Collective Opinions and Conclusions
It seems to me that there are far more questions than there
are answers in regards to the supposed intentionality of Neanderthal ‘burials’.
On the one hand, we do see some similarities between sites across Eurasia. Neanderthal
skeletons, for example, have been found on a few occasions in shallow
depressions. Furthermore, there are two intriguing sites in which Neanderthal
skeletons were found with animal remains. While these findings are significant,
and indeed help us to learn more about Neanderthals and potentially the origins
of certain cultural behaviours, they do not provide conclusive evidence upon
which extraordinary claims can be made. They open the door to the possibility
that Neanderthals buried their dead, but do not prove it outright. For this
reason, I must choose the side of skepticism. I cannot explain the presence of
animal bones (at Regourdou and Teshik-Tash), or flowers (at Shanidar) with
Neanderthal remains; however, the burden of proof lies with those who claim
they were intentionally buried, and so far, no strong evidence can support this
claim.
Based on the information I’ve come across in my research, I
would take the position that the burial was unintentional in regards to the
flower burial specifically, yet I am not convinced that there was no
intentionality whatsoever in the Shanidar IV burial. Although people such as
Leroi-Gourhan claimed that animals couldn’t be responsible for the presence of
the pollen due to their size and the distance the flowers had to travel, I
think that animals shouldn’t be ruled out as a possible explanation for the
presence of pollen. Many animals have the ability to move objects larger then
them, are resourceful with their surroundings and are adept at finding food
sources; all of these factors would have been applicable in the Shanidar cave.
What leaves me unsure is that Shanidar IV was found buried on top of the
remains of three other Neanderthals (Shanidar VI-VII, and VIII). To me, this
collection of bodies seems like a form of intentionality to me. The presence of
bodies in a ‘collective internment’ seems like an intentional, thought-out
disposal of the bodies. I read several sources that maintained that VI-VII had
to be rearranged in order to make room for IV. This to me seems like a sign of
intentionality, or at least a hint in the direction of a ‘conscious’ burial
practices. The fact that they were deliberately buried seems like enough
intentionality to make the whole flower debate a little bit superfluous.
While research has made it clear that very little can be known for sure when it comes to Neanderthal burials, I feel that it is important to keep the debate alive. Great arguments have been offered for both sides - and much of it seems to come down to differences in the interpretation of evidence. Although I understand that no strong evidence has proven intentional or purposeful Neanderthal burial, unusual findings in the archaeological record, such as non-local/special plants, dug-out depressions or pits housing single and multiple remains, and remains found in association with what appears to be meaningful grave goods, must be taken into account. On a side, personal note - if DNA information has indicated that our ancestors historically mated with Neanderthals, who is to say that Neanderthals were incapable of having similar trends and processes, such as burial, that we as humans practice? Burial, mourning, and meaningful association with the dead can be seen even in other animal communities (think elephants, crows, wolves, etc!) - maybe it's beneficial for our general knowledge moving forward to keep open minds and approach research as though most things are possible. The fact that we ended our project (so far) with more questions raised than answers, seems to me to coincide with what one might expect from most archaeological research - incredibly interesting evidence, left open to interpretation.
No comments:
Post a Comment