tentional sea faring ability (Carter et al. 2019). Altogether then, Neandertals definitely exhibit the sorts of complex behaviors we would associate with human cognition and the image of God. Excavations at Denisova Cave, in the Altai mountains of Russia, have yielded the remains of a genetically distinct population known as Denisovans (Reich et al. 2010). A rich collection of tools and cultural artifacts have also been found in Denisova Cave. The earliest stone tools from Denisova Cave, which come from layer 22 of the main chamber, predate the appearance of any fossil or genetic evidence of hominins at the site (Shunkov and Kozlikin 2023). These artifacts include cores, flakes, and side scrapers, some of which show the use of Levallois technique. The first Denisovan fossils appear in layer 15, which also contained numerous stone tools. Whinin stratum 11, a number of cultural artifacts were found including a chloritolite bracelet (Derevianko et al. 2008), pendants, beads, rings, a bone needle and an awl (Shunkov et al. 2020). A wide variety of materials were used in the manufacture of these artifacts. These include agalmatolite, bone, chloritolite, eggshell, ivory, marble, shale, shell, serpentine, talkite, and teeth. Long distance transfer of some materials might also be inferred, since the nearest known source of chloritolite is 200 km away from Denisova Cave (Derevianko et al. 2008). Unfortunately, most of the artifacts cannot yet be attributed to a particular hominin population. Both Neanderthal and Denisovan remains have been found within stratum 11. Homo sapiens also appears to have been present at this time, since their DNA has been found within the upper portion of stratum 11 (Brown et al. 2022). Genetic testing of the Denisova artifacts may help elucidate their ownership. This has already been done in at least one case, in which a pendant from Denisova Cave yielded Homo sapiens DNA (Essel et al. 2023). However, this assemblage still demonstrates an early ability of hominins to make specialized tools and objects for adornment. It is unclear whether fire was used by hominins in Denisova Cave. Although charcoal and charcoal powder have been found throughout the deposits, no hearths have been located (Morley et al. 2019). As a result, these may be alternately interpreted as windblown ashes from wildfires. The taxonomic validity of H. heidelbergensis remains uncertain. While there are diagnosable differences between Middle Pleistocene Homo crania and those of classic Neandertals (Stringer 2012), genome sequencing of a putative H. heidelbergensis fossil from Sima de los Huesos (SH) revealed a typical Neandertal genome (Meyer et al. 2016). Even if we accept the existence of H. heidelbergensis as distinct from Neandertals, the association of artifacts or cultural evidences with putative H. heidelbergensis is not always clear. For example, a single, well-crafted hand axe is known from SH in Spain, a purported H. heidelbergensis site (Carbonell and Mosquera 2006), but the Schöningen spears (front-heavy throwing spears made from dense wood near the heart of mostly spruce trees) are associated with H. heidelbergensis only by conventional dating, which is judged to be too old for Neandertals (Serangeli and Böhner 2012). The horse butchery site at Boxgrove contains numerous stone tools of the Acheulean type (Pope et al. 2020), but the hominin remains assigned to H. heidelbergensis from this site may not be taxonomically decisive, as they consist of only a partial tibia (Roberts et al. 1994) and two mandibular incisors (Hillson et al. 2010). Evidence of artistic expression is less clear, with only a single disputed venus considered to be of possible H. heidelbergensis origin, if it is truly a venus (Bednarik 2003). Burial also remains uncertain, although some have suggested SH as a possible body disposal site (Carbonell and Mosquera 2006; Sala et al. 2023). Complex dispersal ability might be evident in the accessing of dark caves. For example, the aforementioned SH is a pit inside of a cave, but SH also contains numerous bear fossils, suggesting no unique cognitive ability was needed to access it (Arsuaga et al. 1997). Despite these uncertainties, the behaviors of complex weapon manufacture and coordinated big-game hunting evidenced at Boxgrove and Schöningen strongly suggests human cognition. Cave bear bones from Schonigen show cut marks in parts of the body where flesh is not typically collected (Verheijen et al. 2022). These remains may represent the harvesting of pelts. If we accept H. heidelbergensis as a valid taxon, then these evidences point to their humanity. If H. heidelbergensis is really a variety of Neandertal, then Boxgrove and Schöningen add to our confidence in the humanity of Neandertals. Table 1. Distribution of advanced cognitive abilities among hominins. A capital “X” indicates strong positive evidence, a lower-case “x” indicates suggestive evidence, and a “?” indicates significant uncertainty. Hominin Taxon Fire Tools Creative Works Exploration Care for sick / injured Disposal of the Dead Interbreeding w / H. sapiens Ardipithecus (all species) Australopithecus (all species) ? Homo habilis & H. rudolfensis X H. floresiensis X X H. naledi x x x x X Mid-Pleistocene Homo X X ? x H. erectus (including H. ergaster) x X x X ? Neandertals X X X X X X X Denisovans X ROSS, BRUMMEL, AND WOOD Human History: From Adam to Abraham 2023 ICC 69
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=