dw.com
43,000-Year-Old Neanderthal Handprint Found in Spain
A team of Spanish scientists discovered a 43,000-year-old ochre handprint on a granite pebble in Segovia, Spain, the oldest known example of European mobiliary art, providing evidence of Neanderthal symbolic thought and challenging previous assumptions about their cognitive abilities.
- What is the significance of the 43,000-year-old Neanderthal handprint discovered in Spain?
- A 43,000-year-old handprint, identified as belonging to a male Neanderthal aged 18–25, has been discovered on a granite pebble in Segovia, Spain. This finding, published in *Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences*, represents the oldest known example of European mobiliary art and provides strong evidence of Neanderthal symbolic thought.
- How does the discovery of "Perico" contribute to our understanding of Neanderthal cognitive abilities?
- The handprint, discovered at the Abrigo de San Lázaro site, was intentionally applied using ochre pigment. Analysis using X-ray fluorescence, electron microscopy, and 3D scanning confirmed the age and origin of the print. The intentional nature of the marking, coupled with the selection of the pebble for its shape, demonstrates advanced cognitive abilities in Neanderthals.
- What are the potential implications of this discovery for future research on Neanderthal culture and behavior?
- This discovery challenges previous assumptions about Neanderthal cognitive capabilities. The intentional creation of art, as evidenced by "Perico," suggests a capacity for abstract thought and symbolic expression previously underestimated. Future research focusing on similar sites may reveal further examples of Neanderthal artistic and symbolic behavior, enriching our understanding of their culture.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The headline and introduction emphasize the stone's status as the "oldest object of mobiliary art in Europe." This framing immediately positions the discovery as highly significant and groundbreaking, potentially influencing the reader's perception before presenting the full details of the analysis. The article heavily features quotes from the researchers themselves, bolstering the narrative of the discovery's importance. The naming of the stone as "Perico" adds a playful, almost celebratory tone, which may subtly bias the reader toward a positive assessment of the findings.
Language Bias
The language used is largely descriptive and informative. However, terms like "alucinante" (amazing/mind-blowing) and phrases highlighting the discovery's 'uniqueness' and 'groundbreaking' nature contribute to a celebratory and potentially hyperbolic tone that could influence reader perception. While these are used sparingly, they lean away from strict neutrality. Suggesting more neutral alternatives, such as 'remarkable' or 'significant', would improve the objectivity of the piece.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the discovery and analysis of the stone, providing rich detail about the scientific methods used. However, it omits discussion of alternative interpretations or dissenting viewpoints regarding the significance of the findings. While acknowledging space constraints is reasonable, including a brief mention of potential counterarguments would have strengthened the objectivity of the report.
False Dichotomy
The article presents the interpretation of the stone as a deliberate act of symbolic expression as the primary and almost sole explanation. It does not extensively explore alternative explanations for the ocher mark or the selection of the stone, thus creating a false dichotomy between intentional symbolism and purely accidental markings.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article focuses on an archeological finding and does not directly relate to poverty.