The origin of speech is one of the biggest unanswered questions in the evolution of mankind. Scientist from all over the world from different disciplines using different methodologies have been...Show moreThe origin of speech is one of the biggest unanswered questions in the evolution of mankind. Scientist from all over the world from different disciplines using different methodologies have been trying to solve the mystery that is the origin of speech. An unambiguous answer however, remains absent. Using the method of comparative morphology and microbiomechanical studies, it can be studied when in our evolutionary history the anatomy fit to support speech production first arose, and thus which species first had the ability to talk. This thesis looks at published data on different hard structures of the vocal tract, in particular the hyoid, hard palate and mandible, of Australopithecus afarensis, Homo erectus, the SH hominins and Homo neanderthalensis to compare them to those of the modern human and non-human great apes vocal tract, in order to discover what we can infer about the origin speech based on the evolution of the vocal tract. This comparison has shown that based on their features, these hominins can be divided into two categories. The first category is that of archaic morphology and is characterized by a hyoid, hard palate and mandible that most closely resembles the anatomical features of the non-human great apes, in particular, chimpanzees. This means they possessed a bullashaped hyoid body, a long and broad hard palate and a long and narrow, chinless mandible. To this group belong the Australopithecus afarensis and Homo erectus. The second category is that of modern morphology and is characterized by the hyoid, hard palate and mandible that most closely resembles the anatomical features of modern humans. This means a bar-like hyoid body, a shorter and more narrow hard palate and a short and broad mandible with a bony protuberance, the chin. To this groups belongs the SH hominins the Homo neanderthalensis. Based on the results, it can be concluded that the anatomical features of the vocal tract fit to support the production of speech were already in place with, at least, Neanderthals. Therefore, Neanderthals could speak. The way forward for future studies into the origin of speech mainly is more data, both in terms of quantity and more species, though this is not something that can be forced. Establishing the origin of speech might open up a new path into studying the origin of language, a related, but not identical topic.Show less
The Quina flaking system is a relatively new Middle Palaeolithic lithic technocomplex recognized and studied until now only in Southwestern France. It has been argued that this technology was...Show moreThe Quina flaking system is a relatively new Middle Palaeolithic lithic technocomplex recognized and studied until now only in Southwestern France. It has been argued that this technology was developed by Neanderthal groups to cope with the decreasing global temperatures and the environmental changes of the last glaciation. The Quina system, until now, is largely unattested in North Europe, where the glacial climate was more pronounced. Why is a technology evolved for the survival in cold environments absent in regions particularly affected by the glaciation? The presence of this technology in the Northern fringes of the Neanderthals’ ecological niche might shed light on the reasons behind Neanderthals’ technological behaviour. It might further provide important clues for a better understanding of whether the variability in the Middle Palaeolithic archaeological record derives from cultural diversity or functional/technical necessities or other factors. This research identifies, through quantitative and qualitative analyses, and comparative studies of lithic materials, the technological traces of unretouched flakes from the site of Colmont-Ponderosa (South Limburg, the Netherlands). This study confirms that at some point during the last glaciation, the Neanderthal groups were users of the Quina technology. The presence of this technology in the North and at such a distance (around seven-hundred kilometers) from the closest certain Quina sites might be the result of techno-cultural convergence. But it might also indicate the point of origin of this technology, which was later dispersed to the Sout, when the environment became too harsh, or it might indicate a dispersal from the South to the North. To confirm this hypothesis a re-evaluation of other Northern assemblages is necessary: if the Quina technology is present at Colmont-Ponderosa, it could be present elsewhere, overlooked because of the relative novelty of the Quina technocomplex.Show less
De Bandkeramische vindplaats Maastricht-Belvédère 1988 ligt op een middenplateau op de Caberg in Limburg. Alhoewel de Caberg geografisch gezien dichterbij de Heeswatercluster ligt, lijkt de...Show moreDe Bandkeramische vindplaats Maastricht-Belvédère 1988 ligt op een middenplateau op de Caberg in Limburg. Alhoewel de Caberg geografisch gezien dichterbij de Heeswatercluster ligt, lijkt de Bandkeramische bewoning van de Caberg in verschillende aspecten beter aan te sluiten bij de Bandkeramische bewoning van de Graetheidecluster. De Bandkeramische vindplaatsen van de Caberg worden gedateerd in de fasen 1C t/m 2D, waarbij de nadruk ligt op bewoning in de fasen 1C/1D. De vindplaatsen zijn daarnaast allen slechts één à twee fasen bewoond. Bovendien hebben ze een relatief lage spreiding van sporen. Deze kenmerken gelden ook voor de Bandkeramische vindplaats Maastricht-Belvédère 1988, wat het idee versterkt dat de Bandkeramische bewoning van de Caberg beter past bij de Bandkeramische bewoning van de Graetheidecluster, dan bij die van de Heeswatercluster.Show less
The discovery of remains of a lion in the Gran Dolina cave (Atapuerca, Spain) with pronounced signs of butchering makes one wonder why hominids would want to hunt for a large carnivore without...Show moreThe discovery of remains of a lion in the Gran Dolina cave (Atapuerca, Spain) with pronounced signs of butchering makes one wonder why hominids would want to hunt for a large carnivore without projectile weapons. These lion remains are special, but not unique in the Middle and Upper Palaeolithic of Europe. Traces of hunting for lions and wolves are present at a limited number of sites, and procurement of brown bear and cave bear is widespread. In this paper I explore a costly signalling explanation for hunting on these large carnivores. The costly signalling theory states that animals can use signalling to show a quality that is otherwise not easily observed. If the signal is truly costly, this guarantees a level of honesty and receivers of the signal can benefit by responding to it. In our hominid case, strong men can show their hunting quality by engaging in risky hunts for large carnivores. Observing females will then preferentially mate with those males and competitors will be deterred. Anthropological studies apply costly signalling theory to explain deviations from the expected patterns of optimal foraging theory. I will discuss an anthropological case study and then return to the archaeological situation to asses the value of costly signalling for hunting for large carnivores in the European Palaeolithic. Showing the results of signalling in the archaeological record is difficult, but indirect observations can be used. The main value of costly signalling theory lies in its ability to explain economically unexpected behaviour and in introducing sexual selection to European Palaeolithic archaeology.Show less
