P.B. Pettitt, Neanderthal Lifeycles.pdf

Neanderthal Lifecycles: Developmental and Social Phases in the Lives of the Last Archaics

Author(s): P. B. Pettitt

Source: World Archaeology, Vol. 31, No. 3, Human Lifecycles (Feb., 2000), pp. 351-366

Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/125106

Accessed: 22/09/2010 08:38

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancis .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Taylor & Francis, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to World

Archaeology.

http://www.jstor.org

Neanderthal lifecycles:

developmental

and

social

phases

the

lives

the

last

archaics

P. B. Pettitt

Abstract

Neanderthallives were not easy, and, given the levels of physicalexertion they seem to have

experiencedhabitually,bringing them often into contact with physicaltrauma, it would not be

surprising

if suchphenomenaplayed a major role in the way in whichNeanderthals perceivedthe

world.Thisis the underlyingthemeof thispaper,whichis organizedinto two parts.After present-

ing data on Neanderthalontogenyand lifecycles,an attemptis made to integratethese broadly

with the archaeologicalrecord and intepret both in terms of the constitution of society by

Neanderthalindividuals.In this sense it is in the main a purelyinterpretativework,representing

the author'sreadingof the biometricand archaeologicaldata.Given that linguisticand/orexter-

nal means of informationstorage and communicationwere probablypoor or absent in Nean-

derthalsociety, it is suggested that the phases of the Neanderthal lifecycle and events of physical

traumaexperiencedubiquitouslywithin it played the major role in the negotiation of individual

identities within Neanderthalbands, and ultimatelywere a majorfactor in the constitutionof

Neanderthalsociety.

Keywords

Neanderthals;MiddlePalaeolithic;

lifecycles;ontogeny.

Introduction

The database for the Neanderthal body - its development, biomechanical effects upon it,

as well as its depositional contexts - is unsurpassed among fossil hominins. It encom-

passes, for example, developmental variability from Kebara KMH 1, an infant of 7 to 9

months apparently tossed onto a rubbish heap, to La Ferrassie 1, one of the most elderly

Neanderthal individuals known (Plate 1), and Shanidar I, an adult Neanderthal who died

in old age and who was one of the most severely traumatized Pleistocene hominins for

which we have evidence (Plate 2). Numerous studies emphasize the considerable and

habitual stresses placed upon an extremely muscular body from a very young age, stresses

World Archaeology

Vol. 31(3): 351-366 Human Lifecycles

? 2000 T'aylor & FrancisLtd 0043-8243

352

P B. Pettitt

Plate 1 La Ferrassie 1

skull, one of the most

elderly Neanderthals

known, probably male.

Note bad wear of all

teeth. Photo courtesy of

C. B. Stringer.

~~ _

;tr~~~~~~~~sk

As||>'

J....

...

.....

which~~

exen

towardsc

the phsical us

ftebdsapwrtolycnrsteei

strctued

livesi

~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .

Palaheolthic

toarchaeologistsswork

ine discplie indywhichtimerresolutiyontrist

ineevital

afectsdienctlyo the quablityo qesaortionso

thamybe

Nanddressed boy the avaltuable

ncoarsecand

data. Given this, it is ironic that the amount of hominin skeletal materialthat has been

amassedover the last century and a half now permits, for the Neanderthalsat least, the

reconstructionof numerousfactors concerning the ontogeny of the skeleton and a broad

reconstructionof the Neanderthal lifecycle. Thus, in a context in which a chronological

precision of a few millennia is the order of the day, in the case of anatomical and bio-

mechanicalstudiesone is affordeda precision withinone lifecycle, whichfor Neanderthals

is between 30 and 40 years.

Neanderthal lifecycles

353

Plate 2 The skull of

Shanidar 1, an elderly

Neanderthaland one of

the most severely trau-

matized individuals

known in the Neander-

thal hypodigm. Photo

courtesy of B. Trinkaus.

Traumaand lifestyle

It is now well known that, in comparison to Homo sapiens sapiens (hereafter referred to

as anatomically modern humans), Neanderthals were considerably more robust, particu-

larly in the upper limbs, and given to higher levels of physical exertion at a habitual level.

For example 'the observed morphology of these Pleistocene hominids ... is largely deter-

mined by levels and patterns of habitual biomechanical force through the skeleton'

(Trinkaus 1992: 162; see also Trinkaus 1983, 1987, 1989; Trinkaus and Churchill 1999;

Trinkaus and Smith 1985; Churchill 1994). This also includes paramasticatory use of the

anterior dentition - characteristically clear and heavy wear and unusual bevelling which

are especially clear on La Ferrassie 1, Shanidar I, 3, 4 and 5 and Amud unn (e.g. Brace

354

P B. Pettitt

1962; Smith 1983; Ungar et al. 1997). Such differences are particularly apparent in

Neanderthals occupying the more stressed environments of the northerly latitudes of

Eurasia, in contrast to the Near East (Trinkaus 1987, 1989).

Given the many similarities in gorilla and chimpanzee lifecycles to those of modern

humans (Sperling and Beyene 1997), one might expect Neanderthals broadly to share

many features of our own lifecycles; their gestation periods, for example, seem to have

been the same, at least on the basis of the pelvic canal of Kebara 2 (Rak and Arensberg

1987). There are biomechanical differences, however. Physical trauma clearly played an

important role within the Neanderthal lifecycle. In this they were probably not excep-

tional among pre-industrial societies: Pleistocene members of the genus Homo in general

display moderately high levels of trauma and associated degenerative joint disease,

osteoarthritis, stress indicators and various dental pathologies (Fennell and Trinkaus

1997). More rarely, specimens display indicators of infection, tumours and systemic

disorders: e.g. the woven bone deposition on a limb of the KNM-ER 1808 Homo ergaster,

usually taken to indicate Hypervitaminosis A; and the dental absess on the KNM-WT

15000 Homo ergaster (Nariokotome Boy). It must be said, however, that levels of trauma

observable in the Neanderthal hypodigm are relatively high, which requires explanation.

This being so, indicators of infection specifically within Neanderthal populations are rare,

and many pathologies clearly evident on the fossil material relate to other forms of stress

(e.g. Ogilvie et al. 1989; Hutchinson et al. 1997: 912).

Neanderthal lives were certainly not easy: given this, I wonder whether activity-related

physical trauma was such a common event that it actually played a role in structuring

Neanderthal society. Traumatic lesions are common on Neanderthal skeletons, particu-

larly in the regions of the head, neck and arms, a pattern which is paralleled closely in

modern rodeo riding injuries (Berger and Trinkaus 1995). The vertebral osteoarthritis on

La Chapelle-aux-Saints 1 is notable, in that the traumatic lesions are located in the lower

cervical and upper thoracic vertebrae, which, given that this is unknown in other

Neanderthals for which most of the vertebral column survives, is most likely to represent

a trauma specific to this individual rather than to an atypical carrying load (Dawson and

Trinkaus 1997).

The sample of Neanderthal adults interred within Shanidar Cave, Iraq, serves as an

apposite example of the range of physical trauma - by which I mean a skeletal state or

condition arising from physical shock - experienced by Neanderthals in their prime and

thereafter. Of the seven adults buried within the cave, six bear positive evidence of physi-

cal injuries (Trinkaus and Zimmerman 1982). A single, catastrophic event, which may

therefore be taken as non-representative of Neanderthal ontogeny and trauma, can be

ruled out, given that on sedimentary grounds the remains range in antiquity from c. 45-50

ka BP (Shanidar I and 5) through the slightly older Shanidar 3 to individuals seemingly

deposited before (perhaps considerably before) c. 60 ka BP(Shanidar 4, 6-9). Shanidar D,

then, contains a sample of seven Neanderthal adults and two infants (Shanidar 8 and 9)

spanning at least thirty thousand years of Pleistocene time. Given this, it is remarkable

that six out of seven adults bear traces of severe physical trauma. In fact, it is conceivable

that the seventh (Shanidar 2) did too. It is incomplete and one therefore cannot eliminate

trauma in this specimen; in fact some degenerative joint disease (DJD) - which itself is

often related to trauma - is observable.

Plik z chomika:

Inne pliki z tego folderu:

Inne foldery tego chomika: