{"title":"Homo sapiens and Neanderthal Use of Space at Riparo Bombrini (Liguria, Italy)","authors":"Amélie Vallerand, Fabio Negrino, Julien Riel-Salvatore","doi":"10.1007/s10816-024-09640-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Because it is often assumed that fundamental behavioral differences distinguish Neanderthals and <i>Homo sapiens</i>, the ability to structure space within the sites they occupied into distinct activity areas is often invoked as a key distinctive trait of our species. However, this behavior has never been assessed for both groups at a single site, hindering direct comparisons to date. To help resolve this question, this study uses a single methodology to evaluate the spatial organization in the Protoaurignacian levels (A1-A2, associated with <i>Homo sapiens</i>) and the latest Mousterian levels (MS1-MS2, associated with Neanderthals) at Riparo Bombrini (Liguria, Italy) to assess the changes over these three stratigraphic units vis a vis other information about site use. Combining GIS and quantitative methods allows the study of the spatial distribution of plotted finds and features in these levels, showing that Neandertals and <i>Homo sapiens</i> organized their living spaces in accordance with the duration of occupation, the occupation intensity, the tool assemblage and the faunal exploitation<i>.</i> Our results indicate that there is a logic behind the distribution of plotted finds and the use of the space, suggesting comparable cognitive capacities for both anatomically modern humans and Neanderthals. This contributes further data that undermines the notion of ‘behavioral modernity’ as a useful heuristic in human origins research.</p>","PeriodicalId":47725,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-024-09640-1","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Because it is often assumed that fundamental behavioral differences distinguish Neanderthals and Homo sapiens, the ability to structure space within the sites they occupied into distinct activity areas is often invoked as a key distinctive trait of our species. However, this behavior has never been assessed for both groups at a single site, hindering direct comparisons to date. To help resolve this question, this study uses a single methodology to evaluate the spatial organization in the Protoaurignacian levels (A1-A2, associated with Homo sapiens) and the latest Mousterian levels (MS1-MS2, associated with Neanderthals) at Riparo Bombrini (Liguria, Italy) to assess the changes over these three stratigraphic units vis a vis other information about site use. Combining GIS and quantitative methods allows the study of the spatial distribution of plotted finds and features in these levels, showing that Neandertals and Homo sapiens organized their living spaces in accordance with the duration of occupation, the occupation intensity, the tool assemblage and the faunal exploitation. Our results indicate that there is a logic behind the distribution of plotted finds and the use of the space, suggesting comparable cognitive capacities for both anatomically modern humans and Neanderthals. This contributes further data that undermines the notion of ‘behavioral modernity’ as a useful heuristic in human origins research.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, the leading journal in its field, presents original articles that address method- or theory-focused issues of current archaeological interest and represent significant explorations on the cutting edge of the discipline. The journal also welcomes topical syntheses that critically assess and integrate research on a specific subject in archaeological method or theory, as well as examinations of the history of archaeology. Written by experts, the articles benefit an international audience of archaeologists, students of archaeology, and practitioners of closely related disciplines. Specific topics covered in recent issues include: the use of nitche construction theory in archaeology, new developments in the use of soil chemistry in archaeological interpretation, and a model for the prehistoric development of clothing. The Journal''s distinguished Editorial Board includes archaeologists with worldwide archaeological knowledge (the Americas, Asia and the Pacific, Europe, and Africa), and expertise in a wide range of methodological and theoretical issues. Rated ''A'' in the European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH) Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory is rated ''A'' in the ERIH, a new reference index that aims to help evenly access the scientific quality of Humanities research output. For more information visit: http://www.esf.org/research-areas/humanities/activities/research-infrastructures.html Rated ''A'' in the Australian Research Council Humanities and Creative Arts Journal List. For more information, visit: http://www.arc.gov.au/era/journal_list_dev.htm