Latest news with #AnaëlleJallon
The Guardian
3 days ago
- Science
- The Guardian
Even Neanderthals had distinct preferences when it came to making dinner, study suggests
Nothing turns up the heat in a kitchen quite like debating the best way to chop an onion. Now researchers have found even our prehistoric cousins had distinct preferences when it came to preparing food. Archaeologists studying animal bones recovered from two caves in northern Israel have found different groups of Neanderthals, living around the same time, butchered the same animals in different ways. 'It means that within all the Neanderthal population, you have several distinct groups that have distinct ways of doing things, even for activities that are so related to survival,' said Anaëlle Jallon, the first author of the research, from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Writing in the journal Frontiers in Environmental Archeology, Jallon and colleagues report how they studied cut marks on 249 bone fragments from between 70,000 and 50,000 years ago from Amud cave, and 95 bone fragments dating to between 60,000 and 50,000 years ago from Kebara cave. The caves are about 70km apart and both were occupied by Neanderthals during the winters. Both groups are known to have used similar flint-based tools. The team's analysis of the bones fragments – which were recovered from the caves in the 1990s – confirmed previous findings that burned and fragmented samples were more common in Amud cave, and that both groups had a similar diet featuring animals including mountain gazelles and fallow deer. But it also provided fresh insights, including that bones from larger animals such as aurochs were more commonly found at Kebara cave. However, Jallon noted it could be that the samples at Kebara were easier to identify, or that Neanderthals at Amud might have butchered such animals elsewhere. Jallon and colleagues carried out a detailed analysis of the cut marks on 43 and 34 bone samples from Amud and Kebara caves respectively, finding a number of differences in the cut marks between the two sites. While the researchers say some of the variation related to the type of animal – or body part – being butchered, these factors did not explain all of the differences. 'Even when we compare only the gazelles, and only the long bones of gazelles, we find a higher density of cut marks in [bones from] Amud, with more cut marks that are crossing each other, [and] less cut marks that are straight lines, but more [curved],' said Jallon. The team suggest a number of possible explanations, including that different groups of Neanderthals had different butchery techniques, involved a different number of individuals when butchering a carcass, or butchered meat in different states of decay. 'It's either, like, food preferences that lead to different ways of preparing meat and then cutting it, or just differences in the way they learn how to cut meat,' said Jallon. Dr Matt Pope, of University College London, who was not involved in the work, said the study added to research showing different Neanderthal groups had different ways of making tools, and sometimes used different toolkits. 'These aren't just cut marks being studied, these are the gestures and movements of the Neanderthal people themselves, as evocative to us as footprints or hand marks on a cave wall,' he said. 'Future research will help to discern between the alternative [explanations for the variations], but the study as it stands is a powerful reminder that there is no monolithic neanderthal culture and that the population contained multiple groups at different times and places, living in the same landscape, with perhaps quite different ways of life.'
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Science
- Yahoo
Did Neanderthals have 'family recipes'? Study suggests butchery practices in ancient groups
Their meticulous examination of cut-marks on the remains of animal prey revealed patterns that cannot be explained by differences in skill, resources, or available tools at each site. New research into the butchery practices of Neanderthals living in two nearby caves in northern Israel between 50,000 and 60,000 years ago suggests surprisingly distinct food preparation methods, hinting at the possibility of early cultural traditions being passed down through generations. Despite living only 70 kilometers apart and utilizing the same tools and prey, the Neanderthals of Amud and Kebara caves appear to have processed their food in visibly different ways, according to a study led by Anaëlle Jallon from the Institute ofArchaeology at Hebrew University. The study, published in Frontiers in Environmental Archaeology, involved collaboration with colleagues Lucille Crete and Silvia Bello from the Natural History Museum of London, under the supervision of Hebrew University's Prof. Rivka Rabinovich and Prof. Erella Hovers. Their meticulous examination of cut-marks on the remains of animal prey revealed patterns that cannot be explained by differences in skill, resources, or available tools at each site. 'The subtle differences in cut-mark patterns between Amud and Kebara may reflect local traditions of animal carcass processing,' stated Anaëlle Jallon, a PhD candidate at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the lead author. She added, 'Even though Neanderthals at these two sites shared similar living conditions and faced comparable challenges, they seem to have developed distinct butchery strategies, possibly passed down through social learning and cultural traditions." Were Neanderthal butchery techniques were standardized Jallon emphasized the unique opportunity these two sites present: 'These two sites give us a unique opportunity to explore whether Neanderthal butchery techniques were standardized. If butchery techniques varied between sites or time periods, this would imply that factors such as cultural traditions, cooking preferences, or social organization influenced even subsistence-related activities such as butchering.' Both Amud and Kebara caves were occupied by Neanderthals during the winters, leaving behind not just food remains but also burials, stone tools, and hearths. The two groups relied on similar diets, predominantly gazelles and fallow deer, and used identical flint tools. However, subtle distinctions emerged from the archaeological record. Neanderthals at Kebara appear to have hunted more large prey and more frequently transported large kills back to the cave for butchering, rather than processing them at the kill site. Further differences in bone remains provided clues: at Amud, 40% of the animal bones were burned and highly fragmented, potentially due to cooking or post-depositional damage. In contrast, only 9% of the bones at Kebara were burned, less fragmented, and believed to have been cooked. Additionally, bones from Amud showed less evidence of carnivore damage compared to those found at Kebara. To investigate these variations in food preparation, the research team meticulously examined cut-marked bones from contemporaneous layers at both sites, using both macroscopic and microscopic analysis. They recorded various characteristics of the cut-marks, hypothesizing that similar patterns would suggest consistent butchery practices, while differing patterns would point to distinct cultural traditions. The analysis revealed that while the cut-marks were clear, intact, and largely unaffected by later damage, and their profiles, angles, and surface widths were similar (likely due to the shared toolkits), the cut-marks at Amud were more densely packed and less linear in shape than those at Kebara. The researchers explored several hypotheses for these observed patterns. They ruled out explanations based on different prey species or bone types, as the differences persisted even when comparing only the long bones of small ungulates found at both sites. Experimental archaeology also indicated that the variations couldn't be attributed to less skilled butchers or more intensive butchering to maximize food yield. Instead, the evidence strongly suggested that the differing cut-mark patterns were a result of deliberate butchery choices made by each Neanderthal group. One compelling explanation proposed by the researchers is that the Amud Neanderthals might have been pre-treating their meat before butchering. This could involve drying the meat or allowing it to decompose, similar to how modern butchers hang meat. Decaying meat is known to be more challenging to process, which would explain the greater intensity and less linear nature of the cut-marks observed at Amud. Another possibility is that differences in group organization, such as the number of individuals involved in butchering a single kill, played a role. However, further research is needed to fully explore these intriguing possibilities. "There are some limitations to consider,' Jallon acknowledged. 'The bone fragments are sometimes too small to provide a complete picture of the butchery marks left on the carcass. While we have made efforts to correct for biases caused by fragmentation, this may limit our ability to fully interpret the data." She concluded, "Future studies, including more experimental work and comparative analyses, will be crucial for addressing these uncertainties — and maybe one day reconstructing Neanderthals' recipes.' Solve the daily Crossword
