Re: Questions about the Upper Paleolithic


VBM wrote:
> OK, Paleo newbie here.
>
> In a TTC lecture on anthropology I was listening to recently, the professor
> was discussing the upper paleolithic in near halcion terms. The folks were
> taller, stronger, healthier, lived longer, had fewer diseases, a broader
> diet, little (if any) indication of warfare, no famine, more leisure time
> and no body odor (OK, that last one I made up). The professor went on to
> describe the neolithic revolution as a relative descent into "nasty, brutish
> and short". Once mankind began farming and herding, this lifestyle became a
> ball and chain, they became slaves to their own technological advances.
>
> I am exaggerating the professor's position a bit, but not much. Is this
> rosy picture of the Upper Paleolithic generally accepted? Sounds like a
> Jean Auel version, and I always assumed she "cleaned it up".

There is some evidence that life did get nastier in the neolithic
revolution. But life was no vacation before that either -- the
average lifespan in the paleolithic was nowhere near threescore
and ten. If the paleolithic had been a paradise, the population
wouldn't have remained near-static for millennia, and then started
to _in_crease in the neolithic.

> Also, here is an excerpt from an article, and I was wondering whether there
> are any major mistatements in it:
> "The archaeological picture changed dramatically around 40-50,000 years ago
> with the appearance of behaviorally modern humans. This was an abrupt and
> dramatic change in subsistence patterns, tools and symbolic expression. The
> stunning change in cultural adaptation was not merely a quantitative one,
> but one that represented a significant departure from all earlier human
> behavior, reflecting a major qualitative transformation. It was literally a
> "creative explosion" which exhibited the "technological ingenuity, social
> formations, and ideological complexity of historic hunter-gatherers."7 This
> human revolution is precisely what made us who we are today.

Here is what I wrote on this issue in my recent book about
the origins of language:

"The supposedly sudden appearance of advanced art and advanced
tools in the caves of Europe about 40,000 years ago is taken as
evidence of a cognitive leap. However, the appearance of a sudden
dramatic 'cultural revolution' around 40,000 years ago, has turned
out to be largely an illusion caused by the predominance of
European sites in the documented archeological record, and
possibly some Eurocentrism among archeologists (Henshilwood &
Marean, 2003). Homo sapiens did indeed invade Europe rather
suddenly about 40,000 years ago, bringing along an advanced
toolkit - but that toolkit had been developed gradually in Africa9
over the course of more than 200,000 years (McBrearty & Brooks,
2000; Van Peer et al., 2003). Kuhn et al. (2001) remain skeptical
of the interpretation of McBrearty & Brooks (2000), but later
discoveries of less ambiguous works of abstract art (Henderson,
2002; Henshilwood et al., 2002; Balter, 2002a; Recer, 2002; Harms
& Yellen, 2002), pigment use (Barham, 2002), and personal
ornaments (Henshilwood et al., 2004; Holden, 2004a) add further
support to the long timescale of McBrearty & Brooks (2000). The
debate over the supposed revolution is reviewed by Balter (2002c),
Bar-Yosef (2002), and Henshilwood & Marean (2003)." (p 168)

Johansson, S (2005) 'Origins of Language - Constraints
on Hypotheses' John Benjamins,
http://www.benjamins.com/cgi-bin/t_bookview.cgi?bookid=CELCR%205

> The Upper Paleolithic lifestyle, as it was called, was based essentially on
> hunting and gathering. So successful was this cultural adaptation that until
> roughly 11,000 years ago, hominids worldwide were subsisting essentially as
> hunter-gatherers.

Well... Worked fine as long as it was the only game in town.
But as soon as somebody came up with an alternative (agriculture),
the farmers out-competed the hunter-gatherers pretty fast.

> In the Upper Paleolithic of Eurasia, or the Late Stone Age as it is called
> in Africa, the archaeological signature stands in strong contrast to that of
> the Middle Paleolithic/Middle Stone Age. It was characterized by significant
> innovation:
>
> * a remarkable diversity in stone tool types
>
> * tool types showed significant change over time and space
>
> * artifacts were regularly fashioned out of bone, antler and ivory, in
> addition to stone
>
> * stone artifacts were made primarily on blades and were easily classified
> into discrete categories, presumably reflecting specialized use
>
> * burials were accompanied by ritual or ceremony and contained a rich
> diversity of grave goods
>
> * living structures and well-designed fireplaces were constructed
>
> * hunting of dangerous animal species and fishing occurred regularly
>
> higher population densities
>
> * abundant and elaborate art as well as items of personal adornment were
> widespread
>
> * raw materials such as flint and shells were traded over some distances

All those changes did occur, but there is no evidence that the
transition was sudden. On the contrary, the first appearances
of these things are spread in time over a few hundred thousand
years.

> Homo sapiens of the Upper Paleolithic/Late Stone Age was quintessentially
> modern in appearance and behavior. Precisely how this transformation
> occurred is not well understood, but it apparently was restricted to Homo
> sapiens and did not occur in Neanderthals. Some archaeologists invoke a
> behavioral explanation for the change.

Fair enough -- but don't make too much of it.

> For example, Soffer11 suggests that
> changes in social relations, such as development of the nuclear family,
> played a key role in bringing about the transformation.

Pure speculation.

> Klein7, on the other hand, proffers the notion that it was probably a
> biological change brought about by mutations that played the key role in the
> emergence of behaviorally modern humans. His biologically based explanation
> implies that a major neural reorganization of the brain resulted in a
> significant enhancement in the manner in which the brain processed
> information.

Just as pure speculation.

> This is a difficult hypothesis to test since brains do not
> fossilize. But it is significant that no changes are seen in the shape of
> the skulls between earlier and later Homo sapiens. It can only be surmised
> from the archaeological record, which contains abundant evidence for ritual
> and art, that these Upper Paleolithic/Late Stone Age peoples possessed
> language abilities equivalent to our own.

Extremely unlikely that they didn't have modern language capacity,
as they postdate the most recent common ancestor of living people.
As a matter of fact, the lower limit for the age of language can
be pushed back a bit more than that. But we have no real upper
limit for the age of language, no evidence that Neanderthals or
even erectus did _not_ have language in some form.

> For many anthropologists this
> represents the final evolutionary leap to full modernity."

> http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/johanson.html

Best regards, HLK, Physics
Sverker Johansson U of Jonkoping
----------------------------------------------
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
ATHEISM IS RELIGION
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH - adapted from
CREATIONISM IS SCIENCE George Orwell

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Questions about the Upper Paleolithic
    ... >> with the appearance of behaviorally modern humans. ... that these Upper Paleolithic/Late Stone Age peoples possessed ... >> language abilities equivalent to our own. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Question regarding Upper Paleolithic
    ... with the appearance of behaviorally modern humans. ... Homo sapiens of the Upper Paleolithic/Late Stone Age was quintessentially ... Some archaeologists invoke a ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Questions about the Upper Paleolithic
    ... with the appearance of behaviorally modern humans. ... Homo sapiens of the Upper Paleolithic/Late Stone Age was quintessentially ... Some archaeologists invoke a ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Question regarding Upper Paleolithic
    ... with the appearance of behaviorally modern humans. ... Homo sapiens of the Upper Paleolithic/Late Stone Age was quintessentially ... Some archaeologists invoke a ...
    (sci.bio.paleontology)