Widespread evidence for elephant exploitation by Last Interglacial Neanderthals on the North European plain

[Primum Sapienti]

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2309427120
December 4, 2023


Significance
We have recently learned that around 125,000 years
ago, hunting of straight-tusked elephants, the largest
terrestrial mammals of the Pleistocene, was part of
the Neanderthal behavioral repertoire, for several
dozens of generations. This knowledge is based on
data from one lake-side location in northern Europe
only, and hence possibly of limited value for our
knowledge of the Neanderthal niche. This new study
presents data from two other, contemporaneous sites
on the North European plain, demonstrating that
elephant exploitation was a widespread phenomenon
there. The sheer quantities of food generated by the
butchering activities, aimed at extensive exploitation
of the carcasses, suggest that Neanderthals had some
form of food preservation and/or at least temporarily
operated in larger groups than commonly acknowledged.


Abstract
Neanderthals hunted and butchered straight-tusked
elephants, the largest terrestrial mammals of the
Pleistocene, in a lake landscape on the North European
plain, 125,000 years ago, as recently shown by a study
of the Last Interglacial elephant assemblage from
Neumark-Nord (Germany). With evidence for a
remarkable focus on adult males and on their extended
utilization, the data from this location are thus far
without parallel in the archaeological record. Given their
relevance for our knowledge of the Neanderthal niche,
we investigated whether the Neumark-Nord subsistence
practices were more than a local phenomenon, possibly
determined by local characteristics. Analyzing elephant
remains from two other Last Interglacial archaeological
sites on the North European plain, Gröbern and Taubach,
we identified in both assemblages similar butchering
patterns as at Neumark-Nord, demonstrating that
extended elephant exploitation was a widespread
Neanderthal practice during the (early part of the) Last
Interglacial. The substantial efforts needed to process
these animals, weighing up to 13 metric tons, and the
large amounts of food generated suggest that
Neanderthals either had ways of storing vast amounts of
meat and fat and/or temporarily aggregated in larger
groups than commonly acknowledged. The data do not
allow us to rule out one of the two explanations, and
furthermore both factors, short-term larger group sizes
as well as some form of food preservation, may have
played a role. What the data do show is that exploitation
of large straight-tusked elephants was a widespread and
recurring phenomenon amongst Last Interglacial
Neanderthals on the North European plain.

[Marc Verhaegen]

Thanks!

Widespread evidence for elephant exploitation by Last Interglacial Neanderthals on the North European plain
Sabine Gaudzinski-Windheuser, Lutz Kindler & Wil Roebroeks 2023 PNAS 120 (50) e2309427120
doi org/10.1073/pnas.2309427120

Hn hunted & butchered straight-tusked elephants in a lake landscape on the N.European plain 125 ka,
this is recently shown by a study of the Last Interglacial elephant assemblage from Neumark-Nord, Germany.
With evidence for a remarkable focus on adult males & on their extended utilization, the data from this location are thus far without parallel in the archaeological record.
Given their relevance for our knowledge of the Hn niche, we investigated :
were the Neumark-N subsistence practices more than a local phenomenon, possibly determined by local characteristics?
We analyzed elephant remains from 2 other Last Interglacial archaeological sites on the N.uropean plain (Gröbern & Taubach):
we identified in both assemblages similar butchering patterns as at Neumark-N:
extended elephant exploitation was a widespread Hn practice during the (early part of the) Last Interglacial.
The substantial efforts needed to process these animals (up to 13 metric tons) & the large amounts of food generated suggest:
Hn either had ways of storing vast amounts of meat & fat, and/or temporarily aggregated in larger groups than commonly acknowledged.
The data do not allow us to rule out 1 of the 2 explanations,
both factors (short-term larger group sizes & some form of food preservation) may have played a role.
The data do show: exploitation of large straight-tusked elephants was a widespread & recurring phenomenon amongst Last Interglacial Hn on the N.Eur.plain.

Significance
We have recently learned: c 125 ka, hunting of straight-tusked elephants (the largest Pleistocene terrestrial mammals) was part of Hn behavioral repertoire, for several dozens of generations,
this is based on data from 1 lake-side location in N-Europe only: possibly of limited value for our knowledge of the Hn niche.
This new study presents data from 2 other, contemporaneous sites on the N.European plain:

elephant exploitation was a widespread phenomenon there.

The sheer quantities of food generated by the butchering activities, aimed at extensive exploitation of the carcasses, suggest:
Hn had some form of food preservation and/or at least temporarily operated in larger groups than commonly acknowledged.

___

:-)
This once more confirms our view, see discussions at a...@groups.io:
- Hn already had speech? cf. cooperation?
- Hn in lake landscape.

Hn fossilised at coasts & rivers & lakes: did they seasonally follow the salmon??
POS pachy-osteo-sclerosis He >> Hn >> Hs > apes-apiths.

H.erectus was more exclusively coastal, e.g.
at least 8 *independent* indications show Indonesian H.erectus often dived:
- POS = shallow-diving, esp.in salt water,
- auditory exostoses = colder water irrigation,
- enamel wear caused by shells+sand,
- island colonisations in SE.Asia,
- brain size++ = sea-food (DHA etc.),
- fossilisations amid barnacles-corals-shellfish...,
- shell engravings (S.Munro),
- stone use + extreme manual dexterity,
- ...
IOW, only incredibly stupid PAs still believe their ancestors ran after antelopes in Africa... :-DDD

[JTEM is so reasonable]

Primum Sapienti wrote:

> We have recently learned that around 125,000 years
> ago, hunting of straight-tusked elephants, the largest
> terrestrial mammals of the Pleistocene, was part of
> the Neanderthal behavioral repertoire, for several
> dozens of generations. This knowledge is based on
> data from one lake-side location in northern Europe
> only, and hence possibly of limited value for our
> knowledge of the Neanderthal niche. This new study
> presents data from two other, contemporaneous sites
> on the North European plain, demonstrating that
> elephant exploitation was a widespread phenomenon
> there. The sheer quantities of food generated by the
> butchering activities, aimed at extensive exploitation
> of the carcasses, suggest that Neanderthals had some
> form of food preservation and/or at least temporarily
> operated in larger groups than commonly acknowledged.

Scavenging.

Why not?

Seems incredibly obvious yet nobody wants to so much
as entertain the possibility.

Everything dies. Not everything is killed. And even if an
elephant or a mammoth isn't killed it still eventually dies.

If a population is stable then roughly one dies for every
one that is born. Roughly.

And you're into the putrid meat thing so, who cares if
they didn't find it under a week later?



-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/740429495655432192

[Primum Sapienti]

JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>
>> We have recently learned that around 125,000 years
>> ago, hunting of straight-tusked elephants, the largest
>> terrestrial mammals of the Pleistocene, was part of
>> the Neanderthal behavioral repertoire, for several
>> dozens of generations. This knowledge is based on
>> data from one lake-side location in northern Europe
>> only, and hence possibly of limited value for our
>> knowledge of the Neanderthal niche. This new study
>> presents data from two other, contemporaneous sites
>> on the North European plain, demonstrating that
>> elephant exploitation was a widespread phenomenon
>> there. The sheer quantities of food generated by the
>> butchering activities, aimed at extensive exploitation
>> of the carcasses, suggest that Neanderthals had some
>> form of food preservation and/or at least temporarily
>> operated in larger groups than commonly acknowledged.
>
> Scavenging.

They did both. Why not? mv thinks all animals that
early hominids had drowned.

> Why not?
>
> Seems incredibly obvious yet nobody wants to so much
> as entertain the possibility.

Oh? Even carnivores are not above scavenging. No
one turns up a free meal.

> Everything dies. Not everything is killed. And even if an
> elephant or a mammoth isn't killed it still eventually dies.
>
> If a population is stable then roughly one dies for every
> one that is born. Roughly.

Not true. What about a creature that has muliple young?

> And you're into the putrid meat thing so, who cares if
> they didn't find it under a week later?

"didn't find it under a week later"?

See earlier posts on this

https://groups.google.com/g/sci.anthropology.paleo/c/0wIt0CHkcXI/m/XJIWJF8lAQAJ

https://groups.google.com/g/sci.anthropology.paleo/c/mCotqCTMgAk/m/b6YcKnc-BgAJ

[JTEM is so reasonable]

Primum Sapienti wrote:

> > Scavenging.

> They did both.

Maybe.

> Why not?

Wrong question.

> > Seems incredibly obvious yet nobody wants to so much
> > as entertain the possibility.

> Oh? Even carnivores are not above scavenging.

Yet YOU and YOUR CITE say it was hunting. Not scavenging.

> No
> one turns up a free meal.

And yet your cite says, "Oh! They ate an elephant. That means
they hunted them."

> > Everything dies. Not everything is killed. And even if an
> > elephant or a mammoth isn't killed it still eventually dies.
> >
> > If a population is stable then roughly one dies for every
> > one that is born. Roughly.

> Not true.

Of course it's true. It would be either growing or shrinking if
it weren't.

> What about a creature that has muliple young?

If it's a stable population then roughly one dies for every one
born, exactly like I already said.

And thank you for the cites. Totally random, as always. No
apparent connect to any point you're attempting to make or
refute, as usual.





-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/741355563147984896

[Primum Sapienti]

JTEM is so reasonable wrote:

> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>
>>> Scavenging.
>
>> They did both.
>
> Maybe.

They had to hunt. Northern latitudes get colder in
winter. They need food and shelter. Do you expect
they chopped holes in ice to get fish or clams?

Hint - hunters/gatherers

You cannot exploit cold climes without hunting.

>> Why not?
>
> Wrong question.

Wrong answer.

>>> Seems incredibly obvious yet nobody wants to so much
>>> as entertain the possibility.
>
>> Oh? Even carnivores are not above scavenging.
>
> Yet YOU and YOUR CITE say it was hunting. Not scavenging.

Yet YOU say they couldn't hunt!

>> No
>> one turns up a free meal.
>
> And yet your cite says, "Oh! They ate an elephant. That means
> they hunted them."

And yet up make up quotes!

>>> Everything dies. Not everything is killed. And even if an
>>> elephant or a mammoth isn't killed it still eventually dies.
>>>
>>> If a population is stable then roughly one dies for every
>>> one that is born. Roughly.
>
>> Not true.
>
> Of course it's true. It would be either growing or shrinking if
> it weren't.

Never heard of twins?

>> What about a creature that has muliple young?
>
> If it's a stable population then roughly one dies for every one
> born, exactly like I already said.

By that "logic", how do they reacha stable population
without growing?

> And thank you for the cites. Totally random, as always. No
> apparent connect to any point you're attempting to make or
> refute, as usual.

You wrote

"And you're into the putrid meat thing so, who cares if
they didn't find it under a week later? "

So here they are again:

https://groups.google.com/g/sci.anthropology.paleo/c/0wIt0CHkcXI/m/XJIWJF8lAQAJ
"Putrid meat was quite likely on the menu"


https://groups.google.com/g/sci.anthropology.paleo/c/mCotqCTMgAk/m/b6YcKnc-BgAJ
Indigenous groups relish(ed) rotted meat


A free meal is not passed up. GO back to film school.