![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rfmcdonaldUntil quite recently, the general consensus was that the sustained interest in the Neanderthals, a kindred subspecies at the very least, were inherently inferior to homo sapiens sapiens--technologically, biologically--and that their destruction come the end of the Ice Age was inevitable and so thorough that not a trace of the Neanderthal genome was left. Remarkable advantages in the sequencing of ancient DNA have revealed that Neanderthals (and other hominin species) did interbreed with non-African homo sapiens sapiens, leaving an actually existing genetic legacy, and suggest that Neanderthals were intellectually comparable to homo sapiens sapiens. Why the disappearance of a discrete Neanderthal population? Wired Science writer Kate Shaw's article "Sheer Numbers Gave Early Humans Edge Over Neanderthals" presents new evidence that the Neanderthals were simply wildly outnumbered.
All this has interesting implications. Looking at this, I'm reminded of the way that some homo sapiens sapiens hunter-gatherer cultures in historical time ended up giving way to agricultural civilizations. Certain hunter-gatherer populations, particularly those in pre-modern Japan and the North American Pacific Northwest before white settlement in the mid-19th century, were so well adapted to a bountiful environment that they had large enough surpluses to support materially and organizationally quite complex cultures. It was only at a late date, as agriculture-using civilizations finally these former frontiers with their superior technologies and numbers, that they succumbed, eventually becoming overwhelmed and assimilated as with the Ainoid Emishi of northeastern Japan, leaving only a relatively few traces far outnumbered by the impact of implanted agricultural civilization.
Other hominin species have left legacies in the human gene pool, as noted, but these legacies are fairly rare, on the level of low single digit percentages. One traditional model would have it that this low percentage reflects sustained inter-population conflicts that allowed only a select minority of Neanderthal survivors to reproduce. If Neanderthals were so substantially outnumbered by homo sapiens sapiens, however, this relatively low percentage might reflect a much more thorough assimilation of more of the Neanderthal population than traditionally believed.
Two archaeologists from Cambridge University analyzed data from the Aquitaine region of southern France, which has Europe’s highest density of sites from this era, and one of the most complete archeological records. They used data from three time periods that encompassed the transition between Neanderthals and modern humans: the Mouterian and Chatelperronian eras, during which Neanderthals lived, and the Aurignacian period, which was dominated by modern humans. By examining differences between land use during these time periods, the researchers hoped to determine whether population dynamics played a role in the transition between these two hominins.
Because of the difficulties in estimating long-ago populations, the researchers used a few different proxies for population sizes and densities. They analyzed the number of occupied sites in each era, the size of these sites, and the accumulation rates of stone tools and animal food remains. Through these proxies, the researchers could get good estimates of population dynamics during the transition from Neanderthals to modern humans in Aquitaine.
[. . .] Since these archaeological proxies was developed independently, the estimations can be looked at cumulatively to get a better idea of the different population sizes. When evaluated as a whole, these estimations show that the population size and densities of modern humans may have been more than 9 times those of the Neanderthals around the time of the population’s transition. It’s very likely that a numerical advantage that large played a significant role in modern humans’ dominance over their earlier counterparts.
All this has interesting implications. Looking at this, I'm reminded of the way that some homo sapiens sapiens hunter-gatherer cultures in historical time ended up giving way to agricultural civilizations. Certain hunter-gatherer populations, particularly those in pre-modern Japan and the North American Pacific Northwest before white settlement in the mid-19th century, were so well adapted to a bountiful environment that they had large enough surpluses to support materially and organizationally quite complex cultures. It was only at a late date, as agriculture-using civilizations finally these former frontiers with their superior technologies and numbers, that they succumbed, eventually becoming overwhelmed and assimilated as with the Ainoid Emishi of northeastern Japan, leaving only a relatively few traces far outnumbered by the impact of implanted agricultural civilization.
Other hominin species have left legacies in the human gene pool, as noted, but these legacies are fairly rare, on the level of low single digit percentages. One traditional model would have it that this low percentage reflects sustained inter-population conflicts that allowed only a select minority of Neanderthal survivors to reproduce. If Neanderthals were so substantially outnumbered by homo sapiens sapiens, however, this relatively low percentage might reflect a much more thorough assimilation of more of the Neanderthal population than traditionally believed.
