Diogenes

The Upper Palaeolithic Revolution, sometimes called ‘the Creative Explosion’, is seen as the period when the forefathers of modern forager societies emerged. Similarly to the Industrial and Neolithic Revolutions, it represents a short time span when numerous inventions appeared and cultural changes occurred. The inventions were in the domain of technology, that is, shaping of new stone tool forms, longdistance exchange of raw materials, the use of bone, antler and ivory as well as rare minerals for the production of domestic and ritual objects. Spatial analysis of ‘living floors’ indicates the presence of a kitchen area, sleeping grounds, storage facilities (in certain regions) and a discard zone. We can also detect a certain increase in social hierarchy and the presence of shamans. Body decorations indicate the appearance of personal individuality. Several hypotheses were offered as an explanation for the initiation of all these cultural changes often grouped under the term ‘modern behaviour’. It stands to reason that attributing the new successful technologies observed in the Eurasian Upper Palaeolithic to intrinsic social processes and economic innovations by local Middle Palaeolithic populations would need a better archaeological demonstration than that available today. For the time being, the emergence of Modern humans in sub-Saharan Africa, their socio-economic dynamism that caused their expansion through the Nile Valley into the Near East, and their migration along the ‘southern route’ of Asia as far as Australia, is the most plausible scenario though it still leaves much to be desired from future archaeological research.

Among the cultural innovations by which the Upper Palaeolithic period is characterized, those relating to burial practices furnish the possibility of evaluating the profound changes which differentiated this era from the Middle Palaeolithic. The graves of the Upper Palaeolithic offer us a sometimes very compelling glimpse of the complexity of the symbolic, cognitive and social environment of those peoples, as well as of the evolution and diversification over time and space of their rituals associated with death. This article considers the set of burials discovered to date within the boundaries of Italy as particularly representative of these features. Numerous, diverse and well-endowed, they provide important information about the peoples of the Upper Palaeolithic and of the way they responded to death. These graves also represent a significant body of evidence for the debate on the degree to which Palaeolithic man can be considered culturally fully human and the extent to which he intentionally buried his dead.

Beads and other ‘body ornaments’ are very widespread components of the archaeological record of early modern humans (Homo sapiens). They appear first in the Middle Stone Age in Africa, and somewhat later in the Early Upper Paleolithic of Eurasia. The manufacture and use of ornaments is widely considered to be evidence for significant developments in human cognition. In our view, the appearance of these objects represents the interaction of evolved cognitive capacities with changing social and demographic conditions. Body ornamentation is a medium or technology for communication, particularly of socially-relevant information. The widespread adoption of beads and other discrete objects as media for communication implies changes in the complexity and stability of social messages, as well as the scale of social networks. The relatively sudden appearance of beads in the Paleolithic archaeological record coincides with genetic and archaeological evidence for expansion of human populations. We argue that these changes reflect expanding scales of social interaction and more complex social landscapes resulting from unprecedentedly large and internally differentiated human populations.

This article seeks to show the interaction between cultural and anatomic evolution in the birth and differentiation of cultures and languages. The diversity which characterizes our world does not preclude logical regularities due to the coherence of the human mind, which evolved slowly through the paleontological phases of its emergence over millions of years. The anatomical retroaction of the hominids is analyzed to show that, in the long run, anatomy reflected ‘cultural selection’. With the anatomic evolution of man, culture became a crucial component for all human beings and their anatomy simply adapted progressively to this fact.

The question of the origin of ‘natural’ human language has fascinated the scientific world for a very long time and seems to be generating a renewed level of interest. This paper will show that all elements converge to indicate a long and slow process of separation by which the hominids very progressively became distinguished from the other higher primates and more generally from other animal species. Biological and neurological developments created favourable structures for the future emergence of human languages. These developments were further potentialized by the appearance of new forms of co-operation within human communities. Such anthropological, socio-cultural and ‘political’ elements were determinant in allowing the transition to the specifically human functions of language. If these elements are not taken into consideration, researchers are reduced to imaging the appearance of a mutation from which solely Homo sapiens would have benefited and from whichHomo neanderthalensis would have been excluded, as must equally be excluded any intermingling between the various varieties of hominids.

This paper sketches a comprehensive methodology to analyse the elementary structures of prehistoric art. A formal analysis of art is proposed through the distinction between pictograms, ideograms and psychograms. The dynamic between these elements and the thematic contents of the represented scenes is related to the four main types of social organization: early hunters, early gatherers, late hunters, pastoralists and complex economy societies. Cultural patterns of these societies and formal elements of art may appear as sharing the same elementary structures.

The very concept of the ‘birth’ or ‘origin’ of art may seem inappropriate, since humans are by nature artists and the history of art begins with that of humanity. In their artistic impulses and achievements humans express their vitality, their ability to establish a beneficial and positive relationship with their environment, to humanize nature; their behaviour as artists is one of the characteristics for selection favourable to the evolution of the human species. Evidence from a huge analysis of rock art and cave paintings and engravings shows that, from their origins, humans have also been Homo aestheticus.

Over the last twenty years the debate over the origin of modern Man has broadened, the supporters of a theory of regional diversification of Homo sapiens being often opposed by those holding to the single source theory (the ‘Out of Africa’ model). At the same time, the idea of Homo neanderthalensis as a separate species was being resurrected, supported by bone classification typology and drawing on arguments derived from palaeogenetic analyses, which buttressed the case for the existence of distinct species and for privileging an African origin for modern humans. The prospects offered by palaeogenetic research to find answers for the questions concerning the relationship between modern humans and Neanderthals throw up numerous questions and all the obstacles have not yet been removed. Palaeoanthropology, from its point of view, casts major doubt on the thesis according to which man has always evolved in the same direction.

It is hard to define cultural modernity. Nonetheless, apparently there is no match between biological and cultural evolution, between biological and archaeological data. The features of cultural modernity cannot be seen as a direct consequence of the biological origin of our species. A second crucial aspect is that the subsistence strategies, technological and symbolic traditions of Neanderthals are not significantly different from those of modern humans living in Africa and the Near East at the same period. Europe, at the level of human evolution, was a cul-de-sac and not a disseminating centre. Bifaces reached Europe a million years after their invention in Africa. Homo sapiens and Neanderthals thus evolved in parallel, even though speed and cultural forms varied from one population to another. It now seems clear that the features we recognize as ‘modern’ appeared in different regions and in different human groups. It would be the same later with the invention of agriculture, writing, state societies, which appeared separately at several points on the planet.

There is no direct, constant relationship between the anthropological and cultural aspects of modernity. Anthropologically modern peoples display a certain heterogeneity that is not unconnected with earlier peoples, and the culture produced by modern humans, which is also heterogeneous, is differentiated diachronically and according to territory. Though paleogenetic research seems to point us to a single, African source for modern peoples, who had replaced the pre-sapiens populations in Eurasia, this view is not completely proven or accepted. On the other hand, paleo-genetic research has contributed to our relinquishing the hypothesis of a multiregional ‘total continuity’ of local pre-modern populations in the Old World. Indeed the theory of a partial replacement, by a migration ‘out of Africa’, appears to be getting increasingly plausible. This article deals with the problems of the origins of modern man from the points of view of anthropological, paleogenetic, paleoenvironmental and cultural approaches.