(Ancient people, Neanderthals)

Paleoanthropus continues the evolution of Pithecanthropus. According to some anthropologists, Neanderthals should be considered not an independent branch, but early representatives of the species Homo sapiens.
The first discovery of a Neanderthal was made earlier than the others that gave the name to the species, in 1848 in Gibraltar (Europe), the second in Neanderthal, which served as the basis for the term “Neanderthal,” which is narrower than paleoanthrope.

Paleoanthropus was widespread in the territory globe and existed for quite a long time. The earliest finds date back to the second interglacial period (300-250 thousand years). The latest - to the last glaciation (80-35 thousand years ago, and perhaps later - finds of Chapelle, Moustier, Ferrady). The vast majority of Neanderthals date back to the last interglacial.
In modern human paleontology, the view of multiple transitions between successive stage groups, including the transition from Pithecanthropus to Neanderthals, is often used. Transitional forms from Pithecanthropus to Neanderthals are considered to be the remains of a skull from the Cave of Araches (Pyrenees), the remains of hominids from Morocco and the Lazare Grotto (France). Transitional forms were also found in southern Africa - in the locations of Broken Hill and Saldania. The volume of the brain cavity of these finds is estimated at 1300 cm3. It has been suggested that Brocken Hill man is a successor to Olduvai Pithecanthropus from East Africa.
Some anthropologists have put forward a hypothesis about a parallel line of evolution of paleoanthropes in Southeast Asia and southern Africa.

In northern Africa (Temara, Jebel, Irhoud, Haua Fteah), bone remains of Neanderthals similar to the “classical” European version were found. Similar finds were made in Iraq (Shanidar Cave). One skeleton from this cave shows signs of amputation on its right arm. Bony remains of Neanderthals were discovered in the Crimea, in the Caucasus. The remains of a Neanderthal man with traces of funeral rites were discovered on the territory of Uzbekistan.
In the Asian part of the world, in China (Mapa Grotto), a Pamoanthropus skull was discovered, which cannot be attributed to any European variant, which proves the replacement of the Pithecanthropus morphotype over time by the Neanderthal type for this region.
Two skulls bearing traces of cannibalism were discovered on the island of Java.
These skulls are different from all the others and in terms of structural features are close to Pithecanthropus. However, the volume of the brain cavity is 1035-1255 cm3. Taking this into account, this find is interpreted by anthropologists as a local type of Neanderthal who underwent slow evolution (isolation factor).
The earliest Neanderthals had a brain cavity volume of 1150-1250 cm3. They were characterized by the following morphological features, which unite them with both the previous and subsequent forms of hominids: a relatively narrow and high skull, a relatively convex forehead, a massive eyebrow, a rather rounded occiput, a straightened facial region, and the presence of a mental triangle in the lower jaw.
The third molar is larger in size than the second and first (in modern man There is a decrease in the size of the molars from the first to the third). The cultural accompaniment of early paleoanthropes is archaic tools.
The subsequent group of Neanderthals is characterized by a reduction in the brow relief, a rounded occipital region, a rather convex forehead, and a smaller number of archaic features in the structure of the molars (the third molar is no larger than the first and second). The brain volume was 1200-1400 cm3.
The morphological type of late Neanderthals is characterized by: a highly developed superciliary region, a compressed occipital region from top to bottom, and a decrease in the size of the molars. The presence of an occipital ridge and a brow ridge are noted, which is due to the harsh conditions of the natural environment, the chin protuberance is slightly cut off, and a strong, massive physique. The volume of the brain cavity is 1350-1700 cm3.
Of exceptional importance are the paleoanthropic finds of Mount Carmel (Palestine). They are distinguished by a mosaic of sapient and Neanderthal features. The dating of the finds is the end of the last interglacial. These finds can be interpreted as evidence of a connection, contact between early Neanderthals and modern humans in the Early Paleolithic. The brain volume of Carmelians is 1500 cm3.
A similar find, with an even more pronounced sapient character, was discovered in the Qafzeh cave (Israel).
The presence of a chin protrusion, although weakly expressed, indicates the development of speech; the volume of the brain cavity and the inner surface indicate the development of mental abilities and the visual analyzer. The speech apparatus of Neanderthals was not adapted for the entire range of speech sounds.
To summarize, it must be emphasized that in the period between the second and last interglacial (300-350 thousand years ago), parallel evolution took place at the Neanderthal stage, as in the previous stages. In all likelihood, three forms of hominids coexisted: Pithecanthropus, Neanderthals and Homo sapiens.
However, Homo sapiens was the first to reach the finish line.

Homo sapiens sapiens → Archaic Homo sapiens → Homo neandertalensis → Homo erectus → Homo habilis → Australopithecus → Ramapithecus → Chimpanzee →

Questions to prepare for the lecture.

Why did cannibalism flourish at the stage of archanthropes and paleanthropes?
What advances in anthropology support radial evolution in hominids?
What adaptations did man acquire at the stage of Pithecanthropus and Neanderthal?

Paleoanthropes are one of the four main stages in human evolution (Roginsky, 1977). It is represented by a large number of finds in the Old World. Bone remains of paleoanthropes have been found in more than 40 localities and belong to more than 100 individuals. Late European paleoanthropes (Neanderthals) are characterized by the following morphological features: 1) a powerful supraorbital ridge and a strongly sloping forehead, 2) the occipital region, flattened from top to bottom, 3) a horizontally located upper edge of the temporal bone scales, 4) a somewhat blunt mastoid process, 5) flat and backward sloping zygomatic bones, 6) upper jaws without canine fossae. characteristic of modern people, 7) a massive lower jaw without a chin protrusion, 8) the capacity of the braincase of the skull, not inferior in size to a modern person.

Neanderthals Western Europe were small in stature (155 - 165 cm for men). The large head of Neanderthals sat on a spinal column with weakly pronounced curves, vertically standing, highly developed spinous processes. Long bones are characterized by large absolute sizes and massiveness of the epiphyses, and diaphyses are also characterized by massiveness and bending. The ribs of large Neanderthals were massive and triangular in cross-section. The collarbones are very long and gracile. The shoulder blade is short and wide. The body is short. The relative size of the upper limb is small. The upper arm is longer than the forearm. The humerus tends to have a rounded section in the middle of the diaphysis. Neanderthal bones are wide and powerful. The shape of the carpometacarpal joints indicates the lack of the ability of Neanderthal fingers to perform a variety of movements.

The following primitive feature is noted for the pelvis - a relatively narrow opening of the entrance to the small pelvis. The femur is characterized by the presence of a third trochanter, weak development of the linea aspera and pilaster, the tibia is relatively short, the bones of the foot are massive, their shape and relationships may indicate the clumsy gait of Neanderthals. True, the ideas that existed until recently about the walking of a Neanderthal, stooping, with bent knees and a bowed head, are now not shared by researchers, since they were based on facts obtained from an inaccurate reconstruction of the skeleton of an elderly individual from La Chapelle-aux-Saints, who suffered arthritis. Neanderthal locomotion may have been indistinguishable from ours. Massiveness is inherent in the entire Neanderthal skeleton. In conclusion, it can be argued that in general structure the Neanderthal skeleton is closer to the type of modern man than his skull.

The teeth of Neanderthals are large, the dental cavity is large, and the chewing surface is furrowed. There are no gaps between the teeth, the fangs do not exceed the height of a number of other teeth. The upper molars have four cusps, the lower molars have five. The phenomenon of caries for the teeth of Neanderthals was not noted. The abrasion of the crown occurred more intensely when chewing solid food than in modern humans (Nesturkh). The descendants of archanthropes - paleoanthropes in all respects represent the continuation of the evolutionary development of hominids within the stage of “formed people”, defined by F. Engels, whose physical and social development led to the emergence of a “ready man” - Homo sapiens.

The question of the origin of the Neanderthal group is complex. According to K. Kuhn, the Heidelberg hominid claims to be the ancestral form for paleoanthropes. This opinion is disputed by V.P. Alekseev (1966), who prefers to draw a genetic connection to Neanderthals from Early Pleistocene forms, which are generally morphologically close to Sinanthropus. One should not imagine transitions from one stage group to another in a simplified way. The elementary formula “paleoanthropes descended from archanthropes,” as V.V. Bunak (1966) notes, cannot satisfy the modern researcher. The relationship between these types of hominid fossils is more complex. The facts suggest that paleoanthropes and archanthropes partially existed simultaneously and did not differ in type of culture, just like paleoanthropes and neoanthropes.

Morphological progress during the transition from archanthropes to paleoanthropes is manifested mainly in the development of the brain - in an increase in its volume and in the restructuring of the cortex, which is expressed in the preferential growth of its individual sections. The areas that continue to develop most intensively are those functionally related to the processes of cognition of the properties of objects, to the dynamic actions of the hands, i.e., to various aspects of work activity. Proof further development speech is served by an increase in the areas of areas in the lower part of the frontal lobe, which is noted on the endocranes of paleoanthropes (V.V. Bunak, V.I. Kochetkova, Yu.G. Shevchenko, etc.). There is a noticeable restructuring in the peripheral organs of speech, such as in the lower jaw.

The increased morphophysiological capabilities of paleoanthropes is evidenced by the fact that they made complex tools (from two component parts, for example). This also indicates a very high level of associative activity of paleoanthropes. We can talk about their great dexterity and accuracy, a balanced gait and good coordination of movements. High development production activities and the complication of the social structure of paleoanthropes contributed to living in areas with different natural conditions.

The factors of the evolution of paleoanthropes are the same as in the process of transformation of archanthropes, but it is very important that the more complex forms of labor, and hence strengthened social ties, further limited the scope of action natural selection, although the latter undoubtedly remained a significant factor in the species evolution of humans (M. I. Uryson). A study of the skeletal remains of paleoanthropes reveals significant morphological variability. which is connected, on the one hand, with the longer duration of their existence, and on the other, with the natural diversity of the entire territory of their habitat. It is possible to distinguish among paleoanthropes morphological types that are more or less similar to modern humans.

Thus, according to M.A. Gremyatsky, at least three geographical groups can be distinguished among paleoanthropes: 1) South Asian-African, 2) Mediterranean, 3) European (late finds). Not all of the listed groups served as the initial type for the races of modern humanity. There is a point of view according to which the European group took part in the formation of modern races only through miscegenation.

The presence of significant morphological differences between paleoanthropes and neoanthropes was interpreted by a number of researchers (M. Buhl, A. Keys, etc.) as evidence of their great genetic distance from each other. Neanderthals began to be viewed not as possible ancestors of Homo sapiens, but as specialized lateral branches that became extinct or exterminated in the process of interspecific struggle with humans modern look, physically and intellectually more perfect.

The degree of similarity (dissimilarity) of Pithecanthropus, Neanderthals and modern humans is assessed by researchers differently. Some bring Neanderthals closer to modern people, contrasting them with Pithecanthropus (A. Vallois). Thus, G.F. Debets proposed to classify the group of Neanderthals as Pithecanthropus, uniting them. The third group of authors equates the difference between archanthropes, paleoanthropes and neoanthropes (A. Keys, T. McCone, M.F. Nesturkh).

Rice. 27. Scheme of phylogenetic relationships of paleoanthropes (according to M. I. Uryson)

The name of A. Hrdlicka and his work of 1927 can be associated with the emergence of the most reasoned view of Neanderthals as an ancestral phase preceding the appearance of Homo sapiens. The morphological and cultural continuity of paleoanthropus and neoanthropus was proven by data from paleoanthropology, archeology and geology. The views of A. Hrdlicka received wide support from Soviet anthropologists. Ya. Ya. Roginsky (1936 and others) gave an analysis of the factors that determined the transformation of Neanderthaloid ancestors into Homo sapiens. V.P. Yakimov (1949) believes that the late European paleoanthropes, who lived in the harsh natural conditions characteristic of the periglacial zone of Europe, due to the influence of environmental factors, deviated from development in the direction of “sapiens”.

The exclusion of late European Neanderthals from the phylogenetic tree of modern humans is not recognized by everyone (V.P. Alekseev, Yu.I. Semenov). This is contradicted by the natural nature of the transition from the Acheulean stage of the Lower Paleolithic to the Mousterian.

Adherents of this point of view further point to the non-absolute nature of Dollo’s law of irreversibility, which makes it difficult to imagine “classical” Neanderthals, specialized in a number of traits, as transforming into neoanthropes. An assumption arose about the reality of other variants of the hypothesis about the Neanderthal phase in human evolution. In this case, the only factor that determined the rate of evolution of gomtsnids in specific geographic regions should be considered unequal natural and historical conditions (Roginsky, 1977).

The important thing is that, according to them, the ancestors of neoanthropes were still paleoanthropes in the broad sense of the word. The significant fact is that in all areas (Europe, Africa, Western Asia, Indonesia) paleoanthropes precede neoanthropes in time. This has been proven by geological data. Undoubtedly, the hypothesis of the Neanderthal phase is supported by the findings of intermediate forms (Carmel paleoanthropes), showing the morphological transition from paleoanthropes to neoanthropes. According to Ya. Ya. Roginsky (1977), in fact, the population of Mount Carmel is the result of a mixture of fully developed modern humans and Neanderthals. Another morphological argument is the finds of early neoanthropes that have features (survival) of paleoanthropes (for example, the Khvalynsk and Skhodnensk skull caps in Eastern Europe, Podkumskaya - in the North Caucasus).

The groups of paleoanthropes described above in the process of neoanthropus genesis are phylogenetically, most often subordinated as follows (Fig. 27). The basis for the formation of modern man was the representatives of the early European group (finds from Eringsdorf), and the Palestinian forms were intermediate. A number of authors associate these constructions with the hypothesis of the monocentric origin of modern man.

Kiik-Koba. The first of the Crimean Neanderthals was discovered by G. A. Bonch-Osmolovsky in 1924. near Simferopol in the Kiik-Koba grotto. Here, the bones of the postcranial skeleton of an adult individual (bones of the foot, leg and hand) and the incomplete skeleton of a one-year-old child were discovered.

The study of the skeleton of the limbs by G. A. Bonch-Osmolovsky (1940 and others) made it possible to formulate a version according to which the hand and foot of the Kiikkobin man are different in their development from modern man. In addition, the structure of the limbs of the Crimean Neanderthal does not agree with the hypothesis of an arboreal stage in the evolution of the ape-like ancestor of humans. Based on the material of 256 features of the hand, it turned out that most of the features in anthropoids are different from the human hand in the direction directly opposite to the Kiikkobin hominid. Modern man, in terms of hand characteristics, turned out to be closer to anthropoids than the Kiikkobin man. Here are some signs: the large width of the entire hand and its individual elements, the enormous width of the terminal phalanges, their wedge-shaped shape, the flattened shape of the articular platforms of the first ray at the joint of the first metacarpal and large polygonal bones, the weak curvature of all phalanges.

Based on two premises: a) the Neanderthal (including the Kiikkobin) is the predecessor of the neoanthrope, b) Dollo’s principle on the irreversibility of evolution is of absolute importance, G. A. BonchOsmolovsky came to the conclusion that there was no arboreal specialization in human ancestors, for whose locomotion It was characterized by movement on four limbs on rocks and flat surfaces. Labor in humans and the need to adapt the hand for arboreal life have led, as a result of convergent development, to similarities in the structure of the hand of modern humans and anthropoids. True, by the time of the existence of the Kiikkobin, his flexibility had not yet reached the degree characteristic of modern higher representatives of the order of primates.

The enormous strength of the Kiikkobin hand was not accompanied by the mobility of the hand of a modern person. Because of this, the labor operations available to him were very simple. Here is what G. A. Bonch Osmolovsky (1941) wrote about the hand of the Neanderthal from Kiik-Koba: “Thick at the base, it thinned out in a wedge shape towards the relatively flat ends of the fingers. Powerful muscles gave it colossal grip and impact power. The grip was already there, but it was carried out not like ours. With the limited opposability of the thumb, with the extraordinary massiveness of the rest, Kiik-Kobinets did not grab the object, but “raked” the object with his whole hand and held it in his fist. “This clamp had the power of pincers.”

In defense of his theory, this author also drew on data from the study of the ontogeny of the hand of modern humans. In accordance with Haeckel's biogenetic law, G. A. Bonch-Osmolovsky saw in the features of the morphology of the hand of the human embryo (9 weeks, for example) the features of this section of the upper limb, characteristic of the ancestor, the person (paw-shaped shape). As an example of such features, we give: the general shape of the hand, the relatively large width, the elongation of the fifth ray, the shape of the fingers, the weakly expressed ability to oppose the first finger. This makes the hand of a human embryo similar to the hand of a Kiikkobin (Roginsky, 1977).

Physiological and medical data were used as evidence of the existence of a hand with a pronounced supporting function in human history. This refers to the weakening or absence of opposition of the first ray in case of lesions of the central nervous system and the presence of this feature in the functioning of the hand in young children.

When studying the foot of a Neanderthal from Kiik-Koba, it turned out that out of 63 signs of the foot skeleton, 26 are similar to those typical of modern humans, 25 deviate in the direction of anthropomorphic apes, and only 12 are more different from anthropoids than from modern humans. Despite this, Bonch-Osmolovsky (1954) did not consider it possible to classify the Kiikkobin as an intermediate link between anthropoids and modern man.

S. A. Semenov (1950) cites the following motor abilities of the Kiikkobin hand, assumed by G. A. BonchOsmolovsky: a) spreading the fingers to the sides, b) lateral turns of the hand to the right and left, c) underdeveloped palmar - dorsal flexion of the hand, and most importantly, very limited ability of the thumb to move. But, notes S.A. Semenov, the hand of the man from Kiik-Koba in the shape and size of its component parts (metacarpal bones and phalanges) does not differ from the modern type and in the length of the thumb as well. He agrees with the fact of the existence of two significant differences: a) a simple, semi-cylindrical shape of the joint of the first metacarpal bone, lying on the trapezium (large, multifaceted) of the wrist, b) the terminal phalanges of the fingers are highly developed in width. In this case, the saddle-shaped joint is necessary only at the moment of extreme tension of the thumb, and it does not completely determine the possibilities of movement of the first ray, since it leaves its bed during the effort.

Finally, there are still significant signs in the structure that indicate the ability of the Kiikkobin thumb to be opposed. Finally, S. A. Semenov notes (like other authors) that there is great variability in the metacarpal joint structure. Expanded terminal phalanges distinguish not only the Neanderthal Kiik-Koba but also other Neanderthals, being a feature of adaptation to the support function.

Relatively recently, the child Kiik-Koba II was introduced into anthropological analysis. Czechoslovakian researcher E. Vlček reconstructed several long bones, the left femur and the right scapula. Individual bones of the fingers and toes, as well as relatively well-preserved vertebrae and ribs, were also isolated.

Of exceptional interest is the work on restoring the proportions of the long bones of the Neanderthal child Kiik-Koba II, whose age was estimated by E. Vlcek at 5 - 7 months. It turns out that in the case of the same length of the femur with the bone modern child The Kiikkobin shin is 7% shorter, and the length of the forearm is 10% longer. Therefore, we can assume that, given the same length of the femur, the height of Neanderthal children should be less. The bones of the Kiikkobin child give the impression of being more massive, especially the diaphysis. The morphology of the vertebrae of the skeleton from Kiik-Koba does not differ from the modern type. However, the originality of the structure of the ribs was revealed (through the difference in the shape of their cross-section). As in the adult Neanderthal, the diaphysis of the radius, ulna and femur are curved. The scapula has a peculiar shape of the glenoid cavity and the articular surface of the humeral process, being more massive than that of a modern child of the same age.

Vlchek (1974) notes a number of structural differences from the modern type in the structure of the radius, ulna and femur, as well as the ribs and scapula.

Rice. 28. Reconstruction of a Neanderthal boy from the Teshik-Tash grotto (according to M. M. Gerasimov)

Teshik-Tash. In 1938, a young specimen of paleoanthropus was found by A.P. Okladnikov during excavations of the Teshik-Tash grotto near the city of Baysun, in the south of Uzbekistan. The age of the child, whose skeleton is not entirely complete, is estimated at 8-9 years. The restoration of the skull and reconstruction of the external appearance of the boy from Teshik-Tashi was carried out by M. M. Gerasimov (Fig. 28). The first study of the Teshik-Tash skull was carried out by G. F. Debets (1940). He drew attention, in particular, to the very large size of the brain cavity of the skull - 1490 cm3. Recalculation to the estimated value of an adult Neanderthal made it possible to assume that the paleoanthropus from Teshik-Tash would be indistinguishable from the paleoanthropus from La Chapelle-au-Seine (1600 cm3). V.V. Bunak (1951), examining the endocranium of a child from Teshik-Tash, noted features that were transitional in nature from the brain type of Neanderthal to modern man.

S.I. Uspensky (1969), based on data on the heteromorphology of the endocrane of the paleoanthropus from Teshik-Tash and other hominids, was able to show that the former can be close to the neoanthropes of the “early-middle Upper Paleolithic.” According to this author, this, together with the archaeological characteristics of Teshik-Tash, allows him to be classified as a transitional “Neanderthal-sapient” group of hominids. Despite its relatively early age, the skull from Teshik-Tash already has a noticeable continuous supraorbital ridge. Characteristic is the absence of a mental protrusion of the lower jaw, which also distinguishes the paleoanthropist from Teshik-Tash from modern humans.

M.A. Gremyatsky (1949) noted the narrow-cavity type of teeth in this Neanderthal child. This feature makes Teshik-Tash look like a modern person. A visual analysis of the skull from Teshik-Tash gave the following results: a large thickness of the walls of the skull was noted (1.5 times greater than the average size in modern children of the same age), a strong development of the supraorbital ridge, the occipital ridge in its infancy, a “chignon-shaped” occiput , weak protrusion of the frontal and parietal tubercles, low position of the scaly suture, small mastoid processes, large width of the interorbital space, large sizes eye sockets, absence of canine fossae,. large width of the nasal opening, massive, flattened and oblique position of the zygomatic bones, powerful development of the coronoid process, absence of the mental protuberance (Gremyatsky, 1949).

N.A. Sinelnikov and M.A. Gremyatsky (1949) write about the following features of the bones of the postcranial skeleton. The atlas is similar to the type of this vertebra in La Chapelle in the shape of the upper articular platforms, flattened and smoothly transitioning into the posterior arch, and the structure of the clavicle is close to the modern type. The structure of the ribs has Neanderthaloid features: a strongly pronounced relief on the lower surface. Unlike the modern type, the humerus is characterized by flattening laterally. The femur is uniformly round in cross-section, which is unusual for modern children. There is no pilaster. The bones of the skeleton from Teshik-Tash are characterized by relative massiveness. The authors believe that young age is the reason for mild Neanderthal characteristics.

G. F. Debets (1947) opposed the point of view about the intermediate position of Teshik-Tash between paleoanthropes and neoanthropes. He classified the Teshiktash man as a typical Neanderthal, an example of which is the “classical” European paleoanthropes. Their similarity, expressed in a peculiar combination of progressive and very primitive features, is explained by the unity of origin and Mousterian people of Uzbekistan and Western Europe. Among the features identified by G. F. Debets, in addition to those listed in the cranioscopic section (analysis by M. A. Gremyatsky), there are: a low parietal lid, a strong slope of the forehead, and large teeth. Let us add that G.F. Debets later attributed the Teshik-Tash man to the group of paleoanthropes of the Palestinian (transitional) type. Finally, we point out that V.P. Alekseev believes that the Teshiktash man combines features that are not different from the Skhul skulls (height of the skull, inclination of the frontal bone), and in terms of the size of the facial part and their ratios he is close to the European group, as well as to the Shani - Darsky and Amudsky variants. He combines the last two with Teshik-Tash into a “transitional” European-Foreign Asian group.

Zaskalnaya. As a result of excavations from 1969 to 1973, carried out under the leadership of Yu. G. Kolosov in the area of ​​the Ak-Kaya rock near Belogorsk, at the Zaskalnaya V and Zaskalnaya VI sites there were

Bone remains of three individuals of the Neanderthal type were found. geological, geomorphological and archaeological characteristics of these sites will be given later. At the Zaskalnaya V site, a fragment of the occipital bone of an adult individual was found, and at Zaskalnaya VI - a fragment of the lower jaw with three teeth and 14 individual teeth of one child, several phalanges of the fingers of another, younger one. Analysis of a fragment of the occipital bone allowed E.I. Danilova (1979) to suggest that it belongs to a female paleoanthropus approximately 25 years old. The author of the description notes a combination of some primitive features, features of specialization and a number of similarities with modern man. E.I. Danilova sees the proximity of the find to the circle of European Neanderthals, but notes “pronounced sapience” in comparison with “classical” Neanderthals (for example, the weak expression of the occipital ridge). The last line apparently associated with the small size of the facial skeleton. Reconstruction of the lower jaw of a Neanderthal child from Zaskalnaya VI was carried out by M. N. Elistratova.

The morphology of the body of the lower jaw - the absence of a mental protuberance and the flattening of the canine-incisal section, located frontally, specific to Neanderthals, indicates that the found lower jaw belongs to a paleoanthropist. The shape and structure of the ascending branch also differ from those typical for modern humans. Let's add to this the comparative size of the coronoid and articular processes, the depth of the notch between them. Such outlines of the lower jaw bring the child from the Zaskalnaya VI site closer to the Neanderthal child from Teshik-Tash. The teeth of a child from Zaskalnaya VI according to the specific crown relief pattern, the proportions of their parts, general form crowns are close to the teeth of other Neanderthals.

The relative sizes of the molars in the series of first, second and third molars differ in a number of sizes from the modern version. The size of the cavity of the second molar can be classified as taurodont (Kolosov, Kharitonov, Yakimov, 1974).

Based on data on the replacement of baby teeth with permanent ones in modern children of a similar age, it can be assumed that the odontological ("dental") age of the child from Zaskalnaya VI is more consistent with the modern age of 10 - 12 years.

It is interesting to note the well-known difference between Zaskalnaya VI and Teshik-Tash in the order of eruption of individual teeth.

A comparative analysis of the structure of the lower jaw of Teshik-Tash and Zaskalnaya VI showed the presence of a significant deviation of the articular processes of the ascending branch outward in both Mousterian children. This feature once again emphasizes that the Crimean find belongs to the circle of Neanderthal human forms. The body of the lower jaw in the child from Zaskalnaya VI is less massive and smaller in size than in the boy from Teshik-Tash. This is additional evidence that the bone remains of a Neanderthal girl were found in Crimea.

Finally, the lower jaw from Zaskalnaya has a single mental foramen, like a modern person. Let us remember that the boy from Teshik-Tash has a double opening on the left half of the body of the lower jaw (Kolosov, Kharitonov, Yakimov, 1974).

We have already written that at the same site - Zaskalnaya VI in 1973, the bone remains of another Neanderthal child, but a younger one, were found. This refers to fragments of bones of arms and legs, ribs, and remains of vertebrae. Most notable is the complete set of hand bones. The bones of this child have not yet been fully examined. However, the Czechoslovakian anthropologist E. Vlček (1976) was given the opportunity to study 1 metacarpal bone of the hand. According to some features of this bone, the child from Zaskalnaya VI turns out to be similar to the adult and child Neanderthals from the Kiik-Koba site. Either these are two different groups that are morphologically close, or the same horde of Neanderthals, who lived in one or another shelter, approximately 20 km away from each other, but located in the valleys of different rivers. Judging by the numerous sites near Ak-Kai, this place was central in relation to others. nearby parking lots. The faunal and cultural environment of the Neanderthal finds in Kiik-Kobe and Zaskalnaya are similar in their characteristics (Yakimov).

Findings of Neanderthal hand bones in Crimean localities made it possible for E. Vlcek to create a specific Neanderthal age series. It is composed of a 6 - 8 month old infant Kiik-Koba D a 5 year old child from Zaskalnaya VI and an adult Neanderthal Kiik-Koba I.

E. Vlchek studied the features of the first metacarpal bone in this age interval among the Neanderthals of the Crimea. It turned out, in particular, that morphologically this group is related to the earlier population of the Mousterian-Levallois circle of the Middle East (Tabun, Amud). These forms are contrasted by E. Vlcek with groups of the Skhul type and the Chapelle type. Skeletal material of Crimean Neanderthals different ages allowed us to imagine the change in the shape and topography of the two short muscles of the thumb at the final stage of the hominization process. In this regard, the function of opposing the thumb is added to the function of adducting it. According to this author, the Kiikkobin thumb was in a more dorsal position, which somewhat limited its opposition.

Sakazhia. In 1974, the bone remains of a paleoanthropist were found in the cave site of Sakazia (Western Georgia). They are represented by a fragment of the upper jaw with teeth (L.K. Gabunia, M.G. Nioradze, A.K. Vekua). Based on the degree of tooth wear, the authors of the find and description presumably attribute the fragment to a young individual - no older than 25 - 30 years. There is an almost complete absence of traces of a canine fossa on the upper jaw. The width of the palate is apparently smaller than that of most European Neanderthals. The prenasal fossae are clearly visible, the pear-shaped opening is not wide. Alveolar prognathism of the Mousterian man from Sakazhia can be assumed to be very pronounced. The alveolar arch, close in shape to parabolic, also suggests their similarity with Palestinian paleoanthropes. The high arch of the palate and the almost flat anterior surface of the alveolar region also make the Sakazhi Mousterian similar to Neanderthals, from which it is distinguished by a relatively narrow nose, like neoanthropes and some Palestinian paleoanthropes. The teeth are generally large in size. Thus, the size and massiveness of the canine and first molar of the Sakazhi is greater than that of the young man from Le Moustier, and the premolars are relatively small. Such dental features as a high degree of root fusion and taurodontism were also noted in the Georgian Mousterian. To this we can add whole line odontoglyphic features of the first and second lower molars.

Horn. The molar tooth of a paleoanthropus was found at the Rozhok site in the Azov region, on the northern coast of the Taganrog Bay, 45 km west of Taganrog. The site was explored by N.D. Praslov. The tooth was recovered from a Mousterian layer that probably belongs to one of the early interstadials within the Würm. According to N.D. Praslov, the morphology of the tooth is distinguished by the predominance of sapient characteristics adjacent to primitive features.

Jruchula. In the cave site of Dzhruchula (Chiatura region, Western Georgia), two cultural layers were discovered during excavations. In the second of them, a human molar tooth was discovered in a cluster of tools and fragments of burnt animal bones; the cultural environment is classified as late Mousterian.

The tooth belonged to an adult. This is the upper right first molar. Researchers (Gabunia, Tushabramishvili, Vekua) note its significant value. In size, crown relief, root structure, and cavity width, the tooth from Dzhruchula is similar to the teeth of Neanderthals and, according to the authors, is especially close to the teeth of paleoanthropes of Western Asia.

The finds in Staroselye and the Akhshtyrskaya Cave, discussed in Chapter VI, dedicated to fossil humans of the modern type, also date back to the Mousterian time.

STADIAL POSITION OF PALEOANTHROPES IN THE USSR TERRITORY

Apparently, we can talk about the morphological similarity of the Teshiktash child with late European paleoanthropes. The small cavity of the dental pulp and some progressive features of the structure of the brain (V.V. Bunak), however, contradict this point of view. “Sapience” in the structure of the skull and the absence of many features of specialization, according to a number of authors, make it possible to outline the circle of paleoanthropes of Western Asia (such as Tabun, Shanidar, Wadi el-Amud), which includes Teshik-Tash.

It will be possible to imagine a certain position of the child from Zaskalnaya VI in the circle of paleoanthropists after a future detailed morphological and metric analysis of the osteological and odontological features of the body of the lower jaw and teeth. The above similarities and differences in the morphology of Teshik-Tash and Zaskalnaya are quite difficult to assess due to the possibility of individual variability or sexual differences. An important fact is that there are similarities in the morphology of these Neanderthal children - a significant deviation of the articular processes of the ascending branch outward, the ratio of bicondylar and bigonial sizes, a significant depth of the notch between the high coronary and articular processes. By the way, the last feature brings Teshik-Tash and Zaskalnaya closer to some paleoanthropes of Europe and distinguishes them from the Western Asian ones (Khaua Fgeakh I and II, Ksar Akil, Tabun I, Skhul IV, etc.) (Kolosov, Kharitonov, Yakimov, 1974).

The question of the place of the Kiikkobin man within his stage group is very difficult. This difficulty is, of course, primarily due to the absence of a skull. Therefore, it seems to us that it is more appropriate to talk about assessing the phylogenetic position of the Kiikkobin hominid. Along with this, one cannot help but note the opinion that the structural features of the hand and foot of a Kiikkobin allow him to be considered " typical representative classical version of the paleoanthropes of Europe" (V.P. Yakimov, V.P. Alekseev, S.A. Semenov).

The combination of Neanderthal features in the Sakazhi paleoanthrope with morphological features characteristic of early neoanthropes and some Palestinian paleoanthropes, and peculiar characteristics, enable the authors of its description to speak of some isolation in the position of the Georgian Mousterian. L.K. Gabunia and others do not exclude the possibility that the Sakazhi represents a branch of the development of paleoanthropes parallel to the Palestinians.

The origin of modern man and his settlement of the territory of Europe can be associated, as we have already written, with the more ancient (than the later Western European paleoanthropes), but more “sapient” in many features paleoanthropes of Western Asia (Skhul, Qafzeh, etc.). It can be assumed that in some territories the early forms of modern man, during their settlement, could mix with the groups of Neanderthals who lived there, including their “classical” representatives.

The presence of Neanderthals in Crimea, close to the “classical” ones, at the same time, the presence in the Mousterian sites of the Crimea and the North Caucasus of bone remains of people of the “sapient” or transitional type, similar to the Central Asian paleoanthropes, can serve to a certain extent as confirmation of this view.

The possible belonging of the Neanderthal child from Teshik-Tash to the circle of Central Asian forms and the possibility of rapprochement with them (albeit in very fragmentary remains) of people who lived in Mousterian times in cave sites of the Caucasus, also indicates the partial inclusion of some southern territories (Caucasus, Central Asia) our country into the ancestral home of modern man.

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF FINDINGS OF BONE REMAINS OF PALEOANTHROPES ON THE TERRITORY OF THE USSR

The significance of the discoveries of bone remains of paleoanthropes in Crimea, Uzbekistan and Georgia, in addition to the finds of the stone industry, is extremely great, primarily because they expanded our understanding of the territory inhabited by paleoanthropes. They also served as the foundation for posing and solving the most important questions in the theory of anthropogenesis and history primitive society. Thus, the significance of the discovery of a hominid in the Kiik-Koba grotto is very great. She expanded the understanding of the variability of the morphology of paleoanthropes. The study of the bones of the skeleton of a child from the Teshik-Tash cave is important for correctly solving the complex problem of the origin of modern humans, or neoanthropes, and for analyzing the relationship of the Homo sapiens species with the Neanderthal species in the broad sense of this term.

After the bones of a paleoanthropist were discovered in Central Asia (we mean Teshik-Tash), supporters of the exclusion of Neanderthal man from the ancestors of modern man found themselves in a difficult position. Until now, it was believed that modern man, who arose independently of them, could have lived in Asia over a fairly vast territory simultaneously with the paleoanthropes. Now, however, it has become clear that Teshiktash man fills the territorial gap between the Western Asian and European forms of paleoanthropes, on the one hand, and the Javanese ones, on the other, which also made it possible to raise objections to the existence of the Neanderthal phase in anthropogenesis (V.P. Yakimov).

PALEOANTHROPES PALEOANTHROPES

(from paleo... and Greek anthropos - man), a generalized name for fossil people, who are considered as the second stage of human evolution, following the archanthropes and preceding the neoanthropes. Often P. is not entirely correctly called Neanderthals. Bone remains of P. are known from the middle and late Pleistocene of Europe, Asia and Africa. Geol. P.'s age is from the end of the Mindelris interglacial and almost to the middle of the Würm glaciation. Abs. age from 250 to 40 thousand years. In morphological In relation to P., it is a heterogeneous group. Along with primitive forms similar to archanthropes, among P. there are representatives close to neoanthropes. The Paleolithic culture is Middle and Late Acheulean and Mousterian (Early Paleolithic).

.We were engaged in ch. arr. hunting large animals (cave bear, woolly rhinoceros, etc.). Social organization is the “primitive human herd.” Although in general P. were the predecessors of modern. person, not all P. - directly. his ancestors. Many of them, due to specialization and other reasons, did not turn into modern humans. species and became extinct (for example, the “classical Neanderthals” of Western Europe). Others (for example, the Central Asian P.) followed the path of progressive evolution and gave rise to the fossil people of modern times. kind.

(Source: “Biological Encyclopedic Dictionary.” Editor-in-chief M. S. Gilyarov; Editorial Board: A. A. Babaev, G. G. Vinberg, G. A. Zavarzin and others - 2nd ed., corrected . - M.: Sov.

paleoanthropes Generalized name for ancient fossil people. Paleoanthropes are often called incorrectly. who are only one of the groups of ancient people. In general, paleoanthropes are a group of people transitional from homo erectus (“Homo erectus”) to modern humans (“Homo sapiens”). These were people of diverse morphological structure, who combined primitive and progressive features to varying degrees. They lived during the Middle and partially Upper Pleistocene. There are 3 groups of paleoanthropes: early (atypical) European, antiquity 250-100 thousand years; Western Asian – “progressive”, antiquity 70-40 thousand years and classical (late) Western European Neanderthals, antiquity 50-35 thousand years.
The features of paleoanthropes were most clearly manifested in the classical Neanderthals of Western Europe, who lived in the harsh conditions of the last glaciation and had a pronounced specialization in the structure of the skull and skeleton. This and much more do not allow us to see the direct ancestors of modern humans in the late Western European paleoanthropes (Neanderthals). The most progressive (sapient) features were found in the Western Asian paleoanthropes from the Skhul and Tabun caves (Israel), occupying an intermediate position between Neanderthals and modern humans. Probably, more “progressive” groups of paleoanthropes had greater opportunities for development during evolution towards Homo sapiens (“Homo sapiens”).
Paleoanthropes hunted large animals ( cave bear, woolly rhinoceros etc.) and gathering, lived as a primitive human herd and created the Middle Paleolithic culture - Mousterian.

.(Source: “Biology. Modern illustrated encyclopedia.” Chief editor A. P. Gorkin; M.: Rosman, 2006.)

See what "PALEOAANTHROPES" are in other dictionaries:

Ancient people: . Neanderthal (Homo neandertalensis) and possibly: Homo heidelbergensis See also Neoanthropes are people of modern appearance. ... Wikipedia

- (from paleo... and Greek anthr,o pos man), the collective name of the ancient people of Africa, Europe and Asia who lived 300-30 thousand years ago. Represented mainly by Neanderthals... Modern encyclopedia

- (from paleo... and Greek antropos man) fossil people of the Paleolithic period (Pithecanthropus, Neanderthals, etc.) ... Big encyclopedic Dictionary

Paleoanthropes- (from paleo... and Greek anthr,o pos man), the collective name of the ancient people of Africa, Europe and Asia who lived 300-30 thousand years ago. Represented mainly by Neanderthals. ... Illustrated Encyclopedic Dictionary

Ov; pl. (units paleoanthropus, a; m.). Anthrop. Fossil people of the Paleolithic period; Neanderthals. * * * paleoanthropes (from paleo... and Greek ántrōpos man), fossil people of the late Acheulian and Mousterian eras (see Neanderthals). Occupies an intermediate… … encyclopedic Dictionary

Paleoanthropes- stage of hominid evolution, following the archanthropes and preceding the neoanthropes. They differ from archanthropes by their large brain, from neoanthropes by their sloping chin, elongated skull shape and significant massiveness. European and some... ... Physical Anthropology. Illustrated explanatory dictionary.

- (from Paleo... and Greek anthropos man) a generalized (non-systematic) name for fossil people who lived in Asia, Africa and Europe 250-35 thousand years ago. Geologically, this corresponds to the time from the end of the Mindel Ris interglacial and... ... Big Soviet encyclopedia

- (from paleo... and Greek tntropos man), fossil people of the late Acheulian and Mousterian eras (see Neanderthals). They occupy an intermediate position between archanthropes and neoanthropes... Natural science. encyclopedic Dictionary

- (paleo... gr. anthropos man) ancient people; the term is used in anthropology to refer to Neanderthals. New dictionary of foreign words. by EdwART, 2009 … Dictionary of foreign words of the Russian language

paleoanthropes- ov; pl. (units paleoa/anthrop, a; m.); anthrop. Fossil people of the Paleolithic period; Neanderthals... Dictionary of many expressions

Books

• Predecessors. Ancestors? Part 5. Paleoanthropes, S. V. Drobyshevsky. This work is a continuation brief overview the most important and best studied fossil hominid localities, outlining the main accompanying data from natural and...

The next stage in the evolution of hominids, paleoanthropes, is represented by the so-called Generalized name for ancient fossil people. Paleoanthropes are often called incorrectly(Homo neanderthalensis), whose species name is associated with the first discovery of fossil remains of these people in the Neanderthal Valley near Düsseldorf. Neanderthals, like archanthropes, were distributed throughout almost the entire territory of the Old World and were very diverse. They appeared on Earth about 300 thousand years ago (during the Mindelris interglacial) and existed until the first half of the Würm glaciation, that is, until about 35 thousand years ago.
Paleoanthropists have made enormous progress in increasing brain mass. The brain volume of Neanderthal men averaged about 1550 cm3, reaching 1600 cm3. The size of the brain achieved by Neanderthals did not increase further during subsequent evolution when they reached the neoanthrope stage, although restructuring of the brain structure occurred.

Despite the voluminous braincase, the Neanderthal skull still retained many primitive features: a sloping forehead, a low arch and the back of the head, a massive facial skeleton with a continuous supraorbital ridge, the chin protrusion was almost not pronounced, and large teeth were preserved. The body proportions of paleoanthropes were generally close to those of modern humans. Compared to archanthropes, paleoanthropes have improved the structure of the hand. The average height of Neanderthals was 151 - 155 cm. Paleoanthropes created the Middle Paleolithic culture. Neanderthals buried their dead with funeral rites, which suggests that they had fairly developed abstract thinking.

The main morphological transformations that occurred during the formation of neoanthropes are expressed in some structural changes in the brain and skull, especially in its facial part (relative reduction of the jaws, formation of a chin protrusion, reduction of the supraorbital ridge and postorbital narrowing, increase in the height of the cranial vault, etc.) .
Cro-Magnons were the creators of the Late Paleolithic culture, characterized by the high perfection of stone and bone processing. It was the Cro-Magnons who were the creators of cave drawings depicting animals of the mammoth fauna, as well as the most ancient sculptural images and the first musical instruments. It can therefore be argued that with neoanthropes art arises.
Let us emphasize once again that each of the stages of human evolution we examined included a large number of variations - both in space (in different regions) and in time. The characteristic features of the next stage did not arise suddenly and all at once, but gradually developed in different populations, so to speak, “in the depths” of the previous stage of anthropogenesis. At the same time, various characteristics, in accordance with Osborn's rule, changed at their own pace, and different combinations of more progressive and archaic characteristics arose in different populations.

The neoanthropic stage corresponds to the modern human species - Homo sapiens (reasonable man). The oldest neoanthropes are traditionally called Cro-Magnons after the site of the first discovery of their fossil remains in the Cro-Magnon grotto, in the French province of Dordogne. Cro-Magnons already fully corresponded to the anthropological type of modern man, differing only in minor features (slightly less high cranial vault, more developed dental system, etc.). Cro-Magnons have been known since the middle Würm glaciation in the late Pleistocene about 38-40 thousand years ago. However, according to some data, the organization of neoanthropes began to form even earlier, and the most ancient neoanthropes could have existed as early as 40-50 thousand years ago.
The average volume of the cranial cavity in neoanthropes is 1500 cm3, i.e., as we have already noted, the increase in brain size stopped after reaching the paleoanthropus stage. Obviously, this volume of the brain turned out to be sufficient for all subsequent complication of higher nervous activity of man, right up to the present day. Moreover, the modern human brain, the volume of which does not exceed that of Neanderthals, according to physiologists, retains enormous resources of nerve cells, with the possibility of the emergence of an even greater number of nerve connections that remain unused throughout the individual’s life.

Homo sapiens(reasonable person). Oddly enough, the course of evolution from H.erectus before H. sapiens, i.e. to the modern human stage is as difficult to document satisfactorily as the original branching stage of the hominid lineage. However, in this case, the matter is complicated by the presence of several contenders for the desired intermediate position.

According to a number of anthropologists, the step that led directly to H.sapiens, was a Neanderthal ( Homo neanderthalensis, or, as is customary today, Homo sapiens neanderthalensis). Neanderthals appeared no later than 150 thousand years ago, and different types flourished until the period of c. 40–35 thousand years ago, marked by the undoubted presence of a well-formed H.sapiens (H. sapiens sapiens). This era corresponded to the onset of the Wurm glaciation in Europe, i.e. ice age closest to modern times. Other scientists do not connect the origin of modern humans with Neanderthals, pointing out, in particular, that the morphological structure of the latter’s face and skull was too primitive to have time to evolve to the forms H.sapiens.

Neanderthaloids are usually imagined as stocky, hairy, beast-like people with bent legs, with a protruding head on a short neck, giving the impression that they had not yet fully achieved upright walking. Paintings and reconstructions in clay usually emphasize their hairiness and unjustified primitiveness. This image of the Neanderthal is a big distortion. First, we don't know whether Neanderthals were hairy or not. Secondly, they were all completely upright. As for evidence of an inclined position of the body, it was probably obtained from the study of individuals suffering from arthritis.

One of the most surprising features of the entire Neanderthal series of finds is that the least modern of them were the most recent in appearance. This is the so-called the classic Neanderthal type, the skull of which is characterized by a low forehead, a heavy brow, a receding chin, a protruding mouth area, and a long, low cranium. However, their brain volume was larger than that of modern humans. They certainly had a culture: there is evidence of funerary cults and possibly animal cults, since animal bones are found along with the fossil remains of classical Neanderthals.

At one time it was believed that classical Neanderthals lived only in southern and western Europe, and their origin was associated with the advance of the glacier, which placed them in conditions of genetic isolation and climatic selection. However, today apparently similar forms have been found in some regions of Africa and the Middle East and, possibly, in Indonesia. Such a widespread distribution of the classical Neanderthal makes it necessary to abandon this theory.

On this moment There is no material evidence of any gradual morphological transformation of the classical Neanderthal type into the modern type of man, with the exception of finds made in the Skhul cave in Israel. The skulls discovered in this cave differ significantly from each other, some of them having characteristics that place them in an intermediate position between the two human types. According to some experts, this is evidence of the evolutionary change from Neanderthal to modern humans, while others believe that this phenomenon is the result of mixed marriages between representatives of the two types of people, thereby believing that H.sapiens evolved independently. This explanation is supported by evidence that as early as 200–300 thousand years ago, i.e. before the appearance of the classical Neanderthal, there was a type of man that most likely belonged to the early H.sapiens, and not to the “progressive” Neanderthal. It's about about well-known finds - fragments of a skull found in Swansky (England), and a more complete skull from Steinheim (Germany).

The controversy regarding the “Neanderthal stage” in human evolution is partly due to the fact that two circumstances are not always taken into account. First, it is possible for the more primitive types of any evolving organism to exist in a relatively unchanged form at the same time that other branches of the same species undergo various evolutionary modifications. Secondly, migrations associated with shifts in climatic zones are possible. Such shifts were repeated in the Pleistocene as glaciers advanced and retreated, and humans could follow shifts in the climate zone. Thus, when considering long periods of time, it must be taken into account that the populations occupying a given area at a given time are not necessarily the descendants of populations that lived there at an earlier period. It is possible that early H. sapiens could migrate from the regions where they appeared, and then return to their original places after many thousands of years, having undergone evolutionary changes. When fully formed H.sapiens appeared in Europe 35-40 thousand years ago, during the warmer period of the last glaciation, it undoubtedly displaced the classical Neanderthal, which occupied the same region for 100 thousand years. It is now impossible to accurately determine whether the Neanderthal population moved north, following the retreat of its usual climatic zone, or mixed with those who invaded its territory H.sapiens.

Neanderthals (ancient people, paleoanthropes)

Neanderthals (ancient people, paleoanthropes)

In the traditional stage model of anthropogenesis, the intermediate evolutionary stage between Homo erectus and Homo sapiens was represented by paleoanthropes (“ancient people”), who, in absolute chronology, lived in the period from 300 thousand years to about 30 thousand years in Europe, Asia and Africa. In non-professional literature they are often referred to as “Neanderthals”, after the name of one of the first finds in 1848 in the area of ​​Neanderthal (Germany).

In general, paleoanthropes continue the line of evolution of “Homo erectus” (more precisely, Homo heidelbergensis), but in modern schemes they are often designated as a side branch of hominids. In terms of the general level of evolutionary achievements, these hominids are closest to modern humans. Therefore, they have undergone changes in their status in the classifications of hominids: paleoanthropes are currently considered as a subspecies of “Homo sapiens,” i.e., as its fossil version (Homo sapiens neanderthalensls). This view reflects new knowledge about the complexity of Neanderthal biology, intelligence, and social organization. Anthropologists, who attach great importance to the biological differences between Neanderthals and modern humans, still consider them a special species.

The first discoveries of Neanderthals were made in the 19th century. in Western Europe and did not have an unambiguous interpretation.

Groups of paleoanthropes, located over a significant range of geological time, are very diverse in morphological appearance. Anthropologist V.P. Alekseev attempted to classify groups of Neanderthals that were morphologically and chronologically similar, and identified several groups: European, African, Skhul type and Western Asian. Most of the finds of paleoanthropes are known from Europe. Neanderthals often inhabited periglacial zones.

On the same grounds (morphological and chronological), among the European forms of this time, the following levels are distinguished: “the earliest Neanderthals” - “pre-Neanderthals”, “early Neanderthals” and “late Neanderthals”.

Anthropologists suggested that objectively there were multiple transitions between successive stage groups, therefore, in different areas, from several variants of Pithecanthropus, an evolutionary transition to paleoanthropus could have occurred. Representatives of the species Homo heidelbergensis could be predecessors (Petralona, ​​Swanscombe, Atapuerca, Arago, etc.).

The earliest European group includes a fossil skull from the Steinheim site (200 thousand years old), found in Germany in 1933, as well as the Swanscombe female skull (200 thousand years old), discovered in England in 1935. These finds relate to the second interglacial according to the alpine scheme. Under similar conditions, a fossil lower jaw was found in France - the Montmorin monument. These forms are distinguished by the small size of the brain cavity (Steinheim - 1150 cm3, Swanscombe - 1250-1300 cm3). A complex of features has been identified that bring the earliest forms closer to modern humans: a relatively narrow and high skull, a relatively convex forehead, a massive eyebrow, like that of Pithecanthropus, not divided into its component elements, a rather rounded back of the head, a straightened facial region, the presence of a rudimentary chin of the lower jaw. There is obvious archaism in the structure of the teeth: the third molar is larger in size than the second and first (in humans, the size of the molars decreases from the first to the third). The bones of this type of fossil human are accompanied by archaic Acheulean tools.

Rice. I. 10. Skull of a late European Neanderthal (equal to Wurm)

Many Neanderthals known to science belong to the last interglacial. The earlier of them lived about 150 thousand years ago. You can imagine their appearance based on finds from the European monuments of Eringsdorf and Saccopastore. They are distinguished by a vertical profile of the facial region, a rounded occipital region, a weakened superciliary relief, a rather convex forehead, and a relatively small number of archaic features in the structure of the teeth (the third molar is not the largest among the others). The brain volume of early Neanderthals is estimated at 1200-1400 cm3.

The existence of late European Neanderthals coincides with the last glaciation. The morphological type of these forms is clearly visible on the fossil bone remains of Chapelle (50 thousand years), Moustier (50 thousand years), Ferrassi (50 thousand years), Neanderthal (50 thousand years), Engis (70 thousand years), Circeo (50 thousand years), San Cesaire (36 thousand years) (Fig. I. 10).

This variant is characterized by a strong development of the eyebrow, a compressed occipital region from top to bottom (“chignon-shaped”), a wide nasal opening, and an expanded cavity of the molars. Morphologists note the presence of an occipital ridge, a chin protrusion (rarely and in rudimentary form), and a large volume of the brain cavity: from 1350 to 1700 cm3. Based on the bones of the skeleton of the body, one can judge that late Neanderthals had a strong, massive physique (body length - 155-165 cm). The lower limbs are shorter than those of modern humans, and the femurs are curved. The wide facial part of the skull of Neanderthals protrudes strongly forward and is sloping on the sides, the cheek bones are streamlined. The joints of the arms and legs are large. In terms of body proportions, Neanderthals were similar to the modern type of Eskimos, which helped them maintain body temperature in cold climates.

An interesting attempt is to transfer ecological knowledge about modern man to paleoanthropological reconstructions. Thus, a number of structural features of the “classical” Neanderthals of Western Europe are explained as a consequence of adaptation to cold climate conditions.

It appears that the earliest and later forms from Europe are related genetically. European Neanderthals were discovered in France, Italy, Yugoslavia, Germany, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Crimea and the North Caucasus.

To solve the question of the origin of modern man, the finds of paleoanthropes outside Europe, mainly in South-West Asia and Africa, are extremely interesting. The absence of specialization features in morphology in most cases distinguishes them from European forms. Thus, they are characterized by straighter and thinner limbs, less powerful supraorbital ridges, and shorter and less massive skulls.

According to one point of view, a typical Neanderthal man existed only within Europe and some regions of Asia, where he could have moved from Europe. Moreover, starting from the turn of 40 thousand years, Neanderthals coexisted with fully developed people of a modern anatomical type; in the Middle East, such coexistence could be longer.

The finds of paleoanthropes from Mount Carmel (Israel) are exceptional in significance. They attracted researchers with a mosaic of sapient and Neanderthaloid features. These finds can be interpreted as actual evidence of crossbreeding between early Neanderthals and modern humans. True, it should be noted that some of the Skhul finds are currently considered to belong to “archaic Homo sapiens”. Let's name some of the most famous finds.

Tabun is a fossil skull discovered in Tabun Cave, Mount Carmel. Antiquity - 100 thousand years. The skull is low, the forehead is sloping, there are supraorbital ridges, but the facial part and occipital region have a modern character. The curved limb bones resemble the type of European Neanderthals.

Skhul-V, antiquity - 90 thousand years (Fig. I. 11). The skull combines a large volume of the brain cavity and quite high forehead with a modern structure of the facial region and the back of the head.

Amud, antiquity - 50 thousand years. Found in the Amud cave near Lake Tiberias. (Israel). Has a large brain volume: 1740 cm3. The bones of the limbs are elongated.

Qafzeh, antiquity - about 100 thousand. years. Opened in Israel. Sapience is quite strongly expressed, so it is considered an accomplished sapiens.

In the north of Iraq, a Shanidar Neanderthal was discovered, classical in type, with a large brain section; researchers drew attention to the absence of a continuous supraorbital ridge. Age - 70-80 thousand years.

A Neanderthal man with traces of a funeral rite was found on the territory of Uzbekistan. The skull belonged to a boy with an unformed supraorbital ridge. The facial section and limbs of the skeleton, according to some anthropologists, are of a modern type. The location of the find is the Teschik-Tash cave, antiquity - 70 thousand years.

Rice. I. 11. Skull of a progressive Neanderthal (archaic sapiens) (90 thousand years)

In Crimea, in the Kiik-Koba cave, the bone remains of an adult paleoanthrope (a type close to Western European Neanderthals) and a very young Neanderthal child were discovered. The bone remains of several Neanderthal children were discovered in the Crimea and in the area of ​​Belogorsk. A fragment of the skull of a Neanderthal woman with some modern features, making it look like shul finds. Neanderthal bones and teeth were discovered in Adygea and Georgia.

The skull of a paleoanthropist was discovered in Asia - on the territory of China, in the Mala Grotto. It is believed that he cannot be attributed to any European variant of Neanderthals. The importance of this find lies in the fact that it proves the replacement of one stage type by another in the Asian part of the world. Another point of view is that in finds such as Mala, Chanyan, Ordos (Mongolia) we see transitional forms from Pithecanthropus to “early” sapiens. Moreover, this transition in some forms can be dated back to at least 0.2 million years (uranium method).

On about. In Java, near the village of Ngan-dong, peculiar skulls bearing traces of cannibalism were found. Researchers drew attention to their very thick walls and powerful supraorbital ridge. Such features make the Ngandong skulls similar to the type of Pithecanthropus. The existence of discovered hominids is the Upper Pleistocene (about 0.1 million years), i.e., they are synchronous with the late Pithecanthropus. There was an opinion in science that this was a local, unique type of Neanderthal, formed as a result of a slow evolutionary process. From other positions, the "Javanthropes" from Ngandong are defined as late Pithecanthropus, genetically related to the Late Pleistocene sapiens of Australia.

Until recently, it was believed that Neanderthals existed not only in the north, but also in the south of Africa. Hominids from Broken Hill and Saldanha were cited as examples of “southern” Africans. In their morphological type it was found general signs Neanderthals and Pithecanthropus. Their brain volume reached about 1300 cm3 (slightly less than the average for Neanderthals). It has been suggested that Broken Hill Man is a successor to the Olduvai Pithecanthropus from East Africa. Some anthropologists believed that there was parallel line evolution of paleoanthropes in Southeast Asia and southern Africa. Currently, the Broken Hill variant is assigned the role of a fossil sapient form.

Changes in taxonomic views on later hominids have led to the fact that many forms preceding modern humans are classified as archaic Homo sapiens, often understood by this term as “pro-Neanderthals” (Swanscombe, Steinheim), then - peculiar African forms (Broken Hill, Saldanha), Asian (Ngandong), as well as European variants of Pithecanthropus.

Paleontological evidence suggests a mestizo origin for classical European Neanderthals. Apparently, there were two waves of migrants from Africa and Asia approximately 300-250 thousand years ago, with subsequent mixing.

The evolutionary fate of Neanderthals is unclear. The choice of hypotheses is quite wide: the complete transformation of Neanderthals into sapiens; complete extermination of Neanderthals by sapiens of non-European origin; crossbreeding of both options. The last point of view has the greatest support, according to which the emerging modern man migrated from Africa to Europe through Asia. In Asia it was recorded for about 100 thousand years, and came to Europe at the turn of 40 thousand years. Next, the assimilation of the Neanderthal population took place. The evidence is provided by European finds of hominids of Neanderthal appearance, modern type and intermediate forms. Early Neanderthals, penetrating into Western Asia, could interbreed with ancient sapiens there too.

Fossil odontological materials provide an idea of ​​the scale of crossbreeding processes. They record the contribution of European Neanderthals to the gene pool of modern humans. Neanderthal fossil hominids coexisted with modern ones for tens of thousands of years.

The essence of the evolutionary transition that took place at the boundary of the Upper Paleolithic is explained in the hypothesis of Professor Ya.Ya. Roginsky.

The author summarizes data on the structure of the endocrane with clinical observations of modern humans and, on this basis, puts forward the assumption that the social behavior of paleoanthropes and modern humans is significantly different (control of behavior, manifestation of aggressiveness).

The Mousterian era, coinciding in time with the era of the Neanderthals, belongs to the Middle Paleolithic. In absolute terms, this time ranges from 40 to 200 thousand years. Mousterian tool assemblages are heterogeneous in the proportion of tools of different types. Mousterian sites are known in three parts of the world - Europe, Africa and Asia; bone remains of Neanderthals were also discovered there.

The technology of stone processing by Neanderthal man differs relatively high level techniques for splitting and secondary processing of flakes. The pinnacle of technology is the method of preparing the surface of a stone blank and processing the plates separated from it.

Rice. 1.12. Mousterian tools of the Middle Paleolithic

Careful adjustment of the surface of the workpiece entailed the thinness of the plates and the perfection of the tools obtained from them (Fig. 1.12).

The Mousterian culture is characterized by disc-shaped blanks, from which flakes were chipped radially: from the edges to the center. Most Mousterian tools were made on flakes through secondary processing. Archaeologists count dozens of types of tools, but their diversity apparently boils down to three types: pointed, scraper, rubel. The point was a tool with a point at the end, used for cutting meat, leather, processing wood, and also as a dagger or spear tip. The side scraper was a flake, retouched along the edge. This tool was used for scraping or cutting when processing carcasses, hides or wood. Wooden handles were added to the scrapers. Toothed tools were used for turning wooden objects, cutting or sawing. In Mousterian one can find piercings, incisors, and scrapers—tools of the Late Paleolithic. The means of labor are represented by special chippers (elongated pieces of stone or pebbles) and retouchers (pieces of stone or bone for processing the edge of a tool by pressing).

Modern ethnographic studies of Australian Aborigines help to imagine the technological processes of the Stone Age. Experiments by archaeologists have shown that the technique of obtaining tool blanks in the form of flakes and plates was complex and required experience, technical knowledge, precise coordination of movements, and great attention.

Experience allowed ancient man reduce the amount of time required to manufacture tools. The technique of processing bone in Mousterian is poorly developed. Wooden tools were widely used: clubs, spears, spears with fire-hardened ends. Water vessels and elements of dwellings were made from wood.

Neanderthals were skilled hunters. At their sites, accumulations of bones of large animals were discovered: mammoths, cave bears, bison, wild horses, antelopes, and mountain goats. Complex hunting activities were within the power of a coordinated group of Neanderthals. The Mousterians used methods of rounding up or driving animals to cliffs and swamps. Complex tools were discovered - spearheads with flint fragments. Bolas were used as throwing weapons. The Mousterians practiced cutting up the carcasses of killed animals and roasting the meat over a fire. They made simple clothes for themselves. Gathering had a certain importance. The discovered grain grinders made of stone suggest that primitive grain processing existed. Cannibalism existed among Neanderthals, but was not widespread.

During Mousterian times, the nature of settlements changed. Sheds, grottoes and caves were more often inhabited. The types of Neanderthal settlements are identified: workshops, hunting and base sites. Wind barriers were installed to protect fires from the wind. In the grottoes, pavements were made from pebbles and pieces of limestone.

Bone remains of Neanderthals can be found together with Upper Paleolithic tools, as was the case, for example, with the discovery of a late paleoanthropus in France (the Saint-Césaire monument).

In the early Würmian era, Mousterian burials appeared on the territory of Eurasia - the first reliable traces of the burial of the dead. Today, about 60 such monuments have been opened. Interestingly, the “Neanderthal” and “sapient” groups more often buried adult individuals, and the “Neanderthal” population buried both adults and children to the same extent. The facts of burial of the dead give reason to assume the existence of a dualistic worldview among the Mousterians.