a. Archaeology and Anatomy
(Please click images to get a larger version)
When it comes to the subject Neanderthal, we find clearly a hot topic, and this, from the archaeological research. I do not know you, but as a human being I ask you to follow me, leaving possible the fact that you knew so far comes from one of the most serious -conscious or unconscious- lie of human history. You will need a good dose of impertinence.
« Dossiers d’Archéologie », Nr. 345 May / June 2011 entitled Neanderthal rehabilitated. This title is both right and wrong, it is misleading, since Neanderthal is not raised to the appropriate level, although there is a recent wave of “false rehabilitation.”
I decided to start with an overview of the official theory.
It says then that Neanderthal, discovered in 1830, brings together a set of three potential hominid races forming a European species of the genus Homo (Homo sapiens as one – other – species of the genus homo): Neanderthal race of Eastern Europe (eastern Europe to Russia), the Neanderthal race of Western Europe, and the Neanderthal race of Southern Europe, between the coast of Spain and Croatia.
Neanderthals lived in Europe during a very long time. Depending on where you place the limit of the appearance of Neanderthal characteristics, we get about 500,000 years before present. It attests the mastery of fire in Neanderthal technology, which is also the first of the genus homo in whom it is recognized. Neanderthal is the species of genus homo who was best suited, and has endured the harshest climates. Its industry was in its time (until -40 000 according to the official theory) the most developed of the world, and this is established, from the remains that were discovered. Skull volume, meanwhile, was higher than the current average (approximately 1700cm3 against 1500cm3 approximately), and the largest ever known, with that of the Cro-Magnon (European race -40 000 to -10 000).
It seems that Neanderthal is the descendant of Homo erectus in Europe. This theory is also quite controversial, but it will not matter. It seems easier for evolutionists to imagine that all living creatures come from the same original bacterium, and to consider the creation of the same bacteria from suitable climatic and environmental conditions; that, only assume, that human or other living creatures could possibly come from an another place or be created from scratch. I do not defend the creationist theories, but I believe that evolutionary theories are, in many cases, the result of a belief just as strange. Is that they should be obvious which is arguably one of the biggest problems in science today.
Neanderthal, was in the last century, and until recently, if not today, considered as a primitive backward-looking monkey. In any case, that is what we can hear today. Hence the so-called “rehabilitation.”
Here is the description of Neanderthal in Wikipedia (please note that this description is more realistic, more nuanced, and updated on english Wikipedia than on french Wikipedia, my original source is the french):
The magnitude of autapomorphic traits in specimens differ in time. In the latest specimens, autapomorphy is unclear. The following is a list of physical traits that distinguish Neanderthals from modern humans. However, not all of them distinguish specific Neanderthal populations from various geographic areas, evolutionary periods, or other extinct humans. Also, many of these traits occasionally manifest in modern humans, particularly among certain ethnic groups traced to Neanderthal habitat ranges. Nothing is certain (from unearthed bones) about the shape of soft parts such as eyes, ears, and lips of Neanderthals. While the structure of the head and face were not very far removed from those of modern humans, there were still quite noticeable differences. Notably the Neanderthal head was shorter and with a less pronounced facial front. Chin and forehead sloped backwards and the nose region protruded forward more than in modern humans. The common shapes of the nose are not known but in general it was likely more robust, and possibly slightly larger, than in modern humans. The brain space of the skull, and so most likely the brain itself, were larger than in modern humans.
When comparing traits to worldwide average present day human traits in Neanderthal specimens, the following traits are distinguished. The magnitude on particular trait changes with 300,000 years timeline. The large number of classic Neanderthal traits is significant because extreme examples of Homo sapiens sapiens may sometimes show one or more of these traits, but not most or all of them.
Suprainiac fossa, a groove above the inion
Occipital bun, a protuberance of the occipital bone, which looks like a hair knot
less neotenized skull than humans
Low, flat, elongated skull
A flat basicranium
Supraorbital torus, a prominent, trabecular (spongy) brow ridge
1,200–1,900 cm3 (73–116 cu in) skull capacity
Lack of a protruding chin (mental protuberance; although later specimens possess a slight protuberance)
Crest on the mastoid process behind the ear opening
No groove on canine teeth
A retromolar space posterior to the third molar
Bony projections on the sides of the nasal opening, projecting nose
Distinctive shape of the bony labyrinth in the ear
Larger mental foramen in mandible for facial blood supply
Considerably more robust, stronger build
Long collar bones, wider shoulders
Barrel-shaped rib cage
Short, bowed shoulder blades
Larger round finger tips
Thick, bowed shaft of the thigh bones, bowed femur
Short shinbones and calf bones, longer torso and proportionally shorter legs
Long, gracile pelvic pubis (superior pubic ramus)
See also this picture:
Then this one:
Note that the given values only are general averages.
Neanderthals, the elephant-nosed human and the alleged prognathe.
Differences between Neanderthal skeleton and the so-called modern human are certain. Yes, but, because there is a but, it is still logical to ask what are the differences between Homo sapiens leaving Africa before the Aurignacian / Chatelperronian period (40,000 years to 30,000 years) where Neanderthal (officially: Chatelperronnian culture) and sapiens (officially: Aurignacian culture) living together in Europe.
For this, it is also necessary to study the characteristics of the one who is called archaic Homo sapiens, that is to say Homo sapiens before he came in Europe. There is almost nothing. As if this is a problem for some, it seems that nobody wants to inform us that the only skulls of archaic Homo sapiens (-100 000 years) which were found almost whole were very different from the one who is called modern human (from -40,000), contemporary to Neanderthal.
Even more surprising, the study of African and European skulls (because that is the subject, as we will see later in the genetic similarities and differences) reveals that the African skull is almost identical to that of archaic Homo sapiens.
It seems additionaly, especially because of this implacable logic, but also because of informed compliance, that the so-called “modern human” or Cro-Magnon human suddenly appeared in Europe around -40,000 years, is a hybrid between Neanderthals and the African sapiens.
Neanderthals – most often – represented with a huge nose is a great heresy, probably implemented in order to avoid reactions on the likeness of the Neanderthal nose with european nose The reconstructions are based only on the Neanderthal skull, or as everyone knows, is a skull bone, not cartilage.
Since a picture is better than many words, please note and consider the shape of the nose on the skulls here. From the front, the Neanderthal form, as the shape of the modern European (which is presented as modern human), has a triangular shape, and profile, a clear direction that comes out from the skull. The rest of the nose in humans, is composed mainly of cartilage, and we understand that nothing at the base of the nose can necessarily determine its final shape.
As it can be noticed on the african and asian skulls , there is no “starting nose “bone” giving them a flattened shape at the base. From the front, the nasal cavity is generally round in shape and not triangular (the Asian is mid-way, and we will talk about that in due time). The supraorbital rim is also slightly greater in the European than in the Asian and African Finally, modern human, from all origins has a more or less marked chin, supposed absent in Neanderthal, but in reality it is often only slightly marked, as here, on the skull of La Ferrassie:
The prognathism is pronounced among the African and archaic Homo sapiens and it is supposed in the Neanderthal. We enter a amazing area. You can see here quite classical representations of Neanderthal:
(On this last example, notice the ear, where the angle is changed by the incorrect positioning of the skull)
And to better understand, Neanderthal, in the representation which is to me the most accurate known at this time, alongside the so-called modern human:
The nose is – for once – well sculpted, and this man – is not prognathe or little, but it has apparently been obliged to respect the tradition, and to give the illusion that he is prognat, he adopts a very special position, while his modern sapiens friend acts as a reversed mirror.
Now please consider this:
The so-called prognathism in Neanderthals is created entirely by the way his head is placed. Due to the shape of the cranial mass, different from that of so-called modern human. Indeed, if we compare two skulls, it is important that their jaw respects the same angle, and this is not the case when showing a Neanderthal skull and a so-called modern human skull.
Just look here:
On this photograph of Svante Pääbo with a Neanderthal skull, we notice that if we give to the jaw of Neanderthal skull the same angle as that given to the jaw of the skull of modern man, here Svante Pääbo, ( I moved the neanderthal head ), the so-called prognathism no longer exists, and only the absence of chin remains. This photograph, oh so eloquent, was less biased that most of the reproductions, but there remained a certain error. Not talking about the many “comparisons” that is missing on one of the skulls the lower mandible, which makes it impossible to see just by looking if the skulls are prognathous. We must compare what is comparable.
There is no doubt that if you put your head back, you will have a sloping forehead and a strong prognathism.
In fact, our Neanderthal friend on this photograph could put his head up, and then get a less facial angle than his modern congener :
This image shows how the spine is misplaced in the Neanderthal representations. To prognanthisme, and in addition to his flat nose, they add a massive neck, which gives it a very primitive appearance.
For this, there is a system for measuring the facial angle, which gave us 88 ° on the picture above. The angle for the Neanderthal adults is around 90 degrees, they are not only not prognathic (-90 °), but some individuals and Neanderthal babies are retrognathic (+90 °).
A Neanderthal baby (facial angle: 94 °, remember that the lower mandible is placed straight then it is placed diagonally in a face):
However children are represented as follows:
Cro-Magnon or the Neanderthal baby
In the case where modern man would be – mostly – in Europe, hybrid of Neanderthal and archaic homo sapiens / the African, it is possible to imagine that the cranial mass elevates which would give the image of a modern skull: more arched skull with marked forehead and a erased supra-orbital ridge to change the center of gravity of the skull. In fact, Neanderthal has a larger skull than archaic sapiens / the African, and its mass is mostly concentrated to the back, it seems clear that to the head do not tend to take it back, the supraorbital ridge was necessary to maintain a proper center of gravity.
Let us analyze this (facial angle 89 °):
And this (facial angle 94 °, retrognathic):
In the second type of skull you have recognized two Neanderthal babies. The first skull, meanwhile, is from a cro-magnon human found in Les Eyzies-de-Tayac in the Dordogne (France), that is to say, according to the official theory, the european from Africa, totally changed when he arrived in Europe. He shall live in Europe from -40 000 to -10 000, they say. His cranial capacity is about 15 to 30 % larger than modern humans, and many of its features are unique to himself (more robust skeleton than modern humans, the upper limbs are shorter, unique dentition, small supraorbital ridge, etc.).. But they say today that word “cro-magnon human” is now outdated, and they prefer to speak about the same species worldwide, appeared around 40,000 during the disappearance of Neanderthals, the former european.
We may wonder if evolutionists are not a little creationists because of that:
Here is archaic homo sapiens, the supposed father of cro-magnon human, just before his arrival in Europe (about -100,000):
Qafzeh 9 (facial angle 78 °, prognathic)
Skhul V (facial angle 85 °, prognathic):
And two skulls of modern African type:
Facial angle: 75 ° (prognathic):
Facial angle: 72 ° (prognathic):
Let us discuss the young Neanderthal again. About two and a half years old, he does not represent any of the “typical Neanderthal” features. He is very similar to the adult cro-magnon human.
As the cranial mass is not projected backward, the supraorbital ridge has no reason to be. The center of gravity is naturally maintained by the balance that the absence or presence of these features makes together. The volume of the skull is thrown up, like a helmet, above the child’s face.
We will return later to the reason for this similarity between Cro Magnon / and Neanderthal child again, but it seems that their father is the same.
The birth of Neanderthal women
One of the interesting elements that we need to analyze in the case of hybridization is undoubtedly the birth, and the pelvis of the different species of the genus homo. Only one pelvis of Neanderthal woman – about – 60 000 years – was found, in Palestine. This pelvis was incomplete and they replaced sacrum by a sacrum of modern woman. The fact remains that a modern baby passed through this Neanderthal pelvis And there, as it was discovered there something exceptional, the pelvis is considerably larger, the baby is passed without the usual twisting that babies must do at birth. From that to saying that Neanderthal gave birth without the twist, opinions are divided, and that is normal. Obviously, adding a modern piece to a old one and pass a modern piece in a old/modern piece , it is possible to do better as a study, but if we return that, we get an important indication.
The modern new-born , as modern human, has a smaller skull that a Neanderthal newborn. The woman said modern pool is narrower than that of a Neanderthal woman. Logically, the pelvis of a woman is suitable for the offspring of her kind. It is therefore probable that a Neanderthal newborn in the pelvis of the Neanderthal woman also had to carry out the famous twist, because of its wider skull. But this means that a Neanderthal newborn did not pass a sapiens pelvis, since the baby already has to do the twist in the Neanderthal pelvis.
I invite you finally see the next article, which will consist of a series of skulls with various measuring (facial angle), particularly relevant in the case of sapiens / Neanderthal hybridization.