|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Neanderthals v Humans |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Edited Oct 29, 2012, 22:03
Oct 29, 2012, 22:01
|
||
|
Neanderthals vs. Humans: Who would win in a fight? Tsk, that’s the headline from The Independent Online – would have thought they’d have come up with something a bit more intelligent in the body of the article if not in the headline itself but no, we’ve got an artist’s impression of a few ape-like creatures squatting round a fire followed by the question, “...what would happen if modern man and his prehistoric ancestor were to square off?” Tsk again, Neanderthals are not our ancestors – they’re descended from the same ancestor (Homo heidelbergensis) as ourselves. Sorry if I’m sounding nerdy on this but I’ve got a very soft spot for our Neanderthal cousins (and from recent TV progs it seems we even carry 2-3% of their DNA) and get fed-up with the inaccurate and out-of-date bad press they still get. More germane to TMA, I’ve often wondered if they (Neanderthals) might not have been the ‘builders’ of some of our ‘simpler’ stone structures. Dunno if anyone has done any research on that but the idea that some of our structures might be the work of Neanderthals, and not Homo sapiens, is fascinating.
|
|||
thesweetcheat 6216 posts |
Oct 29, 2012, 22:10
|
||
|
Interesting thought - you would have to find a stone structure that dated back far further than anything yet reliably dated, I would think. Rock shelters/caves obviously not counting! I share your annoyance with the tone of the piece too. Too many B-Movies (or Harry Hill) being watched by the sub-editor maybe.
|
|||
tiompan 5758 posts |
Oct 29, 2012, 22:17
|
||
|
Littlestone wrote: Neanderthals vs. Humans: Who would win in a fight? Tsk, that’s the headline from The Independent Online – would have thought they’d have come up with something a bit more intelligent in the body of the article if not in the headline itself but no, we’ve got an artist’s impression of a few ape-like creatures squatting round a fire followed by the question, “...what would happen if modern man and his prehistoric ancestor were to square off?” Tsk again, Neanderthals are not our ancestors – they’re descended from the same ancestor (Homo heidelbergensis) as ourselves. Sorry if I’m sounding nerdy on this but I’ve got a very soft spot for our Neanderthal cousins (and from recent TV progs it seems we even carry 2-3% of their DNA) and get fed-up with the inaccurate and out-of-date bad press they still get. More germane to TMA, I’ve often wondered if they (Neanderthals) might not have been the ‘builders’ of some of our ‘simpler’ stone structures. Dunno if anyone has done any research on that but the idea that some of our structures might be the work of Neanderthals, and not Homo sapiens, is fascinating. I can't see how that would work for LS . There are no monuments/stone structures pre Holocene attributable to anyone and Neanderthals weren't around by the end of the Pleistocene .
|
|||
|
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Oct 29, 2012, 22:17
|
||
Aye, just wonder though how reliably dated most of our structures are – some for sure but many aren’t, not to mention the Doggerland caché if we can get to it.
|
|||
|
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Oct 29, 2012, 22:22
|
||
I need to check the timelines there Mr t, but can we be really sure that Neanderthals didn’t leave anything more than a few remains in just a few underground locations...
|
|||
|
tiompan 5758 posts |
Oct 29, 2012, 22:36
|
||
|
Littlestone wrote: I need to check the timelines there Mr t, but can we be really sure that Neanderthals didn’t leave anything more than a few remains in just a few underground locations... If open air it would have had to have survived at least 30,000 years and the effects of an ice age . Burials with a capstone in a cave ? might be the best bet .
|
|||
|
GLADMAN 950 posts |
Oct 29, 2012, 22:55
|
||
|
thesweetcheat wrote: Interesting thought - you would have to find a stone structure that dated back far further than anything yet reliably dated, I would think. Rock shelters/caves obviously not counting! I share your annoyance with the tone of the piece too. Too many B-Movies (or Harry Hill) being watched by the sub-editor maybe. Nothing wrong with Harry Hill, I'll have you know! You should hear his theories on the cronology of rock art on the west coast of Scotland. Us Homo Sapien Sapiens v The Neanderthals reminds me somewhat of Scots v The Picts. Noone really knows whether the former undertook ethnic cleansing or the latter simply gave up the fight?
|
|||
Howburn Digger 986 posts |
Oct 30, 2012, 17:02
|
||
|
GLADMAN wrote: Us Homo Sapien Sapiens v The Neanderthals reminds me somewhat of Scots v The Picts. No one really knows whether the former undertook ethnic cleansing or the latter simply gave up the fight? So many more options than be "ethnically cleansed" or "give up" MR GLADMAN! Someone doesn't really know what question to ask obviously! The change from Pictland to Scotland is mostly medieval mythmaking of the highest order. Some of which obviously has continued in a gentle trickledown system which has informed some of our Southern Neighbours. Scots v The Picts - did the variety of incomers settle, trade, merge and intermarry over hundreds of years? Because that is what people do and that is what the archaeological record shows happened. The notion that the death of a named king, a treaty after a battle or a change of political leadership actually physically changes or even removes an entire population or culture is a strange one. We know for instance that a Pictish King Elpin was attacked by bandits at Monid Croib in 728, that was very near modern Forteviot. We know that Kenny McAlpin was the first king of the unified kingdoms in 843. We know that the name of our king was changed from Rex Pictorum (King of Pictland) to Ri Alba when our area North of The Wall dropped the Latin Pish and started speaking in our vernacular language. That was in the early 10th century. That was at a time when the area North of The Wall was driving back Danes/ Vikings on the North-West and North-East coasts and Angles from the South. No-one "Pict" or "Scot" was "giving up" any fight... the people fought battles, maintained borders and struck a treaty with the Danes. Back at the end of the 11th Century we were back with the Latin Pish and referring to our kings as Rex Scottorum (King of Scotland). The Picts are still here. The Scots are still here. They live in Scotland which has only really existed in its current (approximate) geographical form since the 9th century (excluding the Hebrides, Orkney and Shetland). This might be slightly longer than England - I think some of which used to be in France. What was England actually called before the Angles invaded? Did the romanised remnants of the Icenii and Trinovantes simply "give up" when the Angles and Saxons arrived? They hadn't been "ethnically cleansed" by the Romans as their continued existence and presence, post-AD61's revolt, is recorded by Ptolemy at Venta Icenorum and later in the Ravenna Cosmography. Did they move around a wee bit, intermarry, start wearing some new fashionable "jingle-jangle" jewellery and get pissed in the fashionable Grub Huts of the day. I am sure their descendants learned French, started building twee churches and making tapestries once the Normans arrived. These days you don't see many Victorian gentlemen strutting around in cummerbunds and smoking jackets debating whether the future lies with the Penny Farthing or the Horseless Carriage. People move and groove with the times.
|
|||
handofdave 3515 posts |
Oct 30, 2012, 17:25
|
||
|
I believe that they would qualify as our ancestors in the sense that we do contain their DNA in varying amounts... if we're Europeans. Sub-Saharan Africans do not... Apparently, Neanderthals were always a northern hominid and did not venture down into Africa. I would guess the Neanderthals would have been capable of erecting some small structures, but would they have gone to the trouble of hauling and finishing large megaliths? Speculative. The sort of grandiosity that homo sapiens is famous for doesn't seem to have ever infected the other branches of our tree, but as so much is gone to time, who can really know for sure.
|
|||
|
Harryshill 510 posts |
Oct 30, 2012, 17:38
|
||
I agree with the ancestor and DNA thing
|
| Pages: 14 – [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
