Arts and Crafts: Who was better at making lithics?

TODAY'S TOPIC: LITHICS

How did they differ between Neanderthals and Homo sapiens, and how were they similar?

Were there fundamental differences in the craftsmanship of early hominid lithics that led to the extinction of Neanderthals?

Many people seem shocked to know that for a long period of time, both Neanderthals and early Homo sapiens used extremely similar, if not the same, stone tool technologies. I was certainly VERY surprised to find this out. Yet, there were obvious differences between the two. In this quest to find out why Homo sapiens didn't go extinct as Neanderthals did, it is critical that the lithics of each species be examined. To begin, let's look at the similarities.


Similarities:

We know that Neanderthals and early Homo sapiens both used Mousterian stone tool technologies in the Middle Paleolithic. The Mousterian is characterized by a shift from using large core tools, like hand axes, to using and making more refined flake tools. Furthermore, flakes of a more or less standardized shape were often made using the Levallois technique. The video below shows the Levallois flaking process that was used by early hominids in the Middle Paleolithic. 

The Levallois flake technique is one of the most important stone tool technology features of the Mousterian, and again shows that Neanderthals and Homo sapiens both utilized the same methods. To put this technique into words:

Blocks or cobbles of flint and other brittle fracturing rock were percussion flaked on one side until a convex "tortoise shell" shape was formed.  Then, a heavy percussion blow at one end of the core removed a large flake that was convex on one side and relatively flat on the other--i.e., a Levallois flake.  This technique was first used by archaic humans in Africa around 250,000 years ago.  It was perfected in the Mousterian Tradition by the Neandertals and some of their contemporaries.

O'Neil, D. (2012). Archaic human culture. Palomar College. Retrieved November 11th, 2012, from http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo2/mod_homo_3.htm

The image above depicts accurate drawings of flakes found in the Palmyra Basin at Doura Cave, Syria

There is also substantial evidence of scarring on flakes, which shows that during the Mousterian, hammering devices made of bone and antler were being used to more carefully craft bifacial tools, like hand axes. Also, many crude uni-facial spear points are also found in the archaeological record, which tells us that although organic materials do not preserve well, Neanderthals potentially pioneered the throwing spear. 

A recreation of a Neanderthal throwing spear.

 

It has long been thought that Homo sapiens' tools were more advanced than those of the Neanderthals because they had blades, however,  a recent study by archaeologist Metin Eren and his team suggests two things. Firstly, the research showed that the knapping and percussion techniques of Neanderthals and Homo sapiens were very similar. Secondly, the research showed that there was no technological advantage found in stone tools made by Homo sapiens in the Upper Paleolithic. 

How did they conduct the study?: 

Eren and his team spent spent three years recreating blades and flakes, then measured their cutting power, durability and the amount of effort needed to produce them.

(Eren, M. (2008, August 26th). Neanderthal tools were a match for early homo sapiens'. Retrieved November 11th, 2012, from http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2008/08/26/neanderthal-tools-were-a-match-for-early-homo-sapiens/.)

The team then measured the circumference of the tools using an advanced computer program, which allowed them to calculate how much cutting-edge was made, and estimate the production efficiency and life span of the tool.
 
What were the results?:

We found that with every respect the Neanderthal technology was just as efficient, if not slightly more efficient, than modern Homo sapiens blade technology. This was a very strong indication that Neanderthals did not go extinct because of any cognitive inferiority.

(Eren, M. (2008, August 26th). Neanderthal tools were a match for early homo sapiens'. Retrieved November 11th, 2012, from http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2008/08/26/neanderthal-tools-were-a-match-for-early-homo-sapiens/.)

Through their recreations, Eren and his team show clear indication that the process for creating stone tools (direct percussion, etc.) were very similar between Neanderthals and Homo sapiens. However, we know that Homo sapiens did make advancements in the realm of lithic technology. Specifically, the tool traditions often associated with early Homo sapiens is the Acheulian tradition. This leads us to look at the differences in tool creation between Homo sapiens and Neanderthals.

Differences: 

We've been talking about the similarities between stone tool technologies of Neanderthals and Homo sapiens, but it is also crucial to look at the differences. Did the Homo sapiens ability to create more carefully crafted, diverse, and slender tools give them the 'evolutionary upper hand'? The answer is ambiguous; perhaps it did, and perhaps it didn't. What we do know is that the 'differences' between the stone tool technologies, specifically in the Upper Paleolithic, are few and far between. Apart from what has already been mentioned, there truly weren't vast differences between the craftsmanship and capabilities of each species.

Neanderthal and Homo sapien Mousterian tools next to one another.

Yes, Homo sapiens did begin to develop less bulky tools during the Middle Paleolithic, however, all evidence has pointed to the fact that these tools didn't have any obvious advantage in terms of cutting, butchering, or slicing ability. In general, they worked equally well. The advantages that Homo sapiens had that are so often talked about, have to do more with the fact that their more refined tool kits were better suited for the climate and fauna than the chunkier Neanderthal tools. However, it is imperative to make the distinction that this does not say that Homo sapien stone tools were better because they were more intelligent, it simply says they were better adapted for the living conditions.

Conclusions: 

So I, and many members of the scientific community, have come to the conclusion that stone tool technologies were clearly not a sign of intelligence, and therefore don't provide good causation for the Neanderthal extinction. So, if lithics don't provide a good answer for why Neanderthals died out, then what does? The next source of explanation to explore: MORPHOLOGY!