Neanderthals Were Smarter Than We Ever Realized

The more we learn about Neanderthals, the more we discover how smart they really were. It wasn't very long ago that the public and scientific perception of Homo neanderthalensis was unflattering, to say the least. But modern discoveries have revealed that this human species was far from the small-brained caveman archetype.

Neanderthals were a species of archaic human that lived between roughly 400,000 to 40,000 years ago. Their range included Europe, southwestern Asia, and central Asia. The overlap of that geographic spread during that timeline with our own isn't a coincidence. In fact, there's evidence that Neanderthals and Homo sapiens were so closely related that interbreeding could, and did, occur.

The overlap of the Neanderthals' history with our own also may explain their extinction. It appears that the disappearance of the Neanderthals' population coincided with the expansion of human beings into their historical hunting grounds. As Homo sapiens moved north and west, Homo neanderthalensis began to disappear.

Whether we outcompeted, slaughtered, or genetically merged with the Neanderthals is still up for debate. The most likely answer is a combination of all three. Nonetheless, evidence of Neanderthal intelligence points towards one of the last species of humans as being closer to our big-brained selves than we previously believed.

Art for art's sake seems to be a uniquely Homo sapiens endeavor, perhaps an extension of our large brains' capacity for abstract and creative thought. Other animals may engage in producing captivating creations, such as the great blue heron's eccentric mating dance, while others sing beautiful music, such as the many different nocturnal bird songs. However, almost all such seemingly artistic displays can be explained as utilitarian, with the purpose of attracting mates through flashy displays of virility.

Humans, on the other hand, seem to appreciate complex forms and sounds for no reason other than enjoying curiosities. But Homo neanderthalensis may have as well. A joint 2024 study by researchers from the University of Málaga and the University of Burgos describes a collection of marine fossils found among a Neanderthal dig site. Remarkably, the fossils apparently served no practical purpose. The conjecture is that Neanderthals collected fossils simply because they were cool.

It's possible that the fossils were kept to be used as ornaments, jewelry, money, or even toys. But whatever the reasons for the collection may have been, the artifacts' lack of an immediate practical function suggests the Neanderthal collectors recognized that these swirly little trinkets were unique and curious enough to save.

For us, placing an interesting-looking shell found on the beach into a pocket doesn't seem to be exceptionally intelligent behavior. But the inclination to collect curious things is actually a sign of the capacity for imagination. If Neanderthals went through the trouble of collecting such trinkets, they likely possessed the ability to appreciate other curiosities. 

A big question anthropologists face when studying Neanderthals is the degree to which Homo sapiens influenced the archeological record of Neanderthals. It's well-established that the two species interbred, as have several Homo species who interbred throughout the millennia. But how much Homo sapiens culture rubbed off onto Neanderthals? Fortunately, there were several millennia before the two species made contact where we can see what innovations Neanderthals cooked up on their own. And they all point to a culture of complex stone tools.

Neanderthals were big fans of meat. To acquire meat, they relied on complex hunting strategies to take down large game. Indeed, their diet alone suggests they would have manufactured sharp hunting weapons, but there's also an abundance of artifacts to support the idea. Spears, axes, and several other stone tools were crucial to the Neanderthals' livelihood, a material culture called the "Mousterian stone tool industry" that required sophisticated flaking techniques to hone their tools into predetermined forms.

But the tools of the Neanderthals weren't all used for violent purposes. Living in colder climates, Neanderthals were experts in tailoring clothing. Archaeologists have found scrapers, likely for cleaning hides, and awls for puncturing holes. Once pieces were cut to size, Neanderthals probably fastened them using other strips of hide or dried sinew to sew their garments.

Yet for all the tools and clothing employed by the Neanderthals, the biggest indication of intelligence may be their mastery of fire. Early fire-making tools aren't easily preserved in the fossil record, since such technology was usually friction-based like the wood-and-string bow drill. Nonetheless, there's evidence that Neanderthals regularly cooked their food and kept warm using controlled fire. Furthermore, the importance of fire for survival means it's fair to assume that Neanderthals were pioneers in chemistry.

Physical artifacts like stone tools can be preserved in the fossil record, but the ability to speak cannot be. The question whether Neanderthals possessed complex speech patterns can only be definitively answered with a time machine. Nonetheless, paleontological evidence, genetic science, and behavioral research can still provide strong clues to the question of Neanderthal language.

One argument for advanced Neanderthal language points to the archeological evidence of symbolic communication. Understanding symbols to have meaning beyond their literal interpretation is a strong indicator of advanced language, of which Neanderthals have plenty of examples. For one, Neanderthals buried their dead in ritualistic ways. They apparently ascribed meaning to funeral burials and symbolic objects placed among the deceased's remains, ultimately ascribing meaning to objects that had no other practical use besides their aesthetic value.

A famous 1971 study released from Philip Lieberman and Edmund S. Crelin sought to reconstruct their vocal tract based on Neanderthal fossils. The study concluded that unlike the vocal tract of modern humans and its larynx, the vocal tract of the Neanderthal was incapable of producing a wide range of distinct sounds. However, over a decade later, it was discovered that the Neanderthal possessed a hyoid bone, an important feature in the articulation of complex speech. 

Subsequent studies have further challenged Lieberman's proposal, pointing out assumptions and biases surrounding vocal tract morphology. However, the best indicators of Neanderthal language come from the evidence of Neanderthal culture itself. The archeological and fossil record points to a human species that lived in complex social structures, suggesting that Neanderthals not only communicated with each other, but also shared ideas and knowledge.

Another defining characteristic of human beings is our social skills. Even by 10 millennia ago, in life during the last ice age, our ancestors left behind clear indications of intimate social bonds — in fact, social ties seem to be a critical turning point in the timeline of human evolution. Yet while Neanderthals died out around 40,000 years ago, they still seem to have possessed social systems that were arguably just as complex as our own.

Neanderthals lived in family-sized groups, with around 10–30 members. That's slightly sparser compared to Homo sapiens groups of the time, but it's still roughly the same size as modern hunter-gatherer communities. It's fair to imagine Neanderthal bands as family-based migratory groups, where males and females were expected to contribute to the group responsibilities as soon as they were weaned off their mothers.

Here's the big picture: Neanderthal groups would have had to interact with other Neanderthal groups, likely creating a complex social system. Like the modern dating scene, a social hierarchy may have been based on reputation, power, success, and genetic robustness.

In other words, the social life of a Neanderthal was likely comparable to that of its contemporary Homo sapiens. Individuals had to support their family system, engage in social hierarchies, and uphold social expectations. Add to that the extensive evidence of support systems, such as individuals who survived debilitating injuries, which would only be possible through help from others, and you can see how this species lived a life dependent on a complex network of caring kin.