Re: Archaic H. sapiens???

Dan Barnes (
Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:55:07 GMT

In article <>, says...
>Bjorn Pedersen wrote:
>> First, isn't the genus of neanderthalis known as Homo Sapiens
>> Neanderthalis?
>It depends on who you talk to. Some people believe it is a subspecies
>of Homo sapiens, hence the Homo sapiens neanderthalensis
>classification. Others believe it is too morphologically different, and
>class it as Homo Neanderthalensis. I prefer the second classification.
I also tend to favour the latter name since if they were replaced then some
variety of speciation event must have occured in Africa around 150 ka. Although
of course there are plenty of people who would argue otherwise.
>The evidence regarding Neanderthal burial rituals is still
>controversial, thus, it is difficult to say just what it all means. Ian
>Tattersall, in his book, _The Last Neanderthal_ (1995), discusses
>Neanderthal burials somewhat. He states that there is really no clear
>evidence of Neanderthal burial rituals. Even the famous Shanidar
>"flower burial" is not free from dispute. There is a marked contrast,
>however, between contemporaneous Neanderthal and H. sapiens burials.
>While Neanderthal burials tend to be simple, almost casual, H. sapiens
>burials were often quite elaborate (Tattersall, 1995: 165-170).
I would recommend the excellently titled:

Gargett, R.H. (1989) Grave shortcomings: The evidence for Neanderthal burials.
Current Anthropology. 30. 157-90.

With the additional comments including Ralph Solecki's reply about the
Shanidar 'flower burials' it provides a good insight into both sides of the
arguement. It must be pointed out that early AMH burials in the Levant are
indistinguishable from those of the Ns with only the addition of simple grave
goods (if they are even that) like a mandible, etc. It is only much later at sites like
Predimosti, Dolni Vestonice, Sungir that elaborate burials take place.