What is Cultural Modernity? A General View and a (original) (raw)
AI-generated Abstract
Cultural modernity, as defined in this study, emerges from the interplay of genetic, anatomical, and behavioral factors dating back to at least 200,000 years ago. The research delves into the rapid onset of symbolic behavior in Upper Palaeolithic Europe, coinciding with the arrival of anatomically modern humans, and evaluates diverse theories surrounding the origins of symbolic storage and its archaeological implications. The evidence highlights a complex narrative of modern human behavior, emphasizing continuity over sudden changed in the development of cultural artifacts.
Sign up for access to the world's latest research.
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Related papers
This research uses Peircean Semiotics to model the evolution of symbolic behavior in the human lineage and the potential material correlates of this evolutionary process in the archaeological record. The semiotic model states the capacity for symbolic behavior developed in two distinct stages. Emergent capacities are characterized by the sporadic use of non-symbolic and symbolic material culture that affects information exchange between individuals. Symbolic exchange will be rare. Mobilized capacities are defined by the constant use of non-symbolic and symbolic objects that affect both interpersonal and group-level information exchange. Symbolic behavior will be obligatory and widespread. The model was tested against the published archaeological record dating from ~200,000 years ago to the Pleistocene/Holocene boundary in three sub-regions of Africa and Eurasia. A number of Exploratory and Confirmatory Data Analysis techniques were used to identify patterning in artifacts through time consistent with model predictions. The results indicate Emergent symboling capacities were expressed as early as ~100,000 years ago in Southern Africa and the Levant. However, capacities do not appear fully Mobilized in these regions until ~17,000 years ago. Emergent symboling is not evident in the European record until ~42,000 years ago, but develops rapidly. The results also indicate both Anatomically Modern Humans and Neanderthals had the capacity for symbolic behavior, but expressed those capacities differently. Moreover, interactions between the two populations did not select for symbolic expression, nor did periodic aggregation within groups. The analysis ultimately situates the capacity for symbolic behavior in increased engagement with materiality and the ability to recognize material objects can be made meaningful– an ability that must have been shared with Anatomically Modern Humans’ and Neanderthals’ most recent common ancestor. Consequently, the results have significant implications for notions of ‘modernity’ and human uniqueness that drive human origins research. This work pioneers deductive approaches to cognitive evolution, and both strengths and weaknesses are discussed. In offering notable results and best practices, it effectively operationalizes the semiotic model as a viable analytical method for human origins research.
The origin of symbolic behavior of Middle Palaeolithic humans: Recent controversies
Quaternary International, 2014
One the most controversial problems of the Middle Palaeolithic research is the origin of symbolic behavior and who was responsible e only populations of anatomically modern humans (Homo sapiens in Africa) or also populations of Neandertals in Western Eurasia? According to the current evidence, there are two opposite concepts. The first one assumes that use of complex stone and bone technology, burying their dead, and making of art objects as well as personal ornaments originated with anatomically modern humans. The second one supports a view that the Neandertals developed their culture in a similar way, convergent or in various contacts with the societies of early Homo sapiens. Their technological equipment enabled them to enter and colonize new areas in northern latitudes, which was impossible without developed knowledge about fire usage, shelter building, and adequate clothing. Neandertals made efficient tools, including composite tools made of various raw materials. In addition, the social relations of Neandertals exemplified an altruistic approach to others. According to the current knowledge, the origin of symbolic behavior cannot be linked only with anatomically modern humans or any isolated Middle Paleolithic population. It appeared much earlier, in the Lower Palaeolithic. It is necessary to remember that archaeological data for remote time are still rare and more evidence is needed to test concepts.
Based on the analyses of tool behaviour in cognitive terms it has been shown recently, that an expansion of cultural capacities occurred through the Middle Stone Age in Sub-Saharan Africa (Lombard/Haidle 2012). In this talk I argued that a rather similar observation can be made regarding the capacities of symbolic communication through ritual behaviour in the late Homo lineage. With a combination of theories from evolutionary biology, cognitive science and cultural anthropology applied to the constantly growing archaeological record it can be shown that an expansion of cognitive capacities to communicate symbolically through collective rituals probably occurred within that time span too. I presented three types of archaeological evidence which may represent early symbolic-ritual behaviour in the Palaeolithic record, namely ochre, burials as well as their predecessors, and personal ornaments. Thus, ritual behaviour is not restricted to Homo sapiens alone, but can also be connected with Neanderthals. There may be some sporadic evidence for ritual behaviour in Homo heidelbergensis as well, such as mortuary activity and pigment use. For that reason it is likely that ritual behaviour is a part of human nature with a deep evolutionary history, which is also confirmed by some new observations in Primatology, let alone the massive ethnographic record of rituals which occur in almost all known human cultures on the planet.
In recent years, there has been a tendency to correlate the origin of modern culture and language with that of anatomically modern humans. Here we discuss this correlation in the light of results provided by our first hand analysis of ancient and recently discovered relevant archaeological and paleontological material from Africa and Europe. We focus in particular on the evolutionary significance of lithic and bone technology, the emergence of symbolism, Neandertal behavioral patterns, the identification of early mortuary practices, the anatomical evidence for the acquisition of language, the 2 d'Errico et al.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.
Related papers
The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Archaoelogy, 2023