish Neanderthal sheds light on the earliest phases of the science that became paleoanthropology, while examining the racial, cultural, and political attitudes about race and extinction that accompanied the science at that time. By inspecting the ways in which the Neanderthals’ image was a product of a particular time and place, we gain a perspective that provides a new basis for thinking about the conceptions of hominin fossil species.
... Not less strikingly is the invariance of themes, crossing different cultures [1,29] and linking different disciplines (ethology, psychopathology and anthropology). Moreover, ritual behavior is a constant tendency of every culture [141], remarkably persistent through the history of mankind [142], going back to the earliest human groups and down to Neanderthals [146,172]. Therefore, an evolutionary framework, able to explain ritual behavior in the light of its phylogenetic continuity is intriguing. Previous evolutionary models have focused on supposed highly conserved systems of our brain: for example, a specific "psychological immune system" [173], responsible to "fixed" risk-avoidance behaviors; a "security motivation system", evolved to handle the uncertainties of potential "disordering" threats [174,175]; a "Hazard-Precaution system", i.e. a specific safety-motivation system dealing with potential danger [24]. ...
Article
Ritual behaviour, intended as a specific, repetitive and rigid form of action flow, appears both in social and non-social environmental contexts, representing an ubiquitous phenomenon in animal life including human individuals and cultures. The purpose of this contribution is to investigate an evolutionary continuum in proximate and ultimate causes of ritual behavior. A phylogenetic homology in proximal mechanisms can be found, based on the repetition of genetically programmed and/or epigenetically acquired action patterns of behaviour. As far as its adaptive significance, ethological comparative studies show that the tendency to ritualization is driven by the unpredictability of social or ecological environmental stimuli. In this perspective, rituals may have a "homeostatic" function over unpredictable environments, as further highlighted by psychopathological compulsions. In humans, a circular loop may have occurred among ritual practices and symbolic activity to deal with a novel culturally-mediated world. However, we suggest that the compulsion to action patterns repetition, typical of all rituals, has a genetically inborn motor foundation, thus precognitive and pre-symbolic. Rooted in such phylogenetically conserved motor structure (proximate causes), the evolution of cognitive and symbolic capacities have generated the complexity of human rituals, though maintaining the original adaptive function (ultimate causes) to cope with unpredictable environments.
... Ever since Neandertal skulls were found in Engis Caves, the questions that have perhaps attracted the greatest interest concerned how much like us such archaic species might have been in their bodies, minds, or behavior. Whereas an early answer was that Neandertal cognition was different from ours, it was based on inferences from the bones and the artifacts found with them (for an authoritative history of early studies of Neanderthals, see Trinkaus & Shipman, 1993). Across the 19th and early 20th centuries, schemes were developed to classify the artifacts (e.g., Lartet & Christy, 1875). ...
Chapter
The discovery of new evidence in the archaeological record naturally invites interpretation and deeper intellectual probing. What novel attributes of brains, minds or behavioural and cultural lives were necessary for such finds to have come into existence: Symbolic thought? Planning? Language? Enhanced memory? The very fragmentary nature of material evidence and the diversity of interpretations usually makes it difficult to arrive at meaningful consensus. Yet specific changes in patterns of archaeological evidence are set in a much longer arc of evolutionary development from the core mental capabilities of most mammals, through mammals showing evidence of advanced cognition such as apes and extinct hominins, until we reach the mental capabilities that we ourselves are known to possess. Theories of how mental capabilities developed across that full arc of evolution can now be specified in some detail. Aspects of a theory of the full arc can be formally tested on existing species while inferred properties of extinct hominins, assumed to have existed within that arc, can be matched to the more fragmentary archaeological evidence. Rather than interpret a piece of evidence, patterns of evidence should fit into the bigger theoretical jigsaw puzzle in a particular way. This strategy of constraining interpretive arguments around theoretical scaffolding is illustrated using a model of cognitive evolution. This model holds that simple mammalian minds are composed of just four subsystems and that five further subsystems evolved to support our own fully modern cognition. Theoretically derived properties of minds can then be directly mapped onto wider patterns of material evidence concerning evolutionary changes across multiple classes of behaviours - in this case illustrated by reference to nutrition, tool use and medicinal support for health.
... Ever since Neandertal skulls were found in Engis Caves, the questions that have perhaps attracted the greatest interest concerned how much like us such archaic species might have been in their bodies, minds, or behavior. Whereas an early answer was that Neandertal cognition was different from ours, it was based on inferences from the bones and the artifacts found with them (for an authoritative history of early studies of Neanderthals, see Trinkaus & Shipman, 1993). Across the 19th and early 20th centuries, schemes were developed to classify the artifacts (e.g., Lartet & Christy, 1875). ...
Chapter
The discovery of new evidence in the archaeological record naturally invites interpretation and deeper intellectual probing. What novel attributes of brains, minds or behavioural and cultural lives were necessary for such finds to have come into existence: Symbolic thought? Planning? Language? Enhanced memory? The very fragmentary nature of material evidence and the diversity of interpretations usually makes it difficult to arrive at meaningful consensus. Yet specific changes in patterns of archaeological evidence are set in a much longer arc of evolutionary development from the core mental capabilities of most mammals, through mammals showing evidence of advanced cognition such as apes and extinct hominins, until we reach the mental capabilities that we ourselves are known to possess. Theories of how mental capabilities developed across that full arc of evolution can now be specified in some detail. Aspects of a theory of the full arc can be formally tested on existing species while inferred properties of extinct hominins, assumed to have existed within that arc, can be matched to the more fragmentary archaeological evidence. Rather than interpret a piece of evidence, patterns of evidence should fit into the bigger theoretical jigsaw puzzle in a particular way. This strategy of constraining interpretive arguments around theoretical scaffolding is illustrated using a model of cognitive evolution. This model holds that simple mammalian minds are composed of just four subsystems and that five further subsystems evolved to support our own fully modern cognition. Theoretically derived properties of minds can then be directly mapped onto wider patterns of material evidence concerning evolutionary changes across multiple classes of behaviours - in this case illustrated by reference to nutrition, tool use and medicinal support for health.
... It is not until 1864 that a separate taxon, Homo neanderthalensis was suggested by William King (King 1864). It is not our aim to present a detailed overview of these early debates on the find (for discussions see Trinkaus and Shipman 1993; Cartmill and Smith 2009), but, rather, to emphasize the mind-set at the time of the discoveries at Krapina. As noted by Klaatsch (cited in GorjanovićKramberger 1918), it is unclear when the debate on the age or biological significance of Neandertals would have been solved without the discovery at Krapina. ...
Chapter
Full-text available
In this chapter, we discuss Croatian sites that have yielded human skeletal remains from the Pleistocene. These include the well-known Neandertal localities Hušnjakovo (at Krapina) and Vindija cave, as well as the Late Upper Paleolithic hominin fossil site Šandalja II cave in Istria. The Krapina site played an important role in the historical development of paleoanthropology and is still the Neandertal site with the largest known minimum number of skeletal individuals to date. Finds from Vindija cave belong to one of the latest Neandertal groups in Europe and provide data for the study of both their behavioral, as well as biological characteristics (including genomics studies). The Šandalja II cave in Istria is the only site in Croatia with direct association of human skeletal finds and the late Paleolithic, an Epigravettian industry, providing us with data on the anatomy and behavior of the Late Paleolithic inhabitants of this region.
... Oni su otkriveni u Evropi i na Srednjem Istoku. Zapadno-evropski neandertalci obično imaju krupniju graĎu, odnosno robusniju konstituciju (klasični neandertalci), u odnosu na neevropske nalaze (Trinkaus & Shipman, 1992; Trinkaus & Howells, 1979; Gore, 1996).U nešto starijoj literaturi ova vrsta se vrlo često tretira tek kao podvrsta arhaičnog Homo sapiens-a (H. sapiens neanderthalensis), dok savremena istraţivanja, pak, donose niz dokaza o njegovoj specijskoj zasebnosti (Harvati et. ...
... L'objectif du présent article est de présenter une synthèse généalogique et critique des principaux débats que la question de la prise en charge des handicaps dans la préhistoire génère depuis la seconde moitié du xx e siècle. La découverte sur des sites archéologiques de squelettes d'individus ayant survécu à leurs déficiences physiques conduit en effet, depuis les années 1970, des paléopathologues, des archéologues et des anthropologues (Anderson, 2002 ;Dickel & Doran, 1989 ;Hawkey, 1998 ;Solecki, 1971 ;Trinkaus & Shipman, 1992 ;Spikins, Rutherford, & Needham, 2010 ;Tilley & Oxenham, 2011 ;Trinkaus & Zimmerman, 1982 ;Vilos, 2011 ;etc.) à inférer l'existence d'attitudes de « compassion » et de « soin » au sein de communautés d'hominiens préhistoriques. ...
... Depuis sa découverte, de nombreux paléopathologues se sont penchés sur son squelette, ont étudié et réétudié ses os, confirmant et affinant ainsi la première analyse établie par Ralph Solecki (1971). Parmi ceux-ci, voici la description qu'en donnent Trinkaus et Shipman (1992, p. 340-1) 2 : ...
... Celles-ci pourraient être la conséquence d'une même blessure traumatique ou des lésions qui se sont développées des suites de la démarche boiteuse de Shanidar I liée aux dégradations de sa jambe et de son pied droits. À l'instar de Ralph Solecki (1971), Trinkaus et Shipman (1992) ne se limitèrent pas à une analyse descriptive issue de l'investigation paléopathologique menée à partir des ossements de Shanidar I. Ils tirèrent résolument de leurs données empiriques maintes fois confirmées, des conclusions quant à la nature des réactions sociales, des affects et des types de comportements qui durent être réalisés pour que Shanidar I puisse survivre : ...
Article
Over the end of the last century, an increasing number of paleopathological reports pretend to present clues in favor of the existence of caring and “compassionate” behaviors toward disabled individuals in prehistoric human societies. Despite the arguments put forward by paleopathologists, this claim raises important questions, not only within the sciences of prehistory but also from the field of the disability studies wherein the notion of “compassion” has been extensively criticized. After a short introduction to paleopathology and to two case studies considered as major references in the scientific literature, this article outlines the main issues which are at stake in the debate that originates in conflicting interpretations with regard to empiric data in the paleopathological literature from 1970 to nowadays.
... The notion of Neanderthal cannibalism appeared in the nineteenth century because of a paradox. Trinkaus and Shipman (1993) commented with irony on the consequences of Edouard Dupont's report of the discovery made in 1866 of a mandible at the site of La Naulette. Dupont expressed his absolute rejection of the idea that Neanderthals were cannibals. ...
Article
Full-text available
Only a tiny portion of unshared DNA makes our world so different from that of other primates, and gives us our bipedalism and the ability to think logically. Imagination and morality are two universal human characteristics. The human brain has undergone a dramatic increase in volume during the course of its evolution. The gene FOXP2 is known to be implicated in human language skills. Another significant feature is our memory. Memory is quite possibly the most amazing phenomenon in the natural world. Biological and cultural evolution have enabled us to build societies. Genes work synergistically with the environment to shape our behaviour. Empathy, the theory of mind, culture are no longer considered unique to the human species, the ability to hold opposing beliefs in our mind at the same time is the key. Nature is still present, imposing its selection on humans. Natural selection is now synonymous with cultural selection since we have become technologically dependent with regard to genetics and evolution.
... The Central European fossil record has clearly been important for our understanding of European Neandertals. In addition to the Feldhofer discovery in 1856, other nineteenthcentury discoveries in Central Europe (Šipka, Krapina) were important for demonstrating the validity of Neandertals as a prehistoric hominin population (Trinkaus and Shipman, 1992). Nevertheless, by the mid-twentieth century, the more numerous and better preserved Neandertal fossils of Western Europe had helped shift focus away from Central Europe. ...
... By the early twentieth century, the motivation for making Neandertals distinct had shifted from seeing them as primitive ancestors of humans to being a fundamentally distinct and extinct branch on the family tree (Boule, 1921). Despite Brace's (1964) attack on this " pre-sapiens " perspective as typological and non-evolutionary, followed by the dismissal of the supposed fossil record of " pre-sapiens " (Trinkaus and Shipman, 1992), accepting Neandertals as an extinct side branch of our evolution continues to promote seeing them as different in type from ourselves. Numerous recent studies appear to begin with the assumption of distinctiveness and then demonstrate it (cf. ...
Chapter
Full-text available
Central European evidence has proven invaluable to our understanding of modern human origins. Important early discoveries such as Feldhofer and Krapina have continued to offer new insights on Neandertal biology and lifeways, as have large samples of early modern humans. More recently, the discoveries at Vindija Cave and sites in Romania have provided more information on the period and process of the Neandertal – modern transition. New dating techniques andtheir direct application to fossil remains haveprovided more chronological clarity. . The genetic revolution, including the sequencing of the Neandertal genomehas shifted our field’s theoretical focus twice: 1) from a perspective that favored overall regional continuity to one of complete replacement and 2) from complete replacement to a more nuanced understanding of the dynamics of origins and admixture. We contend that the available evidence from Central Europe is most commensurate with the Assimilation Model of modern human origins, although some other models cannot be ruled out. The exact patterns of admixture between Neandertals and modern humans must await further evidence and analyses.