News: Neanderthals wore make-up and liked to chat
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Robert Karl Stonjek - 28 Mar 2008 01:38 GMT Neanderthals wore make-up and liked to chat a.. 09:24 27 March 2008 b.. NewScientist.com news service c.. Dan Jones Could Neanderthals speak? The answer may depend on whether they used make-up.
Francesco d'Errico, an archaeologist from the University of Bordeaux, France, has found crafted lumps of pigment - essentially crayons - left behind by Neanderthals across Europe.
He says that Neanderthals, who most likely had pale skin, used these dark pigments to mark their own as well as animal skins. And, since body art is a form of communication, this implies that the Neanderthals could speak, d'Errico says.
Working with Marie Soressi of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, d'Errico has recovered hundreds of blocks of black manganese pigment from two neighbouring sites at Pech de l'Azé in France, which were occupied by Neanderthals. These add to evidence of pigment among Neanderthal from some 39 other sites.
The pigments were not just smeared onto the body like camouflage, d'Errico says, but fashioned into drawing tools.
"The flat, elongated surfaces on the archaeological specimens are consistent, as confirmed experimentally, with producing clearly visible straight black lines, perhaps arranged to produce abstract designs," says d'Errico, who presented his work on 15 March at the Seventh Evolution of Language Conference in Barcelona, Spain.
Essential words Body painting, argues d'Errico, is a "material proxy" for symbolic communication. What's more, he says, the techniques for making the symbols, and the meaning they carry, would have to be transmitted through language.
And body painting isn't the only proxy associated with Neanderthal remains. Neanderthals adorned their bodies with ornamentation, such as necklaces made from shell beads.
The sorts of beads used by modern humans, and the ornaments they fashioned from them, vary geographically. This is often interpreted as a sign of ethnic and cultural diversity among humans, and a means of symbolically binding groups and differentiating them from others. D'Errico suggests that the same holds true for Neanderthals.
Other researchers agree, and point to a double standard of some researchers in interpreting the archaeological record, including evidence of burials, care of the infirm and social cooperation.
'Inferior ability' "Some archaeologists are happy to associate these same features with language if they occur with modern humans, but are not willing to associate them with language among the Neanderthals," says anthropologist Erik Trinkaus of Washington University in St Louis, US.
"The double standard doesn't work - if they reflect language in one, they must reflect in it both."
However, even if Neanderthals had language capabilities, that does not mean they spoke in the same way as humans.
"The archaeological record does not show that they ever attained the cultural level of the humans who could talk as we do," says Phillip Lieberman, a linguist at Brown University, Rhode Island, US.
"Neanderthals possessed language, but their linguistic and cognitive ability was inferior to the humans who replaced them," he says.
Source: NewScientist http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13536?DCMP=NLC-nletter&nsref=dn13536
Posted by Robert Karl Stonjek
Edward Hennessey - 01 Apr 2008 23:35 GMT Neanderthals wore make-up and liked to chat a.. 09:24 27 March 2008 b.. NewScientist.com news service c.. Dan Jones Could Neanderthals speak? The answer may depend on whether they used make-up.
Francesco d'Errico, an archaeologist from the University of Bordeaux, France, has found crafted lumps of pigment - essentially crayons - left behind by Neanderthals across Europe.
He says that Neanderthals, who most likely had pale skin, used these dark pigments to mark their own as well as animal skins. And, since body art is a form of communication, this implies that the Neanderthals could speak, d'Errico says.
Working with Marie Soressi of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, d'Errico has recovered hundreds of blocks of black manganese pigment from two neighbouring sites at Pech de l'Azé in France, which were occupied by Neanderthals. These add to evidence of pigment among Neanderthal from some 39 other sites.
The pigments were not just smeared onto the body like camouflage, d'Errico says, but fashioned into drawing tools.
It is worth remarking that kohl, a cosmetic eyeliner/eyeshadow is still used in the Arab world by women who fancy it for the effect of making their eyes seem bigger and giving them a sloe appearance. Argument and various findings have kohl composed of powdered galena, antimony, herbal soot and other things, perhaps manganese included. Some hail kohl, as well, for its properties as a fly repellent and vermifuge...which would work well with the toxic properties of lead and antimony. Also note that kohl is a key component of the word alcohol, a substance itself reputed to give the eyes a dark and sunken effect on heavy consumption.
Regards,
Edward Hennessey
Rich Travsky - 13 Apr 2008 03:52 GMT > [...] > Francesco d'Errico, an archaeologist from the University of Bordeaux, France, > has found crafted lumps of pigment > [...] > He says that Neanderthals, who most likely had pale skin, used these dark pigments > [...] Which ties in somewhat with news from last year
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003975496_neanderthal26.html Friday, October 26, 2007 Red hair a part of Neanderthal genetic profile
PHILADELPHIA In an unprecedented feat of forensic anthropology, European researchers extracted enough DNA from two Neanderthal skulls to suggest their owners sported red hair and white skin when they were alive 43,000 and 50,000 years ago. ...
GoldLions - 20 Apr 2008 23:23 GMT > "Robert Karl Stonjek" <ston...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in messagenews:Q5XGj.3378$n8.12@news-server.bigpond.net.au... > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > years ago. > ... According to what I've read, some scholars specializing in genetics tried inserting some parts of the Neanderthal genetic material into modern human cells wondering whether the human cells would retain melanin or not.
The result of their experiment was that the human cells would turn light.
Some then assumed that Neanderthal also must had been light skinned, but were they?
Perhaps WHY the human cells would not retain the dark pigment was that the pigment for Neanderthal skin may not had been compatible with ours?
Maybe the skin pigment of the Neanderthal was something completely different? Were Neanderthals a dark gray as seen with gorillas or orangutans since I also read that certain Neanderthal genomes showed that at multiple locations their DNA sequences matched chimp DNA but not human. So with that in mind I wonder what change would happen if one were to try the same procedure of placing gorilla, orangutan, or even chimp pigment/DNA within human cells?
Would the human cells remain white also?
Hard to say since it was also mentioned that what caused "red" in the Neanderthal genome is different from what causes "red hair" in BOTH human AND ape.... So I guess we 're back to "square one" again?........ Pretty frustrating, any reply would be most appreciated. Many thanks.
jerry warner - 15 May 2008 09:50 GMT > > "Robert Karl Stonjek" <ston...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in messagenews:Q5XGj.3378$n8.12@news-server.bigpond.net.au... > > [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > Pretty frustrating, any reply would be most appreciated. > Many thanks. well its an interesting idea but too early to know one way or another. Patience!
GoldLions - 20 Apr 2008 23:57 GMT > "Robert Karl Stonjek" <ston...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in messagenews:Q5XGj.3378$n8.12@news-server.bigpond.net.au... > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > years ago. > ...========================== Lalueza-Fox team studied a skin-pigment gene, called MC1R and found a different variant of the same gene in their Neanderthal bone samples. But how can one be completely certain that this new variant led to red- haired, white-skinned Neanderthals? Why not a completely different skin color like gray as seen on oranutans? Some tried inserting some parts of this Neanderthal genetic material into modern human cells wondering whether the human cells would retain melanin or not.
The result of their experiment was that the human cells would turn light.
Some then assumed that Neanderthal also must had been light skinned, but were they?
Perhaps WHY the human cells would not retain the dark pigment was that the pigment for Neanderthal skin may not had been compatible with ours?
Maybe the skin pigment of the Neanderthal was something completely different? Were Neanderthals a dark gray as seen with gorillas or orangutans since I also read that certain Neanderthal genomes showed that at multiple locations their DNA sequences matched chimp DNA but not human. So with that in mind I wonder what change would happen if one were to try the same procedure of placing gorilla, orangutan, or even chimp pigment/DNA within human cells?
Would the human cells remain white also?
Hard to say since it was also mentioned that what caused "red" in the Neanderthal genome is different from what causes "red hair" in BOTH human AND ape.... So I guess we 're back to "square one" again?........ Pretty frustrating, any reply would be most appreciated. Many thanks.
Dwight E. Howell - 31 May 2008 05:10 GMT >> "Robert Karl Stonjek" <ston...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in messagenews:Q5XGj.3378$n8.12@news-server.bigpond.net.au... >> [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] > Pretty frustrating, any reply would be most appreciated. > Many thanks. Their understanding of genetics human and otherwise is a heck of lot better than yours. By the way the actual genetic differences between humans and chimps is pretty slim.
The pigment DNA is pretty much the same and might be the exact same other than in fair individuals.
The real question is what would happen for example if you tried to do an entire chromosome substitution. Just how much mucking around could you get away with before you did something lethal.
You could most likely get away with using chimp mitochondra and a Y chromosome but beyond that....
Of course doing this to human would be out of the question but if you went the other way especially while nobody was looking...
GoldLions - 01 Jun 2008 14:21 GMT in an email.
If this isn't contamination something crossed the line going one way or the other and this is early days. ================= Interesting, but I'm wondering if the Neanderthal DNA results were STILL "contaminated" since the bones were handled by various scientists who studied them years ago. Should another Neanderthal skeleton be found, I hope at least ONE LONG BONE won't be handled by human hands but by machine and shipped right away to a sterile lab. Then will the genetic results be the same? My point is, just HOW different were they and what was it that made a Neanderthal uniquely "Neanderthal"... TY for your replies BTW.
jerry warner - 06 Apr 2008 08:29 GMT > Neanderthals wore make-up and liked to chat > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > "Neanderthals possessed language, but their linguistic and cognitive > ability was inferior to the humans who replaced them," he says. So were they Repblican or Democrat, by the same token?
Jerry
spiznet - 06 Apr 2008 17:54 GMT > > Neanderthals wore make-up and liked to chat > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > "Neanderthals possessed language, but their linguistic and cognitive > > ability was inferior to the humans who replaced them," he says. Prove it.
Marc Verhaegen - 06 Apr 2008 22:30 GMT Op 06-04-2008 18:54, in artikel c72a7451-a6d2-4f06-8bbc-eafcddaa594a@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com, spiznet <mark@spiznet.com> schreef:
>>> Neanderthals wore make-up and liked to chat >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >>> "Neanderthals possessed language, but their linguistic and cognitive >>> ability was inferior to the humans who replaced them," he says.
> Prove it. To whom are you talking, my little boy? to Lieberman?
Lee Olsen - 07 Apr 2008 00:06 GMT > my little boy? Pervert.
Marc Verhaegen - 07 Apr 2008 00:48 GMT Op 07-04-2008 01:06, in artikel 139f132b-b0f1-4501-9bb1-2bbed36a3914@n1g2000prb.googlegroups.com, Lee Olsen <paleocity@hotmail.com> schreef:
>> my little boy? > > Pervert. Just stop behaving like a little child, ridiculous boy.
Lee Olsen - 07 Apr 2008 02:40 GMT > Op 07-04-2008 01:06, in artikel > 139f132b-b0f1-4501-9bb1-2bbed36a3...@n1g2000prb.googlegroups.com, Lee Olsen [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Just stop behaving like a little child, ridiculous boy. Pervert, just can't get children out of your mind, can you?
Marc Verhaegen - 07 Apr 2008 19:58 GMT Op 07-04-2008 03:40, in artikel 8f652094-c5b7-4c9e-8466-fca3ab0fb336@g1g2000pra.googlegroups.com, Lee Olsen <paleocity@hotmail.com> schreef:
>> Op 07-04-2008 01:06, in artikel >> 139f132b-b0f1-4501-9bb1-2bbed36a3...@n1g2000prb.googlegroups.com, Lee Olsen [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> >>> Pervert.
> Pervert, just can't get children out of your mind, can you? Stop behaving like a little child, ridiculous boy.
Lee Olsen - 07 Apr 2008 21:22 GMT > Stop behaving like a little child, ridiculous boy. says the name-calling a.shole.
GoldLions - 20 Apr 2008 23:35 GMT On Mar 27, 8:38�pm, "Robert Karl Stonjek" <ston...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> Neanderthals wore make-up and liked to chat > � a.. 09:24 27 March 2008 [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > Posted by > Robert Karl Stonjek What a neat topic, "evidence" of Neanderthal make up? My one question to this author is how are they so certain that these "crayons" were the result of Neanderthals and not from their successor, Homo Sapiens? (H.S) Even if these "crayons" were found at certain Neanderthal sites could it had been possible that Neanderthals may had traded for them or more likely "stolen" from abandoned H.S. camps? Just a thought.
|
|
|