In the social sciences, value theory
involves various approaches that examine how, why, and to what degree
humans value things and whether the object or subject of valuing is a
person, idea, object, or anything else. Within philosophy, it is also known as ethics or axiology.
Traditionally, philosophical investigations in value theory have sought to understand the concept of "the good". Today, some work in value theory has trended more towards empirical sciences, recording what people do value and attempting to understand why they value it in the context of psychology, sociology, and economics.
In ecological economics,
value theory is separated into two types: donor-type value and
receiver-type value. Ecological economists tend to believe that 'real
wealth' needs an accrual-determined value as a measure of what things
were needed to make an item or generate a service (H. T. Odum, Environmental Accounting: Emergy and environmental decision-making, 1996).
At the general level, there is a difference between moral and
natural goods. Moral goods are those that have to do with the conduct of
persons, usually leading to praise or blame. Natural goods, on the
other hand, have to do with objects, not persons. For example, the
statement "Mary is a good person" uses 'good' very differently than in
the statement "That is good food".
Ethics is mainly focused on moral goods rather than natural
goods, while economics has a concern in what is economically good for
the society but not an individual person and is also interested in
natural goods. However, both moral and natural goods are equally
relevant to goodness and value theory, which is more general in scope.
It is useful to distinguish between instrumental and intrinsic values. This distinction is based on the distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic properties. First introduced by Plato
in the "Republic", an instrumental value is worth having as a means for
getting something else that is good (e.g., a radio is instrumentally
good in order to hear music). An intrinsically valuable thing, by
contrast, is worth having for itself, not as a means to something else.
Intrinsic and instrumental goods do not constitute mutually
exclusive categories: some things can be found to be both good (in
themselves) while simultaneously being good for getting other things
that have value.
A prominent argument in environmental ethics, made by writers like Aldo Leopold and Holmes Rolston III,
is that wild nature and healthy ecosystems have intrinsic value, prior
to and apart from their instrumental value as resources for humans, and
should therefore be preserved. This line of argument has been
articulated further in recent years by Canadian philosopher John McMurtry within the Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems published by UNESCO.
John Dewey (1859-1952) in his book Theory of Valuation, says goodness is the outcome of ethic valuation
and a continuous balancing of "ends in view". An end in view is said to
be an objective potentially adopted, which may be refined or rejected
based on its consistency with other objectives or as a means to
objectives already held.
Dewey's empiricist approach evinces absolute intrinsic value denial;
i.e. not accepting intrinsic value as an inherent or enduring property
of things. Instead, Dewey sees the appearance of intrinsic value as an
illusory product of our continuous valuative activity as purposive
beings. In addition to denying categorically that there is anything like
intrinsic value, Dewey held the same position with regard to moral
values - for Dewey, moral values are also based on a learning process,
and are never intrinsic or absolute.
Another contribution of pragmatism to value theory is the idea of contributory goods with a contributory conditionality.
These have the same qualities as the good thing, but need some emergent
property of a whole state-of-affairs in order to be good. For example,
salt is food on its own, but is far better as part of a prepared meal.
In other words, such goods are only "good" when certain conditions are
met. This is in contrast to other goods, which may be considered "good"
in a wider variety of situations.
Kant: hypothetical and categorical goods
The thinking of Immanuel Kant greatly influenced moral philosophy. He thought of moral value as a unique and universally identifiable property, as an absolute value rather than a relative value.
He showed that many practical goods are good only in states-of-affairs
described by a sentence containing an "if" clause, e.g., in the
sentence, "Sunshine is only good if you do not live in the desert."
Further, the "if" clause often described the category in which the
judgment was made (art, science, etc.). Kant described these as
"hypothetical goods", and tried to find a "categorical" good that would
operate across all categories of judgment without depending on an
"if-then" clause.
An influential result of Kant's search was the idea of a good will being the only intrinsic good. Moreover, Kant saw a good will as acting in accordance with a moral command, the "Categorical Imperative": "Act according to those maxims that you could will to be universal law." but should not be confused with the Ethic of Reciprocity or Golden Rule, e.g. Mt. 7:12.
Whereas the golden rule states that "One should treat others as one
would like others to treat oneself," Kant asks us to analyze whether an
act can be performed simultaneously by everyone without exception. For
example, murder cannot be performed simultaneously by everyone, one set
of people would have to live and the other die. That disparity is an
exception. The act cannot be performed without exception, therefore it
fails the categorical imperative. Contrast this with the golden rule
which is subjective to the individual. Following the logic of the golden
rule, if I wanted someone to kill me, then it would be acceptable for
me to kill others, because I would be doing to others what I would want
done to me. This is very important to keep in mind, because Kant's
categorical imperative avoids this flaw. From this, and a few other
axioms, Kant developed a moral system that would apply to any
"praiseworthy person".
Kantian philosophers believe that any general definition of
goodness must define goods that are categorical in the sense that Kant
intended.
In sociology, value theory is concerned with personal values which
are popularly held by a community, and how those values might change
under particular conditions. Different groups of people may hold or
prioritize different kinds of values influencing social behavior.
Methods of study range from questionnaire surveys to participant
observation.
Values can be socially attributed. What the community perceives as of
paramount significance to them denotes or decipher their social
attributes.
Economic analysis emphasizes goods sought in a market and tends to use the consumer's choices as evidence (revealed preference) that various products are of economic value. In this view, religious or political struggle over what "goods" are available in the marketplace is inevitable, and consensus
on some core questions about body and society and ecosystems affected
by the transaction, are outside the market's goods so long as they are
unowned.
However, some natural goods seem to also be moral goods. For
example, those things that are owned by a person may be said to be
natural goods, but over which a particular individual(s) may have moral
claims. So it is necessary to make another distinction: between moral and non-moral goods.
A non-moral good is something that is desirable for someone or other;
despite the name to the contrary, it may include moral goods. A moral
good is anything which an actor is considered to be morally obligated to
strive toward.
When discussing non-moral goods, one may make a useful distinction between inherently serviced and material goods in the marketplace (or its exchange value), versus perceived intrinsic and experiential goods to the buyer. A strict service economy model takes pains to distinguish between the goods and service guarantees to the market, and that of the service and experience to the consumer.
Sometimes, moral and natural goods can conflict. The value of natural "goods" is challenged by such issues as addiction.
The issue of addiction also brings up the distinction between economic
and moral goods, where an economic good is whatever stimulates economic growth. For instance, some claim that cigarettes are a "good" in the economic sense, as their production can employ tobacco growers and doctors who treat lung cancer. Many people would agree that cigarette smoking is not morally "good", nor naturally
"good," but still recognize that it is economically good, which means,
it has exchange value, even though it may have a negative public good or even be bad for a person's body (not the same as "bad for the person" necessarily – consider the issue of suicide).
In ecological economics
value theory is separated into two types: donor-type value and
receiver-type value. Ecological economists tend to believe that 'real
wealth' needs a donor-determined value as a measure of what things were
needed to make an item or generate a service (H. T. Odum, Environmental Accounting: Emergy and environmental decision-making,
1996). An example of receiver-type value is 'market value', or
'willingness to pay', the principal method of accounting used in
neo-classical economics. In contrast, both Marx's labour theory of value and the emergy
concept are conceived as donor-type value. Emergy theorists believe
that this conception of value has relevance to all of philosophy,
economics, sociology and psychology as well as Environmental Science.
Silvio Gesell
denied value theory in economics. He thought that value theory is
useless and prevents economics from becoming science and that a currency
administration guided by value theory is doomed to sterility and
inactivity.
Humans acquire culture through the learning processes of enculturation and socialization, which is shown by the diversity of cultures across societies.
A cultural norm
codifies acceptable conduct in society; it serves as a guideline for
behavior, dress, language, and demeanor in a situation, which serves as a
template for expectations in a social group.
Accepting only a monoculture
in a social group can bear risks, just as a single species can wither
in the face of environmental change, for lack of functional responses to
the change.
Thus in military culture, valor
is counted a typical behavior for an individual and duty, honor, and
loyalty to the social group are counted as virtues or functional
responses in the continuum of conflict. In the practice of religion, analogous attributes can be identified in a social group.
Description
Pygmy music has been polyphonic well before their discovery by non-African explorers of the Baka, Aka, Efe,
and other foragers of the Central African forests, in the 1200s, which
is at least 200 years before polyphony developed in Europe. Note the
multiple lines of singers and dancers. The motifs are independent, with
theme and variation interweaving. This type of music is thought to be the first expression of polyphony in world music.
In the humanities,
one sense of culture as an attribute of the individual has been the
degree to which they have cultivated a particular level of
sophistication in the arts, sciences, education, or manners. The level of cultural sophistication has also sometimes been used to distinguish civilizations from less complex societies. Such hierarchical perspectives on culture are also found in class-based distinctions between a high culture of the social elite and a low culture, popular culture, or folk culture of the lower classes, distinguished by the stratified access to cultural capital. In common parlance, culture is often used to refer specifically to the symbolic markers used by ethnic groups to distinguish themselves visibly from each other such as body modification, clothing or jewelry. Mass culture refers to the mass-produced and mass mediated forms of consumer culture that emerged in the 20th century. Some schools of philosophy, such as Marxism and critical theory, have argued that culture is often used politically as a tool of the elites to manipulate the proletariat and create a false consciousness. Such perspectives are common in the discipline of cultural studies. In the wider social sciences, the theoretical perspective of cultural materialism
holds that human symbolic culture arises from the material conditions
of human life, as humans create the conditions for physical survival,
and that the basis of culture is found in evolved biological dispositions.
When used as a count noun, a "culture" is the set of customs, traditions,
and values of a society or community, such as an ethnic group or
nation. Culture is the set of knowledge acquired over time. In this
sense, multiculturalism
values the peaceful coexistence and mutual respect between different
cultures inhabiting the same planet. Sometimes "culture" is also used to
describe specific practices within a subgroup of a society, a subculture (e.g. "bro culture"), or a counterculture. Within cultural anthropology, the ideology and analytical stance of cultural relativism
hold that cultures cannot easily be objectively ranked or evaluated
because any evaluation is necessarily situated within the value system
of a given culture.
Etymology
The modern term "culture" is based on a term used by the ancient Roman orator Cicero in his Tusculanae Disputationes, where he wrote of a cultivation of the soul or "cultura animi," using an agriculturalmetaphor for the development of a philosophical soul, understood teleologically as the highest possible ideal for human development. Samuel Pufendorf
took over this metaphor in a modern context, meaning something similar,
but no longer assuming that philosophy was man's natural perfection.
His use, and that of many writers after him, "refers to all the ways in which human beings overcome their original barbarism, and through artifice, become fully human."
In 1986, philosopher Edward S. Casey wrote, "The very word culture meant 'place tilled' in Middle English, and the same word goes back to Latin colere, 'to inhabit, care for, till, worship' and cultus,
'A cult, especially a religious one.' To be cultural, to have a
culture, is to inhabit a place sufficiently intensely to cultivate it—to
be responsible for it, to respond to it, to attend to it caringly."
...
originally meant the cultivation of the soul or mind, acquires most of
its later modern meaning in the writings of the 18th-century German
thinkers, who were on various levels developing Rousseau's criticism of "modernliberalism and Enlightenment." Thus a contrast between "culture" and "civilization" is usually implied in these authors, even when not expressed as such.
In the words of anthropologist E.B. Tylor,
it is "that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art,
morals, law, custom and any other capabilities and habits acquired by
man as a member of society."
Alternatively, in a contemporary variant, "Culture is defined as a
social domain that emphasizes the practices, discourses and material
expressions, which, over time, express the continuities and
discontinuities of social meaning of a life held in common.
The Cambridge English Dictionary
states that culture is "the way of life, especially the general customs
and beliefs, of a particular group of people at a particular time." Terror management theory
posits that culture is a series of activities and worldviews that
provide humans with the basis for perceiving themselves as "person[s] of
worth within the world of meaning"—raising themselves above the merely
physical aspects of existence, in order to deny the animal
insignificance and death that Homo sapiens became aware of when they acquired a larger brain.
The word is used in a general sense as the evolved ability to categorize and represent experiences with symbols and to act imaginatively and creatively. This ability arose with the evolution of behavioral modernity
in humans around 50,000 years ago and is often thought to be unique to
humans. However, some other species have demonstrated similar, though
much less complicated, abilities for social learning. It is also used to
denote the complex networks of practices and accumulated knowledge and
ideas that are transmitted through social interaction and exist in specific human groups, or cultures, using the plural form.
The Beatles
exemplified changing cultural dynamics, not only in music, but fashion
and lifestyle. Over a half century after their emergence, they continue
to have a worldwide cultural impact.
It has been estimated from archaeological data that the human
capacity for cumulative culture emerged somewhere between
500,000–170,000 years ago.
Cultural invention
has come to mean any innovation that is new and found to be useful to a
group of people and expressed in their behavior but which does not
exist as a physical object. Humanity is in a global "accelerating
culture change period," driven by the expansion of international
commerce, the mass media, and above all, the human population explosion, among other factors. Culture repositioning means the reconstruction of the cultural concept of a society.
Full-length profile portrait of a Turkmen woman, standing on a carpet at the entrance to a yurt, dressed in traditional clothing and jewelry
Cultures are internally affected by both forces encouraging change
and forces resisting change. These forces are related to both social structures and natural events, and are involved in the perpetuation of cultural ideas and practices within current structures, which themselves are subject to change.
Social conflict and the development of technologies can produce
changes within a society by altering social dynamics and promoting new cultural models, and spurring or enabling generative action. These social shifts may accompany ideological shifts and other types of cultural change. For example, the U.S. feminist movement
involved new practices that produced a shift in gender relations,
altering both gender and economic structures. Environmental conditions
may also enter as factors. For example, after tropical forests returned
at the end of the last ice age, plants suitable for domestication were available, leading to the invention of agriculture, which in turn brought about many cultural innovations and shifts in social dynamics.
Cultures are externally affected via contact between societies,
which may also produce—or inhibit—social shifts and changes in cultural
practices. War or competition over resources may impact technological
development or social dynamics. Additionally, cultural ideas may
transfer from one society to another, through diffusion or
acculturation. In diffusion,
the form of something (though not necessarily its meaning) moves from
one culture to another. For example, Western restaurant chains and
culinary brands sparked curiosity and fascination to the Chinese as
China opened its economy to international trade in the late
20th-century.
"Stimulus diffusion" (the sharing of ideas) refers to an element of one
culture leading to an invention or propagation in another. "Direct
borrowing," on the other hand, tends to refer to technological or
tangible diffusion from one culture to another. Diffusion of innovations theory presents a research-based model of why and when individuals and cultures adopt new ideas, practices, and products.
Acculturation
has different meanings. Still, in this context, it refers to the
replacement of traits of one culture with another, such as what happened
to certain Native American tribes and many indigenous peoples across the globe during the process of colonization. Related processes on an individual level include assimilation (adoption of a different culture by an individual) and transculturation.
The transnational flow of culture has played a major role in merging
different cultures and sharing thoughts, ideas, and beliefs.
Early modern discourses
German Romanticism
Johann Herder called attention to national cultures.
Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) formulated an individualist definition of "enlightenment" similar to the concept of bildung: "Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-incurred immaturity."
He argued that this immaturity comes not from a lack of understanding,
but from a lack of courage to think independently. Against this
intellectual cowardice, Kant urged: Sapere Aude, "Dare to be wise!" In reaction to Kant, German scholars such as Johann Gottfried Herder
(1744–1803) argued that human creativity, which necessarily takes
unpredictable and highly diverse forms, is as important as human
rationality. Moreover, Herder proposed a collective form of Bildung:
"For Herder, Bildung was the totality of experiences that provide a
coherent identity, and sense of common destiny, to a people."
Adolf Bastian developed a universal model of culture.
In 1795, the Prussian linguist and philosopher Wilhelm von Humboldt (1767–1835) called for an anthropology that would synthesize Kant's and Herder's interests. During the Romantic era, scholars in Germany, especially those concerned with nationalist
movements—such as the nationalist struggle to create a "Germany" out of
diverse principalities, and the nationalist struggles by ethnic
minorities against the Austro-Hungarian Empire—developed a more inclusive notion of culture as "worldview" (Weltanschauung).
According to this school of thought, each ethnic group has a distinct
worldview that is incommensurable with the worldviews of other groups.
Although more inclusive than earlier views, this approach to culture
still allowed for distinctions between "civilized" and "primitive" or
"tribal" cultures.
In 1860, Adolf Bastian (1826–1905) argued for "the psychic unity of mankind."
He proposed that a scientific comparison of all human societies would
reveal that distinct worldviews consisted of the same basic elements.
According to Bastian, all human societies share a set of "elementary
ideas" (Elementargedanken); different cultures, or different "folk ideas" (Völkergedanken), are local modifications of the elementary ideas. This view paved the way for the modern understanding of culture. Franz Boas (1858–1942) was trained in this tradition, and he brought it with him when he left Germany for the United States.
English Romanticism
British poet and critic Matthew Arnold viewed "culture" as the cultivation of the humanist ideal.
In the 19th century, humanists such as English poet and essayist Matthew Arnold
(1822–1888) used the word "culture" to refer to an ideal of individual
human refinement, of "the best that has been thought and said in the
world." This concept of culture is also comparable to the German concept of bildung: "...culture being a pursuit of our total perfection by means of getting to know, on all the matters which most concern us, the best which has been thought and said in the world."
In practice, culture referred to an elite ideal and was associated with such activities as art, classical music, and haute cuisine. As these forms were associated with urban life, "culture" was identified with "civilization" (from lat. civitas, city). Another facet of the Romantic movement was an interest in folklore, which led to identifying a "culture" among non-elites. This distinction is often characterized as that between high culture, namely that of the rulingsocial group, and low culture.
In other words, the idea of "culture" that developed in Europe during
the 18th and early 19th centuries reflected inequalities within European
societies.
British anthropologist Edward Tylor was one of the first English-speaking scholars to use the term culture in an inclusive and universal sense.
Matthew Arnold contrasted "culture" with anarchy; other Europeans, following philosophersThomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, contrasted "culture" with "the state of nature." According to Hobbes and Rousseau, the Native Americans
who were being conquered by Europeans from the 16th centuries on were
living in a state of nature; this opposition was expressed through the
contrast between "civilized" and "uncivilized."
According to this way of thinking, one could classify some countries
and nations as more civilized than others and some people as more
cultured than others. This contrast led to Herbert Spencer's theory of Social Darwinism and Lewis Henry Morgan's theory of cultural evolution.
Just as some critics have argued that the distinction between high and
low cultures is an expression of the conflict between European elites
and non-elites, other critics have argued that the distinction between
civilized and uncivilized people is an expression of the conflict
between European colonial powers and their colonial subjects.
Other 19th-century critics, following Rousseau, have accepted
this differentiation between higher and lower culture, but have seen the
refinement and sophistication
of high culture as corrupting and unnatural developments that obscure
and distort people's essential nature. These critics considered folk music
(as produced by "the folk," i.e., rural, illiterate, peasants) to
honestly express a natural way of life, while classical music seemed
superficial and decadent. Equally, this view often portrayed indigenous peoples as "noble savages" living authentic and unblemished lives, uncomplicated and uncorrupted by the highly stratified capitalist systems of the West.
In 1870 the anthropologist Edward Tylor (1832–1917) applied these ideas of higher versus lower culture to propose a theory of the evolution of religion. According to this theory, religion evolves from more polytheistic to more monotheistic forms.
In the process, he redefined culture as a diverse set of activities
characteristic of all human societies. This view paved the way for the
modern understanding of religion.
Anthropology
Petroglyphs in modern-day Gobustan, Azerbaijan, dating back to 10,000 BCE and indicating a thriving culture
Although anthropologists worldwide refer to Tylor's definition of culture, in the 20th century "culture" emerged as the central and unifying concept of American anthropology, where it most commonly refers to the universal human capacity to classify and encode human experiencessymbolically, and to communicate symbolically encoded experiences socially. American anthropology is organized into four fields, each of which plays an important role in research on culture: biological anthropology, linguistic anthropology, cultural anthropology, and in the United States and Canada, archaeology. The term Kulturbrille, or "culture glasses," coined by German American anthropologist Franz Boas, refers to the "lenses" through which we see our own countries. Martin Lindstrom asserts that Kulturbrille, which allow us to make sense of the culture we inhabit, also "can blind us to things outsiders pick up immediately."
The sociology of culture concerns culture as manifested in society. For sociologist Georg Simmel
(1858–1918), culture referred to "the cultivation of individuals
through the agency of external forms which have been objectified in the
course of history." As such, culture in the sociological
field can be defined as the ways of thinking, the ways of acting, and
the material objects that together shape a people's way of life. Culture
can be any of two types, non-material culture or material culture.
Non-material culture refers to the non-physical ideas that individuals
have about their culture, including values, belief systems, rules,
norms, morals, language, organizations, and institutions, while material
culture is the physical evidence of a culture in the objects and
architecture they make or have made. The term tends to be relevant only
in archeological and anthropological studies, but it specifically means
all material evidence which can be attributed to culture, past or
present.
Cultural sociology first emerged in Weimar Germany (1918–1933), where sociologists such as Alfred Weber used the term Kultursoziologie (cultural sociology). Cultural sociology was then "reinvented" in the English-speaking world as a product of the "cultural turn" of the 1960s, which ushered in structuralist and postmodern approaches to social science. This type of cultural sociology may be loosely regarded as an approach incorporating cultural analysis and critical theory. Cultural sociologists tend to reject scientific methods, instead hermeneutically focusing on words, artifacts and symbols. "Culture" has since become an important concept across many branches of sociology, including resolutely scientific fields like social stratification and social network analysis.
As a result, there has been a recent influx of quantitative
sociologists to the field. Thus, there is now a growing group of
sociologists of culture who are, confusingly, not cultural sociologists.
These scholars reject the abstracted postmodern aspects of cultural
sociology, and instead, look for a theoretical backing in the more
scientific vein of social psychology and cognitive science.
Nowruz is a good sample of Popular and Folklore
culture that is celebrating by people in more than 22 countries with
different nations and religions, at the 1st day of spring. It has been
celebrated by diverse communities for over 7,000 years
Early researchers and development of cultural sociology
The sociology of culture grew from the intersection between sociology (as shaped by early theorists like Marx, Durkheim, and Weber) with the growing discipline of anthropology,
wherein researchers pioneered ethnographic strategies for describing
and analyzing a variety of cultures around the world. Part of the legacy
of the early development of the field lingers in the methods (much of
cultural, sociological research is qualitative), in the theories (a
variety of critical approaches to sociology are central to current
research communities), and in the substantive focus of the field. For
instance, relationships between popular culture, political control, and social class were early and lasting concerns in the field.
In the United Kingdom, sociologists and other scholars influenced by Marxism such as Stuart Hall (1932–2014) and Raymond Williams (1921–1988) developed cultural studies.
Following nineteenth-century Romantics, they identified "culture" with
consumption goods and leisure activities (such as art, music, film, food, sports, and clothing). They saw patterns of consumption and leisure as determined by relations of production, which led them to focus on class relations and the organization of production.
In the United Kingdom, cultural studies focuses largely on the study of popular culture; that is, on the social meanings of mass-produced consumer and leisure goods. Richard Hoggart coined the term in 1964 when he founded the Birmingham Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies or CCCS. It has since become strongly associated with Stuart Hall, who succeeded Hoggart as Director.
Cultural studies in this sense, then, can be viewed as a limited
concentration scoped on the intricacies of consumerism, which belongs to
a wider culture sometimes referred to as "Western civilization" or "globalism."
From the 1970s onward, Stuart Hall's pioneering work, along with that of his colleagues Paul Willis, Dick Hebdige, Tony Jefferson, and Angela McRobbie, created an international intellectual movement. As the field developed, it began to combine political economy, communication, sociology, social theory, literary theory, media theory, film/video studies, cultural anthropology, philosophy, museum studies, and art history
to study cultural phenomena or cultural texts. In this field
researchers often concentrate on how particular phenomena relate to
matters of ideology, nationality, ethnicity, social class, and/or gender. Cultural studies is concerned with the meaning and practices of everyday life. These practices comprise the ways people do particular things (such as watching television
or eating out) in a given culture. It also studies the meanings and
uses people attribute to various objects and practices. Specifically,
culture involves those meanings and practices held independently of
reason. Watching television to view a public perspective on a historical
event should not be thought of as culture unless referring to the
medium of television itself, which may have been selected culturally;
however, schoolchildren watching television after school with their
friends to "fit in" certainly qualifies since there is no grounded
reason for one's participation in this practice.
In the context of cultural studies, the idea of a text includes not only written language, but also films, photographs, fashion or hairstyles: the texts of cultural studies comprise all the meaningful artifacts of culture.
Similarly, the discipline widens the concept of "culture." "Culture"
for a cultural-studies researcher not only includes traditional high culture (the culture of rulingsocial groups) and popular culture,
but also everyday meanings and practices. The last two, in fact, have
become the main focus of cultural studies. A further and recent approach
is comparative cultural studies, based on the disciplines of comparative literature and cultural studies.
Scholars in the United Kingdom and the United States developed
somewhat different versions of cultural studies after the late 1970s.
The British version of cultural studies had originated in the 1950s and
1960s, mainly under the influence of Richard Hoggart, E.P. Thompson, and Raymond Williams, and later that of Stuart Hall and others at the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies at the University of Birmingham. This included overtly political, left-wing views, and criticisms of popular culture as "capitalist" mass culture; it absorbed some of the ideas of the Frankfurt School critique of the "culture industry"
(i.e. mass culture). This emerges in the writings of early British
cultural-studies scholars and their influences: see the work of (for
example) Raymond Williams, Stuart Hall, Paul Willis, and Paul Gilroy.
In the United States, Lindlof and Taylor write, "Cultural studies [were] grounded in a pragmatic, liberal-pluralist tradition."
The American version of cultural studies initially concerned itself
more with understanding the subjective and appropriative side of
audience reactions to, and uses of, mass culture; for example, American cultural-studies advocates wrote about the liberatory aspects of fandom. The distinction between American and British strands, however, has faded. Some researchers, especially in early British cultural studies, apply a Marxist model to the field. This strain of thinking has some influence from the Frankfurt School, but especially from the structuralist Marxism of Louis Althusser and others. The main focus of an orthodox Marxist approach concentrates on the production of meaning. This model assumes a mass production of culture and identifies power as residing with those producing cultural artifacts. In a Marxist view, the mode and relations of production form the economic base of society, which constantly interacts and influences superstructures, such as culture. Other approaches to cultural studies, such as feminist
cultural studies and later American developments of the field, distance
themselves from this view. They criticize the Marxist assumption of a
single, dominant meaning, shared by all, for any cultural product. The
non-Marxist approaches suggest that different ways of consuming cultural
artifacts affect the meaning of the product. This view comes through in
the book Doing Cultural Studies: The Story of the Sony Walkman (by Paul du Gay et al.),
which seeks to challenge the notion that those who produce commodities
control the meanings that people attribute to them. Feminist cultural
analyst, theorist, and art historian Griselda Pollock contributed to cultural studies from viewpoints of art history and psychoanalysis. The writer Julia Kristeva
is among influential voices at the turn of the century, contributing to
cultural studies from the field of art and psychoanalytical French feminism.
Petrakis and Kostis (2013) divide cultural background variables into two main groups:
The first group covers the variables that represent the "efficiency orientation" of the societies: performance orientation, future orientation, assertiveness, power distance, and uncertainty avoidance.
The second covers the variables that represent the "social
orientation" of societies, i.e., the attitudes and lifestyles of their
members. These variables include gender egalitarianism, institutional
collectivism, in-group collectivism, and human orientation.
In 2016, a new approach to culture was suggested by Rein Raud,
who defines culture as the sum of resources available to human beings
for making sense of their world and proposes a two-tiered approach,
combining the study of texts (all reified meanings in circulation) and
cultural practices (all repeatable actions that involve the production,
dissemination or transmission of purposes), thus making it possible to
re-link anthropological and sociological study of culture with the
tradition of textual theory.
Cognitive tools suggest a way for people from certain culture to deal with real-life problems, like Suanpan for Chinese to perform mathematical calculation
Starting in the 1990s, psychological research on culture influence began to grow and challenge the universality assumed in general psychology.Culture psychologists began to try to explore the relationship between emotions and culture,
and answer whether the human mind is independent from culture. For
example, people from collectivistic cultures, such as the Japanese,
suppress their positive emotions more than their American counterparts.
Culture may affect the way that people experience and express emotions.
On the other hand, some researchers try to look for differences between
people's personalities across cultures As different cultures dictate distinctive norms, culture shock
is also studied to understand how people react when they are confronted
with other cultures. Cognitive tools may not be accessible or they may
function differently cross culture For example, people who are raised in a culture with an abacus are trained with distinctive reasoning style.
Cultural lenses may also make people view the same outcome of events
differently. Westerners are more motivated by their successes than their
failures, while East Asians are better motivated by the avoidance of
failure. Culture is important for psychologists to consider when understanding the human mental operation.
There are a number of international agreements and national laws relating to the protection of culture and cultural heritage. UNESCO and its partner organizations such as Blue Shield International coordinate international protection and local implementation.
Basically, the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property
in the Event of Armed Conflict and the UNESCO Convention for the
Protection of Cultural Diversity deal with the protection of culture.
Article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights deals with
cultural heritage in two ways: it gives people the right to participate
in cultural life on the one hand and the right to the protection of
their contributions to cultural life on the other.
The protection of culture and cultural goods is increasingly
taking up a large area nationally and internationally. Under
international law, the UN and UNESCO
try to set up and enforce rules for this. The aim is not to protect a
person's property, but rather to preserve the cultural heritage of
humanity, especially in the event of war and armed conflict. According
to Karl von Habsburg,
President of Blue Shield International, the destruction of cultural
assets is also part of psychological warfare. The target of the attack
is the identity of the opponent, which is why symbolic cultural assets
become a main target. It is also intended to affect the particularly
sensitive cultural memory, the growing cultural diversity and the
economic basis (such as tourism) of a state, region or municipality.
Another important issue today is the impact of tourism on the
various forms of culture. On the one hand, this can be physical impact
on individual objects or the destruction caused by increasing
environmental pollution and, on the other hand, socio-cultural effects
on society.
Early European modern humans (EEMH) or Cro-Magnons were the first early modern humans (Homo sapiens)
to settle in Europe, continuously occupying the continent possibly from
as early as 48,000 years ago. They interacted and interbred with the
indigenous Neanderthals (H. neanderthalensis),
who went extinct 40 to 35 thousand years ago; and from 37,000 years ago
onwards, all EEMH descended from a single founder population which
contributes ancestry to present-day Europeans. EEMH produced Upper Palaeolithic cultures, the first major one being the Aurignacian, which was succeeded by the Gravettian by 30,000 years ago. The Gravettian split into the Epi-Gravettian in the east and Solutrean in the west, due to major climate degradation during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), peaking 21,000 years ago. As Europe warmed, the Solutrean evolved into the Magdalenian by 20,000 years ago, and these peoples recolonised Europe. The Magdalenian and Epi-Gravettian gave way to Mesolithic cultures as big game animals were dying out and the Last Glacial Period drew to a close.
EEMH were anatomically similar to present-day Europeans, but were more robust,
having broader and shorter faces, more prominent brow ridges, and
bigger teeth. Compared to most present-day Europeans, EEMH had shorter
upper jaws, more horizontally oriented cheekbones, and more rectangular
eye sockets, which are more frequent in East Asian populations. The
first EEMH would have probably had dark skin; natural selection for lighter skin would not begin until 30,000 years ago, and whiter skin would not become prevalent in Europe until the Bronze Age.
Before the LGM, EEMH had overall low population density, tall stature
similar to post-industrial humans, expansive trade routes stretching as
long as 900 km (560 mi), and hunted big game animals. EEMH had much
higher populations than the Neanderthals, possibly due to higher
fertility rates; life expectancy for both species was typically under 40
years. Following the LGM, population density increased as communities
travelled less frequently (though for longer distances), and the need to
feed so many more people in tandem with the increasing scarcity of big
game caused them to rely more heavily on small or aquatic game, and more
frequently participate in game drive systems and slaughter whole herds at a time. The EEMH arsenal included spears, spear-throwers, harpoons, and possibly throwing sticks and Palaeolithic dogs. EEMH likely commonly constructed temporary huts while moving around, and Gravettian peoples notably made large huts on the East European Plain out of mammoth bones.
EEMH are well renowned for creating a diverse array of artistic works, including cave paintings, Venus figurines, perforated batons, animal figurines, and geometric patterns. They may have been decorating their bodies with ochre crayons and perhaps tattoos, scarification,
and piercings. The exact symbolism of these works remains enigmatic,
but EEMH are generally (though not universally) thought to have
practiced shamanism,
in which cave art — specifically of those depicting human/animal
hybrids — played a central part. They also wore decorative beads, and
plant-fibre clothes dyed with various plant-based dyes, which were
possibly used as status symbols. For music, they produced bone flutes and whistles, and possibly also bullroarers, rasps, drums, idiophones,
and other instruments. They buried their dead, though possibly only
people which had achieved or were born into high status received burial.
Remains of Palaeolithic cultures have been known for centuries, but they were initially interpreted in a creationist model, wherein they represented antediluvian peoples which were wiped out by the Great Flood. Following the conception and popularisation of evolution in the mid-to-late 19th century, EEMH became the subject of much scientific racism, with early race theories allying with Nordicism and Pan-Germanism. Such historical race concepts were overturned by the mid-20th century. During the first wave feminism movement, the Venus figurines were notably interpreted as evidence of some matriarchal religion, though such claims had mostly died down in academia by the 1970s.
When early modern humans (Homo sapiens) migrated onto the European continent, they interacted with the indigenous Neanderthals (H. neanderthalensis) which had already inhabited Europe for hundreds of thousands of years. In 2019, Greek palaeoanthropologist Katerina Harvati and colleagues argued that two 210,000 year old skulls from Apidima Cave, Greece, represent modern humans rather than Neanderthals — indicating these populations have an unexpectedly deep history — but this was refuted in 2020 by French paleoanthropologist Marie-Antoinette de Lumley [fr] and colleagues. About 60,000 years ago, marine isotope stage
3 began, characterised by volatile climatic patterns and sudden retreat
and recolonisation events of forestland in way of open steppeland.
The earliest indication of Upper Palaeolithic modern human migration into Europe is the Balkan Bohunician industry beginning 48,000 years ago, likely deriving from the Levantine Emiran industry, and the earliest bones in Europe date to roughly 45–43 thousand years ago in Bulgaria, Italy, and Britain. It is unclear, while migrating westward, if they followed the Danube or went along the Mediterranean coast. About 45 to 44 thousand years ago, the Proto-Aurignacian culture spread out across Europe, probably descending from the Near Eastern Ahmarian culture. After 40,000 years ago with the onset of Heinrich event 4 (a period of extreme seasonality), the Aurignacian proper evolved perhaps in South-Central Europe, and rapidly replaced other cultures across the continent. This wave of modern humans replaced Neanderthals and their Mousterian culture.
In the Danube Valley, the Aurignacian features sites far and few
between, compared to later traditions, until 35,000 years ago. From
here, the "Typical Aurignacian" becomes quite prevalent, and extends
until 29,000 years ago.
The Aurignacian was gradually replaced by the Gravettian
culture, but it is unclear when the Aurignacian went extinct because it
is poorly defined. "Aurignacoid" or "Epi-Aurignacian" tools are
identified as late as 18 to 15 thousand years ago.
It is also unclear where the Gravettian originated from as it diverges
strongly from the Aurignician (and therefore may not have descended from
it). Nonetheless, genetic evidence indicates not all Aurignacian bloodlines went extinct. Hypotheses for Gravettian genesis include evolution: in Central Europe from the Szeletian
(which developed from the Bohunician) which existed 41 to 37 thousand
years ago; or from the Ahmarian or similar cultures from the Near East
or the Caucasus which existed before 40,000 years ago.
It is further debated where the earliest occurrence is identified, with
the former hypothesis arguing for Germany about 37,500 years ago, and the latter Buran-Kaya [ru] III rockshelter in Crimea about 38 to 36 thousand years ago. In either case, the appearance of the Gravettian coincides with a significant temperature drop.
Also around 37,000 years ago, the founder population of all later early
European modern humans (EEMH) existed, and Europe would remain in
genetic isolation from the rest of the world for the next 23,000 years.
Around 29,000 years ago, marine isotope stage 2 began and cooling intensified. This peaked about 21,000 years ago during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) when Scandinavia, the Baltic region, and the British Isles were covered in glaciers, and winter sea ice reached the French seaboard. The Alps were also covered in glaciers, and most of Europe was polar desert, with mammoth steppe and forest steppe dominating the Mediterranean coast.
Consequently, large swathes of Europe were uninhabitable, and two
distinct cultures emerged with unique technologies to adapt to the new
environment: the Solutrean in Southwestern Europe which invented brand new technologies, and the Epi-Gravettian from Italy to the East European Plain which adapted the previous Gravettian technologies. Solutrean peoples inhabited the permafrost
zone, whereas Epi-Gravettian peoples appear to have stuck to less
harsh, seasonally frozen areas. Relatively few sites are known through
this time. The glaciers began retreating about 20,000 years ago, and the Solutrean evolved into the Magdalenian, which would recolonise Western and Central Europe over the next couple thousand years. Starting during the Older Dryas roughly 14,000 years ago, Final Magdalenian traditions appear, namely the Azilian, Hamburgian, and Creswellian. During the Bølling–Allerød warming, Near Eastern genes began showing up in the indigenous Europeans, indicating the end of Europe's genetic isolation.
Possibly due to the continual reduction of European big game, the
Magdalenian and Epi-Gravettian were completely replaced by the Mesolithic by the beginning of the Holocene.
Europe was completely re-peopled during the Holocene climatic optimum from 9 to 5 thousand years ago. Mesolithic West European Hunter-Gatherers (WHG) contributed significantly to the present-day European genome, alongside Ancient North Eurasians (ANE) which descended from the SiberianMal'ta–Buret' culture (and split from EEMH before 37,000 years ago). Unlike ANE, the WHG genome is not prevalent on both sides of the Caucasus,
and is only seen in any significant measure west of the Caucasus. Most
present-day Europeans have a 60–80% WHG/(WHG+ANE) ratio, and the 8,000
year old Mesolithic Loschbour man seems to have had a similar pattern. Near Eastern Neolithic
farmers which split from the European hunter-gatherers about 40,000
years ago started to spread out across Europe by 8,000 years ago,
ushering in the Neolithic with Early European Farmers
(EEF). EEF contribute about 30% of ancestry to present-day Baltic
populations, and up to 90% in present-day Mediterranean populations. The
latter may have inherited WHG ancestry via EEF introgression. The Eastern Hunter-Gatherers (EHG) population identified around the steppes of the Urals also dispersed, and the Scandinavian Hunter-Gatherers appear to be a mix of WHG and EHG. Around 4,500 years ago, the immigration of the Yamnaya and Corded Ware cultures from the eastern steppes brought the Bronze Age, the Proto-Indo-European language, and more or less the present-day genetic makeup of Europeans.
EEMH have historically been referred to as "Cro-Magnons" in
scientific literature until around the 1990s when the term "anatomically
modern humans" became more popular. The name "Cro-Magnon" comes from the 5 skeletons discovered by French palaeontologist Louis Lartet in 1868 at the Cro-Magnon rock shelter, Les Eyzies, Dordogne, France, after the area was accidentally discovered while clearing land for a railway station. Fossils and artefacts from the Palaeolithic had actually been known for decades, but these were interpreted in a creationist model (as the concept of evolution had not yet been conceived). For example, the Aurignacian Red Lady of Paviland (a young man) from South Wales was described by geologist Reverend William Buckland in 1822 as a citizen of Roman Britain. Subsequent authors contended the skeleton was either evidence of antediluvian (before the Great Flood)
people in Britain, or was swept far from the inhabited lands farther
south by the powerful floodwaters. Buckland assumed the specimen was a
woman because he was adorned with jewellery (shells, ivory rods and
rings, and a wolf-bone skewer), and Buckland also stated (possibly in
jest) the jewellery was evidence of witchcraft. Around this time, the uniformitarianism movement was gaining traction, headed principally by Charles Lyell, arguing that fossil materials well predated the biblical chronology.
Following Charles Darwin's 1859 On the Origin of Species,
racial anthropologists and raciologists began splitting off putative
subspecies and sub-races of present-day humans based on unreliable and pseudoscientific metrics gathered from anthropometry, physiognomy, and phrenology continuing into the 20th century. This was a continuation of Carl Linnaeus' 1735 Systema Naturae, where he invented the modern classification system, in doing so classifying humans as Homo sapiens with several putative subspecies classifications for different races based on racist behavioural definitions (in accord with historical race concepts): "H. s. europaeus" (European descent, governed by laws), "H. s. afer" (African descent, impulse), "H. s. asiaticus" (Asian descent, opinions), and "H. s. americanus" (Native American descent, customs).
The racial classification system was quickly extended to fossil
specimens, including both EEMH and the Neanderthals, after the true
extent of their antiquity was recognised In 1869, Lartet had proposed the subspecies classification "H. s. fossilis" for the Cro-Magnon remains. Other supposed subraces of the 'Cro-Magnon race' included (among many others): "H. pre-aethiopicus" for a skull from Dordogne which had "Ethiopic affinities"; "H. predmosti" or "H. predmostensis" for a series of skulls from Brno, Czech Republic, purportedly transitional between Neanderthals and EEMHH. mentonensis for a skull from Menton, France; "H. grimaldensis" for Grimaldi man and other skeletons near Grimaldi, Monaco; and "H. aurignacensis" or "H. a. hauseri" for the Combe-Capelle skull.
These 'fossil races', alongside Ernst Haeckel's idea of there being backwards races which require further evolution (social darwinism),
popularised the view in European thought that the civilised white man
had descended from primitive, low browed ape ancestors through a series
of savage races. Prominent brow-ridges were classified as an ape-like
trait, and consequently Neanderthals (as well as Aboriginal Australians) were considered a lowly race. These European fossils were considered to have been the ancestors to specifically living European races. Among the earliest attempts to classify EEMH was done by racial anthropologists Joseph Deniker and William Z. Ripley in 1900, who characterised them as tall and intelligent proto-Aryans,
superior to other races, who descended from Scandinavia and Germany.
Further race theories revolved around progressively lighter, blonder,
and superior races (subspecies) evolving in Central Europe and spreading
out in waves to replace their darker ancestors, culminating in the "Nordic race". These aligned well with Nordicism and Pan-Germanism (that is, Aryan supremacy), which gained popularity just before World War I, and was notably used by the Nazis to justify the conquest of Europe and the supremacy of the German people in World War II. Stature was among the characteristics used to distinguish these
sub-races, so taller EEMH such as specimens from the French Cro-Magnon, Paviland, and Grimaldi sites were classified as ancestral to the "Nordic race", and smaller ones such as Combe-Capelle and Chancelade man (also from France) were considered the forerunners of either the "Mediterranean race" or "Eskimoids". The Venus figurines — sculptures of pregnant women with exaggerated breasts and thighs — were used as evidence of the presence of the "Negroid race" in Palaeolithic Europe, because they were interpreted as having been based on real women with steatopygia (a condition which causes thicker thighs, common in the women of the San people of Southern Africa) and the hairdos of some are supposedly similar to those seen in Ancient Egypt. By the 1940s, the positivism
movement — which fought to remove political and cultural bias from
science and had begun about a century earlier — had gained popular
support in European anthropology. Due to this movement and raciology's
associations with Nazism, raciology fell out of practice
The
beginning of the Upper Palaeolithic is thought to have been
characterised by a major population increase in Europe, with the human
population of Western Europe possibly increasing by a factor of 10 in
the Neanderthal/modern human transition.
The archaeological record indicates that the overwhelming majority of
Palaeolithic people (both Neanderthals and modern humans) died before
reaching the age of 40, with few elderly individuals recorded. It is
possible the population boom was caused by a significant increase in
fertility rates.
A 2005 study estimated the population of Upper Palaeolithic
Europe by calculating the total geographic area which was inhabited
based on the archaeological record; averaged the population density of Chipewyan, Hän, Hill people, and Naskapi
Native Americans which live in cold climates and applied to this to
EEMH; and assumed that population density continually increased with
time calculated by the change in the number of total sites per time
period. The study calculated that: from 40 to 30 thousand years ago the
population was roughly 1,700–28,400 (average 4,400); from 30 to 22
thousand years ago roughly 1,900–30,600 (average 4,800); from 22 to 16.5
thousand years ago roughly 2,300–37,700 (average 5,900); and 16.5–11.5
thousand years ago roughly 11,300–72,600 (average 28,700).
Following the LGM, EEMH are thought to have been much less mobile
and featured a higher population density, indicated by seemingly
shorter trade routes as well as symptoms of nutritional stress.
For 28 modern human specimens from 190 to 25 thousand years ago,
average brain volume was estimated to have been about 1,478 cc
(90.2 cu in), and for 13 EEMH about 1,514 cc (92.4 cu in). In
comparison, present-day humans average 1,350 cc (82 cu in), which is
notably smaller. This is because the EEMH brain, though within the
variation for present-day humans, exhibits longer average frontal lobe length and taller occipital lobe height. The parietal lobes,
however, are shorter in EEMH. It is unclear if this could equate to any
functional differences between present-day and early modern humans.
EEMH are physically similar to present-day humans, with a
globular braincase, completely flat face, gracile brow ridge, and
defined chin. However, the bones of EEMH are somewhat thicker and more robust.
Compared to present-day Europeans, EEMH have broader and shorter faces,
more prominent brow ridges, bigger teeth, shorter upper jaws, more
horizontally oriented cheekbones, and more rectangular eye sockets. The latter three are more frequent in certain present-day East Asian populations.
Aurignacians featured a higher proportion of traits somewhat
reminiscent of Neanderthals, such as (though not limited to) a slightly
flattened skullcap and consequent occipital bun
protruding from the back of the skull (the latter could be quite
defined). Their frequency significantly diminished in Gravettians, and
in 2007, palaeoanthropologist Erik Trinkaus
concluded these were remnants of Neanderthal introgression which were
eventually bred out of the gene pool in his review of the relevant
morphology.
Reconstruction of the 40,000 year old Oase 2 (who is not an ancestor to any living person)
In early Upper Palaeolithic Western Europe, 20 men and 10 women were
estimated to have averaged 176.2 cm (5 ft 9 in) and 162.9 cm (5 ft
4 in), respectively. This is similar to post-industrial modern Northern
Europeans. In contrast, in a sample of 21 and 15 late Upper Palaeolithic
Western European men and women, the averages were 165.6 cm (5 ft 5 in)
and 153.5 cm (5 ft), similar to pre-industrial modern humans. It is
unclear why earlier EEMH were taller, especially considering that
cold-climate creatures are short-limbed and thus short-statured to
better retain body heat. This has variously been explained as: retention
of a hypothetically tall ancestral condition; higher-quality diet and
nutrition due to the hunting of megafauna which later became uncommon or
extinct; functional adaptation to increase stride length and movement
efficiency while running during a hunt; increasing territorialism among
later EEMH reducing gene flow between communities and increasing inbreeding
rate; or statistical bias due to small sample size or because taller
people were more likely to achieve higher status in a group before the
LGM and thus were more likely to be buried and preserved.
Prior to genetic analysis, it was generally assumed that EEMH,
like present-day Europeans, were light skinned as an adaptation to
absorb vitamin D
from the less luminous sun farther north. However, of the 3 predominant
genes responsible for lighter skin in present-day Europeans — KITLG, SLC24A5, and SLC45A2 — the latter two, as well as the TYRP1 gene associated with lighter hair and eye colour, experienced positive selection
as late as 19 to 11 thousand years ago during the Mesolithic
transition. These three became more widespread across the continent in
the Bronze Age. The variation of the gene which is associated with blue eyes in present-day humans, OCA2, seems to have descended from a common ancestor about 10–6 thousand years ago somewhere in Northern Europe.
Such a late timing was potentially caused by overall low population
and/or low cross-continental movement required for such an adaptive
shift in skin, hair, and eye colouration. However, KITLG experienced
positive selection in EEMH (as well as East Asians) beginning
approximately 30,000 years ago.
While anatomically modern humans have been present outside of Africa
during some isolated time intervals potentially as early as 250,000
years ago, present-day non-Africans descend from the out of Africa
expansion which occurred around 65–55 thousand years ago. This movement
was an offshoot of the rapid expansion within East Africa associated
with mtDNA haplogroup L3. Mitochondrial DNA analysis places EEMH as the sister group to Upper Palaeolithic East Asian groups ("Proto-Mongoloid"), divergence occurring roughly 50,000 years ago.
Initial genomic studies on the earliest EEMH in 2014, namely on the 37,000-year-old Kostenki-14 individual, identified 3 major lineages which are also present in present-day Europeans: one related to all later EEMH; a "Basal Eurasian"
lineage which split from the common ancestor of present-day Europeans
and East Asians before they split from each other; and another related
to a 24,000-year-old individual from the Siberian Mal'ta–Buret' culture
(near Lake Baikal). Contrary to this, a 2016 study looking at much earlier European specimens, including Ust'-Ishim and Oase-1
dating to 45,000 years ago, found no evidence of a "Basal Eurasian"
component to the genome, nor did they find evidence of Mal'ta–Buret'
introgression when looking at a wider range of EEMH from the entire
Upper Palaeolithic. The study instead concluded that such a genetic
makeup in present-day Europeans stemmed from Near Eastern and Siberian
introgression occurring predominantly in the Neolithic and the Bronze
Age (though beginning by 14,000 years ago), but all EEMH specimens
including and following Kostenki-14 contributed to the present-day
European genome and were more closely related to present-day Europeans
than East Asians. Earlier EEMH (10 tested in total), on the other hand,
did not seem to be ancestral to any present-day population, nor did they
form any cohesive group in and of themselves, each representing either
completely distinct genetic lineages, admixture between major lineages,
or have highly divergent ancestry. Because of these, the study also
concluded that, beginning roughly 37,000 years ago, EEMH descended from a
single founder population and were reproductively isolated from the
rest of the world. The study reported that an Aurignacian individual
from Grottes de Goyet, Belgium, has more genetic affinities to the Magdalenian inhabitants of Cueva de El Miròn than to more or less contemporaneous Eastern European Gravettians.
Haplogroups identified in EEMH are the patrilineal (from father to son) Y-DNA haplogroupsIJ, C1, and K2 and matrilineal (from mother to child) mt-DNA haplogroupN, R, and U. Y-haplogroup IJ descended from Southwest Asia. Haplogroup I
emerged about 35 to 30 thousand years ago, either in Europe or West
Asia. Mt-haplogroup U5 arose in Europe just prior to the LGM, between 35
and 25 thousand years ago. The 14,000 year old Villabruna 1 skeleton from Ripari Villabruna, Italy, is the oldest identified bearer of Y-haplogroup R1b (R1b1a-L754* (xL389,V88)) found in Europe, likely brought in from Near Eastern introgression. The Azilian "Bichon man" skeleton from the Swiss Jura was found to be associated with the WHG lineage. He was a bearer of Y-DNA haplogroup I2a and mtDNA haplogroup U5b1h.
Genetic evidence suggests early modern humans interbred with Neanderthals. Genes in the present-day genome are estimated to have entered about 65 to 47 thousand years ago, most likely in West Asia soon after modern humans left Africa. In 2015, the 40,000 year old modern human Oase 2 was found to have had 6–9% (point estimate
7.3%) Neanderthal DNA, indicating a Neanderthal ancestor up to four to
six generations earlier, but this hybrid Romanian population does not
appear to have made a substantial contribution to the genomes of later
Europeans. Therefore, it is possible that interbreeding was common
between Neanderthals and EEMH which did not contribute to the
present-day genome.
The percentage of Neanderthal genes gradually decreased with time,
which could indicate they were maladaptive and were selected out of the
gene pool.
There is a notable technological complexification coinciding with the
replacement of Neanderthals with EEMH in the archaeological record, and
so the terms "Middle Palaeolithic" and "Upper Palaeolithic" were
created to distinguish between these two time periods. Largely based on
Western European archaeology, the transition was dubbed the "Upper
Palaeolithic Revolution," (extended to be a worldwide phenomenon) and
the idea of "behavioural modernity"
became associated with this event and early modern cultures. It is
largely agreed that the Upper Palaeolithic seems to feature a higher
rate of technological and cultural evolution than the Middle
Palaeolithic, but it is debated if behavioural modernity was truly an
abrupt development or was a slow progression initiating far earlier than
the Upper Paleolithic, especially when considering the non-European
archaeological record. Behaviourly modern practices include: the
production of microliths,
the common use of bone and antler, the common use of grinding and
pounding tools, high quality evidence of body decoration and figurine
production, long-distance trade networks, and improved hunting
technology.
In regard to art, the Magdalenian produced some of the most intricate
Palaeolithic pieces, and they even elaborately decorated normal,
everyday objects.
Hunting and gathering
Historically, ethnographic
studies on hunter-gatherer subsistence strategies have long placed
emphasis on sexual division of labour and most especially the hunting of
big game by men. This culminated in the 1966 book Man the Hunter,
which focuses almost entirely on the importance of male contributions
of food to the group. As this was published during the second-wave
feminism movement, this was quickly met with backlash from many female
anthropologists. Among these was Australian archaeologist Betty Meehan in her 1974 article Woman the Gatherer,
who argued that women play a vital role in these communities by
gathering more reliable food plants and small game, as big game hunting
has a low success rate. The concept of "Woman the Gatherer" has since
gained significant support.
It has typically been assumed that EEMH closely studied prey
habits in order to maximise return depending on the season. For example,
large mammals (including red deer, horses, and ibex) congregate seasonally, and reindeer were possibly seasonally plagued by insects rendering fur sometimes unsuitable for hideworking.
There is much evidence that EEMH, especially in Western Europe
following the LGM, corralled large prey animals into natural confined
spaces (such as against a cliff wall, a cul-de-sac, or a water body) in
order to efficiently slaughter whole herds of animals (game drive system). They seem to have scheduled mass kills to coincide with migration patterns, in particular for red deer, horses, reindeer, bison, aurochs, and ibex, and occasionally wooly mammoths.
There are also multiple examples of consumption of seasonally abundant
fish, becoming more prevalent in the mid-Upper-Palaeolithic.
Nonetheless, Magdalenian peoples appear to have had a greater
dependence on small animals, aquatic resources, and plants than
predecessors, probably due to the relative scarcity of European big game
following the LGM (Quaternary extinction event).
Post-LGM peoples tend to have a higher rate of nutrient deficiency
related ailments, including a reduction in height, which indicates these
bands (probably due to decreased habitable territory) had to consume a
much broader and less desirable food range to survive. The popularisation of game drive systems may have been an extension of increasing food return.
In particularly southwestern France, EEMH depended heavily upon
reindeer, and so it is hypothesised that these communities followed the
herds, with occupation of the Perigord and the Pyrenees only occurring in the summer. Epi-Gravettian communities, in contrast, generally focused on hunting 1 species of large game, most commonly horse or bison.
It is possible that human activity, in addition to the rapid retreat of
favourable steppeland, inhibited recolonisation of most of Europe by
megafauna following the LGM (such as mammoths, woolly rhinoceroses, Irish elk, and cave lions),
in part contributing to their final extinction which occurred by the
beginning of or well into the Holocene depending on the species.
For weapons, EEMH crafted spearpoints using predominantly bone
and antler, possibly because these materials were readily abundant.
Compared to stone, these materials are compressive, making them fairly
shatterproof. These were then hafted onto a shaft to be used as javelins.
It is possible that Aurignacian craftsmen further hafted bone barbs
onto the spearheads, but firm evidence of such technology is recorded
earliest 23,500 years ago, and does not become more common until the
Mesolithic. Aurignacian craftsmen produced lozenge-shaped
(diamond-like) spearheads. By 30,000 years ago, spearheads were
manufactured with a more rounded-off base, and by 28,000 years ago
spindle-shaped heads were introduced. During the Gravettian, spearheads
with a bevelled base were being produced. By the beginning of the LGM, the spear-thrower was invented in Europe, which can increase the force and accuracy of the projectile. A possible boomerang
made of mammoth tusk was identified in Poland (though it may have been
unable to return to the thrower), and dating to 23,000 years ago, it
would be the oldest known boomerang.
Stone spearheads with leaf- and shouldered-points become more prevalent
in the Solutrean. Both large and small spearheads were produced in
great quantity, and the smaller ones may have been attached to
projectile darts. Archery
was possibly invented in the Solutrean, though less ambiguous bow
technology is first reported in the Mesolithic. Bone technology was
revitalised in the Magdalanian, and long-range technology as well as harpoons become much more prevalent. Some harpoon fragments are speculated to have been leisters or tridents, and true harpoons are commonly found along seasonal salmon migration routes.
Butt-end of the Magdalenian creeping hyena spear thrower
Magdalenian harpoon tip
Society
Social system
The first Venus discovered, the "Vénus impudique" ("immodest Venus"), possibly of a young girl
As opposed to the patriarchy prominent in historical societies, the idea of a prehistoric predominance of either matriarchy or matrifocal families (centred on motherhood) was first supposed in 1861 by legal scholar Johann Jakob Bachofen. The earliest models of this believed that monogamy
was not widely practiced in ancient times — thus, the paternal line was
resultantly more difficult to keep track of than the maternal —
resulting in a matrilineal
(and matriarchal) society. Matriarchs were then conquered by patriarchs
at the dawn of civilisation. The switch from matriarchy to patriarchy
and the hypothetical adoption of monogamy was seen as a leap forward.
However, when the first Palaeolithic representations of humans were
discovered, the so-called Venus figurines — which typically feature
pronounced breasts, buttocks, and vulvas (areas generally sexualised in
present-day Western Culture) — they were initially interpreted as
pornographic in nature. The first Venus discovered was named the "Vénus impudique" ("immodest Venus") by the discoverer Paul Hurault, 8th Marquis de Vibraye, because it lacked clothes and had a prominent vulva. The name "Venus", after the Roman
goddess of beauty, in itself implies an erotic function. Such a pattern
in the representation of the human form led to suggestions that human
forms were generally pornography for men, meaning men were primarily
responsible for artwork and craftsmanship in the Palaeolithic whereas
women were tasked with child rearing and various domestic works. This
would equate to a patriarchal social system.
The Palaeolithic matriarchy model was adapted by prominent communist Friedrich Engels
who instead argued that women were robbed of power by men due to
economic changes which could only be undone with the adoption of
communism (Marxist feminism). The former sentiment was adopted by the first-wave feminism
movement, who attacked the patriarchy by making Darwinist arguments of a
supposed natural egalitarian or matrifocal state of human society
instead of patriarchal, as well as interpreting the Venuses as evidence
of mother goddess worship as part of some matriarchal religion.
Consequently, by the mid-20th century, the Venuses were primarily
interpreted as evidence of some Palaeolithic fertility cult. Such claims
died down in the 1970s as archaeologists moved away from the highly
theoretical models produced by the previous generation. Through the second-wave feminism movement, the prehistoric matriarchal religion hypothesis was primarily propelled by Lithuanian-American archaeologist Marija Gimbutas. Her interpretations of the Palaeolithic were notably involved in the Goddess movement.
Equally ardent arguments against the matriarchy hypothesis have also
been prominent, such as American religious scholar Cynthia Eller's 2000 The Myth of Matriarchal Prehistory.Looking at the archaeological record, depictions of women are
markedly more common than of men. In contrast to the commonplace Venuses
in the Gravettian, Gravettian depictions of men are rare and contested,
the only reliable one being a fragmented ivory figurine from the grave
of a Pavlovian
site in Brno, Czech Republic (it is also the only statuette found in a
Palaeolithic grave). 2-D Magdalenian engravings from 15 to 11 thousand
years ago do depict males, indicated by an erect penis and facial hair,
though profiles of women with an exaggerated buttock are much more
common.
There are less than 100 depictions of males in the EEMH archaeological
record (of them, about a third are depicted with erections.) On the other hand, most individuals which received a burial (which may have been related to social status) were men.
Anatomically, the robustness of limbs (which is an indicator of
strength) between EEMH men and women were consistently not appreciably
different from each other. Such low levels of sexual dimorphism through the Upper Pleistocene could potentially mean that sexual division of labour, which characterises historic societies (both agricultural and hunter-gatherer), only became commonplace in the Holocene.
Trading
Perforated Homalopoma sanguineum shells (top and underside views) from Poiana Cireşului, Romania, sourced at least 900 km (560 mi) away
The Upper Palaeolithic is characterised by evidence of expansive
trade routes and the great distances at which communities could maintain
interactions. The early Upper Palaeolithic is especially known for
highly mobile lifestyles, with Gravettian groups (at least those
analysed in Italy and Moravia, Ukraine) often sourcing some raw
materials upwards of 200 km (120 mi). However, it is debated if this
represents sample bias,
and if Western and Northern Europe were less mobile. Some cultural
practices such as creating Venus figurines or specific burial rituals
during the Gravettian stretched 2,000 km (1,200 mi) across the
continent.
Genetic evidence suggests that, despite strong evidence of cultural
transmission, Gravettian Europeans did not introgress into Siberians,
meaning there was a movement of ideas but not people between Europe and
Siberia. At the 30,000 year old Romanian Poiana Cireşului site, perforated shells of the Homalopoma sanguineum sea snail were recovered, which is significant as it inhabits the Mediterranean at nearest 900 km (560 mi) away.
Such interlinkage may have been an important survival tool in lieu of
the steadily deteriorating climate. Given low estimated population
density, this may have required a rather complex, cross-continental
social organisation system.
By and following the LGM, population densities are thought to
have been much higher with the marked decrease of habitable lands,
resulting in more regional economies. Decreased land availability could
have increased travel distance, as habitable refugia may have been far
and few between, and increasing population density within these few
refugia would have made long-distance travel less economic. This trend
continued into the Mesolithic with the adoption of sedentism.
Nonetheless, there is some evidence of long-distance Magdalenian trade
routes. For example, at Lascaux, a painting of a bull had remnants of
the manganese mineral hausmannite,
which can only be manufactured in heat in excess of 900 °C (1,650 °F),
which was probably impossible for EEMH; this means they likely
encountered natural hausmannite which is known to be found 250 km
(160 mi) away in the Pyrenees. Unless there was a hausmannite source
much closer to Lascaux which has since been depleted, this could mean
that there was a local economy based on manganese ores. Also, at Ekain, Basque Country, the inhabitants were using the locally rare manganese mineral groutite in their paintings, which they possibly mined out of the cave itself.
Based on the distribution of Mediterranean and Atlantic seashell
jewellery even well inland, there may have been a network during the
Late Glacial Interstadial (14 to 12 thousand years ago) along the rivers
Rhine and Rhône in France, Germany, and Switzerland.
Housing
13,800 year old slab from Molí del Salt, Spain, with engravings speculated to be huts
EEMH cave sites quite often feature distinct spatial organisation,
with certain areas specifically designated for specific activities, such
as hearth areas, kitchens, butchering grounds, sleeping grounds, and
trash pile. It is difficult to tell if all material from a site was
deposited at about the same time, or if the site was used multiple
times.
EEMH are thought to have been quite mobile, indicated by the great
lengths of trade routes, and such a lifestyle was likely supported by
the constructions of temporary shelters in open environments, such as
huts. Evidence of huts is typically associated with a hearth.
Magdalenian peoples, especially, are thought to have been highly
migratory, following herds while repopulating Europe, and several cave
and open-air sites indicate the area was abandoned and revisited
regularly. The 19,000 year old Peyre Blanque site, France, and at least
the 260 km2 (100 sq mi) area around it may have been revisited for thousands of years. In the Magdalenian, stone lined rectangular areas typically 6–15 m2 (65–161 sq ft) were interpreted as having been the foundations or flooring of huts. At Magdalenian Pincevent,
France, small, circular dwellings were speculated to have existed based
on the spacing of stone tools and bones; these sometimes featured an
indoor hearth, work area, or sleeping space (but not all at the same
time). A 23,000 year old hut from the Israeli Ohalo II
was identified as having used grasses as flooring or possibly bedding,
but it is unclear if EEMH also lined their huts with grass or instead
used animal pelts. A 13,800 year old slab from Molí del Salt, Spain, has 7 dome-shaped figures engraved onto it, which are postulated to represent temporary dome-shaped huts.
Reconstruction of a mammoth hut from Mezhyrich, Ukraine
Over 70 dwellings constructed by EEMH out of mammoth bones have been identified, primarily from the Russian Plain, possibly semi-permanent hunting camps. They seem to have built tipis and yarangas. These were typically constructed following the LGM after 22,000 years ago by Epi-Gravettian peoples;
the earliest hut identified comes from the Molodova I site, Ukraine,
which was dated to 44,000 years ago (making it possible it was built by
Neanderthals).
Typically, these huts measured 5 m (16 ft) in diameter, or 4 m × 6 m
(13 ft × 20 ft) if oval shaped. Huts could get as small as 3 m × 2 m
(9.8 ft × 6.6 ft).
One of the largest huts has a diameter of 12.5 m (41 ft) — a 25,000
year old hut identified in Kostenki, Russia — and was constructed out of
64 mammoth skulls, but given the little evidence of occupation, this is
postulated to have been used for food storage rather than as a living
space.
Some huts have burned bones, which has typically been interpreted as
bones used as fuel for fireplaces due to the scarcity of firewood,
and/or disposal of waste. A few huts, however, have evidence of wood
burning, or mixed wood/bone burning.
Mammoth hut foundations were generally made by pushing a great
quantity of mammoth skulls into the ground (most commonly, though not
always, with the tusks facing up to possibly be used as further
supports), and the walls by putting into the ground vertically shoulder blades, pelvises, long bones,
jaws, and the spine. Long bones were often used as poles, commonly
placed on the end of another long bone or in the cavity of where tusk
used to be.
Foundation may have extended as far as 40 cm (16 in) underground.
Generally, multiple huts were built in a locality, placed 1–20 m (3 ft
3 in–65 ft 7 in) apart depending on location. Tusks may have been used
to make entrances, skins pulled over for roofing, and the interior sealed up by loess
dug out of pits. Some architectural decisions seem to have been purely
for aesthetics, best seen in the 4 Epi-Gravettian huts from Mezhyrich, Mezine, Ukraine, where jaws were stacked to create a chevron
or zigzag pattern in 2 huts, and long bones were stacked to create
horizontal or vertical lines in respectively 1 and 2 huts. The chevron
was a commonly used symbol on the Russian Plain, painted or engraved on
bones, tools, figurines, and mammoth skulls.
Dogs
At some point in time, EEMH domesticated the dog, probably as a result of a symbiotic
hunting relationship. DNA evidence suggests that present-day dogs split
from wolves around the beginning of the LGM. However, potential Palaeolithic dogs have been found preceding this — namely the 36,000 year old Goyet dog from Belgium and the 33,000 year old Altai dog from Siberia — which could indicate there were multiple attempts at domesticating European wolves.
These "dogs" had a wide size range, from over 60 cm (2 ft) in height in
Eastern Europe to less than 30–45 cm (1 ft–1 ft 6 in) in Central and
Western Europe,
and 32–41 kg (71–90 lb) in all of Europe. These "dogs" are identified
by having a shorter snout and skull, and wider palate and braincase than
contemporary wolves. Nonetheless, an Aurignacian origin for
domestication is controversial.
At the 27 to 24 thousand year old Předmostí site, Czech Republic,
3 "dogs" were identified with their skulls perforated (probably to
extract the brain), and 1 had a mammoth bone in its mouth. The
discoverers interpreted this as a burial ritual. The 14,500 year old Bonn-Oberkassel dog from Germany was found buried alongside a 40-year-old man and a 25-year-old woman, as well as traces of red hematite, and is genetically placed as an ancestor to present-day dogs. It was diagnosed with canine distemper virus
and probably died between 19 and 23 weeks of age. It would have
required extensive human care to survive without being able to
contribute to anything, suggesting that, at this point, humans and dogs
were connected by emotional or symbolic ties rather than purely
materialistic personal gain.
It is hypothesised these proto-dogs provided a vital role in
hunting, as well as domestic services such as transporting items or
guarding camp or carcasses, but their exact utility is unclear.
Art
When examples
of Upper Palaeolithic art were first discovered in the 19th century —
engraved objects — they were assumed to have been "art for art's sake"
as Palaeolithic peoples were widely conceived as having been uncultured
savages. This model was primarily championed by French archaeologist Louis Laurent Gabriel de Mortillet. Then, detailed paintings found deep within caves were discovered, the first being Cueva de Altamira,
Spain, in 1879. The "art for art's sake" model came apart by the turn
of the century as more examples of cave art were found in hard-to-reach
places in Western Europe such as Combarelles and Font-de-Gaume, for
which the idea of it being simply a leisure activity became increasingly
untenable.
EEMH are well known for having painted or engraved geometric designs,
hand stencils, plants, animals, and seemingly human/animal hybrid
creatures on cave walls deep inside caves. Typically the same species
are represented in caves which have such art, but the total number of
species is quite numerous, and namely includes creatures such as
mammoths, bison, lions, bears, and ibex. Nonetheless, some caves were
dominated by certain forms, such as Grotte de Niaux where over half of the animals are bison. Images could be drawn on top of one another. Landscapes were never depicted, with the exception of a supposed depiction of a volcanic eruption at Chauvet-Pont d'Arc, France, dating to 36,000 years ago.
Cave art is found in dark cave recesses, and the artists either lit a
fire on the cave floor or used portable stone lamps to see. Drawing
materials include black charcoal
and red and yellow ochre crayons, but they, along with a variety of
other minerals, could also be ground into powder and mixed with water to
create paint. Large, flat rocks may have been used as palettes,
and brushes may have included reeds, bristles, and twigs, and possibly a
blowgun was used to spray paint over less accessible areas. Hand stencils could either be made by holding the hand to the wall and spitting paint over it (leaving a negative image)
or by applying paint to the hand and then sticking it to the wall. Some
hand stencils are missing fingers, but it is unclear if the artist was
actually missing the finger or simply excluded it from the stencil. It
has generally been assumed that the larger prints were left by men and
the smaller ones by boys, but the exclusion of women entirely may be
improbable.
Though many hypotheses have been proposed for the symbolism of cave
art, it is still debated why these works were created in the first
place.
One of the first hypotheses regarding their symbolism was forwarded by French religious historian Salomon Reinach who supposed that, because only animals were depicted on cave walls, the images represented totem veneration,
in which a group or a group member identifies with a certain animal
associated with certain powers, and honours or respects this animal in
some way such as by not hunting it. If this were the case, then EEMH
communities within a region would have subdivided themselves into, for
example, a "horse clan", a "bison clan", a "lion clan", and so forth.
This was soon contested as some caves contain depictions of animals
wounded by projectiles, and generally multiple species are represented.
In 1903, Reinach proposed that the cave art represented sympathetic magic
(between the painting and the painting's subject), and by drawing an
animal doing some kind of action, the artist believed they were exerting
that same action onto the animal. That is, by being the master of the
image, they could master the animal itself. The hunting magic model —
and the idea that art was magical and utilitarian in EEMH society —
gained much popularity in the following decades. In this model,
herbivorous prey items were depicted as having been wounded prior to a
hunt in order to cast a spell over them; some animals were incompletely
depicted to enfeeble them; geometric designs were traps; and
human/animal hybrids were sorcerers dressed as animals to gain their
power, or were gods ruling over the animals. Many animals were depicted
as completely healthy and intact, and sometimes pregnant, which this
model interprets as fertility magic to promote reproduction; however, if
the animal was a carnivore, then this model says that the depiction
served to destroy the animal. By the mid-20th century, this model was
being contested because of how few depictions of wounded animals exist;
the collection of consumed animal bones in decorated caves often did not
match types of animals depicted in terms of abundance; and the magic
model does not explain hand stencils.
Following the 1960s, begun by German-American art historian Max Raphael, the study of cave art took on a much more statistical
approach, analysing and quantifying items such as the types and
distribution of animals depicted, cave topography, and cave wall
morphology. Based on such structuralist tests, horses and bovines seem
to have been preferentially clustered together typically in a central
position, and such binary organisation led to the suggestion that this
was sexual symbolism, and some animals and iconography were designated
by EEMH as either male or female. This conclusion has been heavily
contested as well, due to the subjective definition of association
between two different animals, and the great detail the animals were
depicted in, permitting sexual identification (and further, the
hypothesis that bison were supposed to be feminine contradicts the
finding that many are male).
Also in the late 20th century, with the popularisation of the hypothesis that EEMH practised shamanism,
the human/animal hybrids and geometrical symbols were interpreted
within this framework as the visions a shaman would see while in a trance (entoptic phenomena).
Opponents mainly attack the comparisons made between Palaeolithic
cultures and present-day shamanistic societies for being in some way
inaccurate. In 1988, archaeologists David Lewis-Williams and Thomas Dowson suggested trances were induced by hallucinogenic plants containing either mescaline, LSD, or psilocybine; but the only European plant which produces any of these is ergot (which produces a substance used to make LSD), and there is no evidence EEMH purposefully ate it.
Venus figurines are commonly found associated with EEMH and are the
earliest well-acknowledged representation of human figures. These are
most frequently found in the Gravettian (notably in the French Upper Périgordian, the Czech Pavlovian, and West Russian Kostenkian)
most dating from 29 to 23 thousand years ago. Almost all Venuses depict
naked women, and are generally hand-held sized. They feature a
downturned head, no face, thin arms which end at or cross over
voluminous breasts, a rotund buttocks, a distended abdomen (interpreted
as pregnancy),
tiny and bent legs, and pegged or unnaturally short feet. Venuses vary
in proportions which may represent limitations using certain materials
over others, or intentional design choices.
Eastern European Venuses seem have more of an emphasis on the breasts
and stomach, whereas Western European ones emphasise the hips and
thighs.
The earliest interpretations of the Venuses believed these were literal representations of women with obesity or steatopygia (a condition where a woman's body stores more fat in the thighs and buttocks, making them especially prominent). Another early hypothesis was that ideal womanhood
for EEMH involved obesity, or that the Venuses were used by men as
erotica due to the exaggeration of body parts typically sexualised in
Western Culture (as well as the lack of detail to individualising traits
such as the face and limbs). Extending present-day Western norms to
Palaeolithic peoples was contested, and a counter interpretation is that
either Venuses were mother goddesses, or that EEMH believed depictions
of things had magical
properties over the subject, and that such a depiction of a pregnant
woman would facilitate fertility and fecundity. This is also contested
as it assumes women are only thought of in terms of child rearing.
EEMH also carved perforated batons
out of horn, bone, or stone, most commonly through the Solutrean and
Magdalenian. Such batons disappear from the archaeological record at the
Magdalenian's close. Some batons seem phallic in nature. By 2010, about
60 batons had been hypothesised to be representations of penises (all
with erections), of which 30 show decoration, and 23 are perforated.
Several phallic batons are depicted as circumcised and seemingly bearing some ornamentation such as piercings, scarification,
or tattooing. The purpose of perforated batons has been debated, which
suggestions for spiritual or religious purposes, ornamentation or
status symbol, currency, drumsticks, tent holders, weaving tools, spear
straighteners, spear throwers, or dildos. Unperforated phallic batons,
measuring 30 (11.8 in) to a few centimetres long, were quite early on
interpreted as sex toys.
Magdalenian perforated baton with an engraving from L'Abri de la Madeleine, France
Magdalenian perforated baton from Veyrier, Switzerland
Depictions of animals were commonly produced by EEMH. As of 2015, as
many as 50 Aurignacian ivory figurines and fragments have been recovered
from the German Swabian Jura.
Of the discernible figures, most represent mammoths and lions, and a
few horses, bison, possibly a rhino, waterfowl, fish, and small mammals.
These sculptures are hand-sized and would have been portable works, and
some figurines were made into wearable pendants. Some figurines also
featured enigmatic engravings, dots, marks, lines, hooks, and
criss-cross patterns.
Aurignacian horse sculpture from Vogelherd Cave, Germany
EEMH also made purely symbolic engravings. There are several plaques
of bone or antler (referred to as polishers, spatulas, palettes, or
knives) which feature series of equidistantly placed notches, most
notably the well-preserved 32,000 year old Blanchard plaque from L'Abri Blanchard, France, which features 24 markings in a seemingly serpentine pattern. The discoverer, British palaeontologist Thomas Rupert Jones,
speculated in 1875 this was an early counting system for tallying items
such as animals killed, or some other notation system. In 1957, Czech
archaeologist Karel Absolon suggested they represent arithmetic. In 1972, Marshack postulated they may be calendars.
Also in 1972, Marshack identified 15 to 13 thousand year old
Magdalenian plaques bearing small, abstract symbols seemingly into
organised blocks or sets, which he interpreted as representing an early
writing system.
Czech archaeologist Bohuslav Klíma speculated a complex engraving
on a mammoth tusk he discovered in the Gravettian Pavlov site, Czech
Republic, as being a map, showing a meandering river centre-left, a
mountain centre-right, and a living grounds at the centre indicated by a
double circle. A few similar engravings have been identified across
Europe (in particular the Russian Plain), which he also postulated were
maps, plans, or stories.
EEMH are commonly associated with large pieces of pigments ("crayons"), namely made of red ochre.
For EEMH, it is typically assumed that ochre was used for some symbolic
purposes, most notably for cosmetics such as body paint. This is
because ochre in some sites had to be imported from incredibly long
distances, and it is also associated with burials. It is unclear why
they specifically chose red ochre instead of other colours. In terms of colour psychology, popular hypotheses include the putative "female cosmetic coalitions" hypothesis and the "red dress effect".
It is also possible that ochre was chosen for its utility, such as an
ingredient for adhesives, hide tanning agent, insect repellent,
sunscreen, medicinal properties, dietary supplement, or as a soft
hammer. EEMH appear to have been using grinding and crushing tools to process ochre before applying it to the skin.
In 1962, French archaeologists Saint-Just and Marthe Péquart identified bi-pointed needles in the Magdalenian Le Mas-d'Azil, which they speculated might have been used in tattooing.
Hypothesised depictions of penises from most commonly the Magdalenian
(though a few dating back to the Aurignacian) appear to be decorated
with tattoos, scarification, and piercings. Designs include lines,
plaques, dots or holes, and human or animal figures.
Clothing
EEMH
produced beads, which are typically assumed to have been attached to
clothing or portable items as body decoration. Beads had already been in
use since the Middle Palaeolithic, but production dramatically
increased in the Upper Palaeolithic. It is unclear why communities chose
specific raw materials over other ones, and they seem to have upheld
local bead making traditions for a very long time.
For example, Mediterranean communities used specific types of marine
shells to make beads and pendants for more than 20,000 years; and
Central and Western European communities often used pierced animal (and
less commonly human) teeth.
In the Aurignacian, beads and pendants were being made of shells,
teeth, ivory, stone, bone, and antler; and there are a few examples of
use of fossil materials including a belemnite, nummulite, ammonite, and amber. They may have also been producing ivory and stone rings, diadems, and labrets.
Beads could be manufactured in numerous different styles, such as
conical, elliptical, drop-shaped, disc-shaped, ovoid, rectangular,
trapezoidal, and so on.
Beads may have been used to facilitate social communication, to display
the wearer's socio-economic status, as they could have been capable of
communicating labour costs (and thereby, a person's wealth, energy,
connections, etc.) simply by looking at them.
The distribution of ornaments on buried Gravettian individuals, and
the likeliness that most of the buried were dressed with whatever they
were wearing upon death, indicates that jewellery was primarily worn on
the head as opposed to the neck or the torso.
Aurignacian necklace made of bear, horse, elk, and beaver teeth
The Gravettian Dolní Věstonice I and III and Pavlov I sites in Moravia, Czech Republic, yielded many clay fragments with textile
impressions. These indicate a highly sophisticated and standardised
textile industry, including the production of: single-ply, double-ply,
triple-ply, and braided string and cordage; knotted nets; wicker baskets; and woven cloth including simple and diagonal twined cloth, plain woven cloth, and twilled cloth. Some cloths appear to have a design pattern. There are also plaited items which may have been baskets or mats. Due to the wide range of textile gauges and weaves,
it is possible they could also produce wall hangings, blankets, bags,
shawls, shirts, skirts, and sashes. These people used plant rather than
animal fibres, possibly nettle, milkweed, yew, or alder which have historically been used in weaving. Such plant fibre fragments have also been recorded at the Russian Kostenki and Zaraysk as well as the German Gönnersdorf site.
The inhabitants of Dzudzuana Cave, Georgia, appear to have been staining flax fibres with plant-based dyes, including yellow, red, pink, blue, turquoise, violet, black, brown, gray, green, and khaki. The emergence of textiles in the European archaeological record also coincides with the proliferation of the sewing needle
in European sites. Ivory needles are found in most late Upper
Palaeolithic sites, which could correlate to frequent sewing, and the
predominance of small needles (too small to tailor clothes out of hide
and leather) could indicate work on softer woven fabrics or accessory
stitching and embroidery of leather products.
There is some potential evidence of simple loom
technology. However, these have also been interpreted as either hunting
implements or art pieces. Rounded objects made of mammoth phalanges from Předmostí and Avdeevo, Russia, may have been loom weights or human figures. Perforated, washer-like ivory or bone discs from across Europe were potentially spindle whorls. A foot-shaped piece of ivory from Kniegrotte, Germany, was possibly a comb or a decorative pendant. On the basis of wearing analyses, EEMH are also speculated to have used net spacers or weaving sticks. In 1960, French archaeologist Fernand Lacorre suggested that perforated batons were used to spin cordage.
Some Venuses depict hairdos and clothing worn by Gravettian women. The Venus of Willendorf
seems to be wearing a cap, possibly woven fabric or made from shells,
featuring at least seven rows and an additional two half-rows covering
the nape of the neck. It may have been made starting at a knotted centre
and spiraling downward from right to left, and then backstitching
all the rows to each other. The Kostenki-1 Venus seems to be wearing a
similar cap, though each row seems to overlap the other. The Venus of Brassempouy seems to be wearing some nondescript open, twined hair cover. The engraved Venus of Laussel from France seems to be wearing some headwear with rectangular gridding, and could potentially represent a snood. Most East European Venuses with headwear also display notching and checkwork on the upper body which are suggestive of bandeaux
(a strip of cloth bordering around the tops of the breasts) with some
even featuring straps connecting it to around the neck; these seem to be
absent in Western European Venuses. Some also wear belts: in Eastern
Europe, these are seen on the waist; whereas in Central and Western
Europe they are worn on the low hip. The Venus of Lespugue seems to be wearing a plant fibre string skirt comprising 11 cords running behind the legs.
EEMH are known to have created flutes
out of hollow bird bones as well as mammoth ivory, first appearing in
the archaeological record with the Aurignacian about 40,000 years ago in
the German Swabian Jura. The Swabian Jura flutes appear to have been
able to produce a wide range of tones. One virtually complete flute made
of the radius of a griffon vulture
from Hohle Fels measures 21.8 cm (8.6 in) in length and 0.8 cm
(0.31 in) in diameter. The bone had been smoothed down and was pierced
with holes. These finger holes exhibit cut marks, which could indicate
the exact placement of these holes was specifically measured to create concert pitch (that is, to make the instrument in tune) or a scale.
The part near the elbow joint had two V-shaped carvings, presumably a
mouthpiece. Ivory flutes would have required a great time investment to
make, as it requires more skill and precision to craft compared to a
bird bone flute. A section of ivory must be sawed off to the correct
size, cut in half so it can be hollowed out, and then the two pieces
have to be refitted and stuck together by an adhesive in an air-tight
seal. EEMH also created bone whistles out of deer phalanges.
Such sophisticated music technology could potentially speak to a
much longer musical tradition than the archaeological record indicates,
as modern hunter-gatherers have been documented to create instruments
out of: more biodegradable materials (less likely to fossilise) such as
reeds, gourds, skins, and bark; more or less unmodified items such as
horns, conch shells, logs, and stones; and their weapons, including spear thrower shafts or boomerangs as clapsticks, or a hunting bow.
It is speculated that a few EEMH artefacts represent bullroarers or percussion instruments such as rasps, but these are harder to prove. One probable bullroarer is identified at Lalinde,
France, dating to 14 to 12 thousand years ago, measuring 16 cm (6.3 in)
long and decorated with geometric incisions. In the mammoth-bone houses
at Mezine, Ukraine, an 80 cm × 20 cm (31.5 in × 7.9 in) thigh-bone, a
53 cm × 50 cm (21 in × 20 in) jawbone, a 57 cm × 63 cm (22 in × 25 in)
shoulder blade, and a 63 cm × 43 cm (25 in × 17 in) pelvis of a mammoth
bear evidence of paint and repeated percussion. These were first
proposed by archaeologist Sergei Bibikov to have served as drums, with
either a reindeer antler or mammoth tusk fragment also found at the site
being used as a drum stick, though this is contested. Other European
sites have yielded potential percussion mallets
made of mammoth bone or reindeer antler. It is speculated that some
EEMH marked certain sections of caves with red paint which could be
struck to produce a note that would resonate throughout the cave
chamber, somewhat like a xylophone.
Language
The
early modern human vocal apparatus is generally thought to have been the
same as that in present-day humans, as the present-day variation of the
FOXP2
gene associated with the neurological prerequisites for speech and
language ability seems to have evolved within the last 100,000 years, and the modern human hyoid bone (which supports the tongue and facilitates speech) evolved by 60,000 years ago demonstrated by the Israeli Skhul and Qafzeh humans. These indicate Upper Palaeolithic humans had the same language capabilities and range of potential phonemes (sounds) as present-day humans.
Though EEMH languages likely contributed to present-day
languages, it is unclear what early languages would have sounded like
because words denature and are replaced by entirely original words quite
rapidly, making it difficult to identity language cognates
(a word in multiple different languages which descended from a common
ancestor) which originated before 9 to 5 thousand years ago.
Nonetheless, it has been controversially hypothesised that Eurasian
languages are all related and form the "Nostratic languages" with an early common ancestor existing just after the end of the LGM. In 2013, evolutionary biologist Mark Pagel
and colleagues postulated that among "Nostratic languages", frequently
used words more often have speculated cognates, and that this was
evidence that 23 identified words were "ultraconserved" and supposedly
changed very little in use and pronunciation, descending from a common
ancestor about 15,000 years ago at the end of the LGM.
Archaeologist Paul Heggarty said that Pagel's data was subjective
interpretation of supposed cognates, and the extreme volatility of sound
and pronunciation of words (for example, Latin [akwam] "water" → French [o] in just 2,000 years) makes it unclear if cognates can even be identified that far back if they do indeed exist.
Several
Upper Palaeolithic caves feature depictions of seemingly part-human,
part-animal chimaeras (typically part bison, reindeer, or deer),
variously termed "anthropozoomorphs", "therianthropes",
or "sorcerers". These have typically been interpreted as being the
centre of some shamanistic ritual, and to represent some cultural
revolution and the origins of subjectivity. The oldest such cave drawing has been identified at the 30,000 year old Chauvet Cave,
where a figure with a bison upper body and human lower body was drawn
onto a stalactite, facing a depiction of a vulva with two tapering legs.
The 17,000 year old Grotte de Lascaux, France, has a seemingly dead
bird-human hybrid between a rhino and a charging bison, with a bird on
top of a pole placed near the figure's right hand. A bird on a stick is used as a symbol of mystical power by some modern shamanistic cultures who believe that birds are psychopomps,
and can move between the land of the living and the land of the dead.
In these cultures, they believe the shaman can either transform into a
bird or use a bird as a spirit guide. The 14,000 year old Grotte des Trois-Frères, France, features 3 sorcerers. The so-called "The Dancing Sorcerer"
or "God of Les Trois Frères" seems to bear human legs and feet, paws, a
deer head with antlers, a fox or horse tail, a beard, and a flaccid
penis, interpreted as dancing on all-fours. Another smaller sorcerer
with a bison head, human legs and feet, and upright posture stands above
several animal depictions, and is interpreted as holding and playing a
musical bow to herd all the animals. The third sorcerer has a seemingly
bison upper body and human lower body with testicles and an erection.
Some drawn human figures feature lines radiating out. These are
generally interpreted as wounded people, with the lines representing
pain or spears, possibly related to some initiation process for shamans.
One such "wounded man" at Grotte de Cougnac, France, is drawn on the
chest of a red Irish elk. A wounded sorcerer with a bison head is found
at the 17,000 year old Grotte de Gabillou. Some caves featured "vanquished men", lying presumably dead at the foot of generally a bull or bear.
For tangible art, the early Aurignacian Hohlenstein-Stadel, Swabian Jura, has yielded the famous lion-human
sculpture. It is 30 cm (12 in) tall, which is much larger than the
other Swabian Jura figurines. A possible second lion-human was also
found in the nearby Hohle Fels. An ivory slab from Geissenklösterle has a carved relief of a human figure with its arms raised in the air wearing a hide, the "worshipper".
A 28,000 year old "puppet" was identified at Brno, Czech Republic,
consisting of an isolated head piece, torso piece, and left arm piece.
It is presumed that the head and torso were connected by a rod, and the
torso and arm by some string allowing the arm to move. Because it was
found in a grave, this is speculated to have belonged to a shaman for
use in rituals involving the dead. A 14,000 year old large stone from Cueva del Juyo,
Spain, seems to have been carved to be the conjoined face of a man on
the right and a big cat on the left (when facing it). The man half seems
to feature a moustache and a beard. The cat half (either a leopard or a
lion) has slanting eyes, a snout, a fang, and spots on the muzzle
suggestive of whiskers.
Spanish archaeologists Leslie G. Freeman and Joaquín González
Echegaray argued that Cueva del Juyo was specifically modified to serve
as a sanctuary site to carry out rituals. They said the inhabitants dug
out a triangular trench and filled it with offerings including Patella (limpets), the common periwinkle (a sea snail),
pigments, the legs and jaws (possibly with meat still on them) of red
and roe deer, and a red deer antler positioned upright. The trench and
offerings were then filled in with dirt, and a seemingly flower-like
arrangement of bright cylindrical pieces of red, yellow, and green
pigments was placed on top. This was then buried with clay, stone slabs,
and bone spearpoints. The clay shell was covered by a 900 kg (2,000 lb)
slab of limestone supported by large flat stones. Somewhat similar
structures associated with some representation of a human have also been
found elsewhere in Magdalenian Spain, such as at Cueva de Erralla, Entrefoces rock shelter, Cueva de Praileaitz, Cueva de la Garma, and Cueva de Erberua.
Mortuary practices
EEMH
buried their dead, commonly with a variety symbolic grave goods as well
as red ochre, and multiple people were often buried in the same grave.
However, the archaeological record has yielded few graves, less than 5
preserved per millennium, which could indicate burials were seldom
given. Consequently, it is unclear if they represent isolated burials or
form a much more generalised mortuary tradition. Across Europe, some graves contained multiple individuals, in this case most often featuring both sexes.
Most burials are dated to the Gravettian (most notably 31–29
thousand years ago) and towards the end of the Magdalenian (from 14 to
11 thousand years ago). None are identified during the Aurignacian.
Gravettian burials seem to differ from post-LGM ones. The former ranged
across Europe from Portugal to Siberia, whereas the latter conspicuously
restricted to Italy, Germany, and southwest France. About half of
buried Gravettians were infants, whereas infant burials were much less
common post-LGM, but it is debated if this was due to social differences
or infant mortality rates. Graves are also commonly associated with
animal remains and tools, but it is unclear if this was intentional or
was coincidentally a part of the filler. They are much less common
post-LGM, and post-LGM graves are more commonly associated with
ornaments than Gravettian graves.
The most lavish Palaeolithic burial is a grave from the Gravettian of Sungir,
Russia, where a boy and a girl were placed crown-to-crown in a long,
shallow grave, and adorned with thousands of perforated ivory beads,
hundreds of perforated arctic fox
canines, ivory pins, disc pendants, ivory animal figurines, and mammoth
tusk spears. The beads were a third the size of those found with a man
from the same site, which could indicate these small beads were
specifically designed for the children. Only two other Upper Palaeolithic graves were found with grave goods other than personal adornment (one from Arene Candide,
Italy, and Brno, Czech Republic), and the grave of these two children
is unique in bearing any functional implements (the spears) as well as a
bone from another individual (a partial femur). The 5 other buried
individuals from Sungir did not receive nearly as many grave goods, with
one seemingly given no formal treatment whatsoever. However, most Gravettian graves feature few ornaments, and the buried were probably wearing them before death.
Due to such rich material culture and the marked difference of
treatment between different individuals, it has been suggested that
these peoples had a complex society beyond band level, and with social
class distinction. In this model, young individuals given elaborate
funerals were potentially born into a position of high status. However, about 75% of EEMH skeletons were men, which sharply contrasts with the predominance of depictions of women in art.
Because of the great amount of time, labour, and resources all these
grave goods would have required, it has been hypothesised that the grave
goods were made long in advance of the ceremony. Because of such
planning for multiple burials as well as their abundance in the
archaeological record, the seemingly purposeful presence of both sexes,
and an apparent preference for individuals with some congenital disorder (about a third of identified burials), it is generally speculated that these cultures practiced human sacrifice either in fear, disdain, or worship of those with abnormal features, like in many present-day and historical societies. Intricate funerals, in addition to evidence of shamanism and ritualism, has also provoked hypotheses of the belief of an afterlife by EEMH.
The earliest evidence of skull cups, and thus ritual cannibalism, comes from the Magdalenian of Gough's Cave,
England. Further concrete evidence of such rituals does not appear
until after the Palaeolithic. The Gough's Cave cup seems to have
followed a similar method of scalping
as those from Neolithic Europe, with incisions being made along the
midline of the skull (whereas the Native American method of scalping
involved a circular incision around the crown). Earlier examples of
non-ritual cannibalism in Europe do not seem to have followed the same
method of defleshing.
At least 1 skull cup was transported from a different site. In
addition, Gough's Cave also yielded a human radius with a zig-zag
engraving. Compared to other artefacts in the cave or common to the
Magdalenian period, the radius was modified quite little, with the
engraving probably quickly etched on (indicated by scrape marks not
recorded on any other Magdalenian engraving), and the bone broken and
discarded soon thereafter. This may indicate the bone's only function
was as a tool in some cannibalistic and/or funerary ritual, rather than
being prepared to be carried around by the group as an ornament or tool.
The "caveman" archetype
is quite popular in both literature and visual media and can be
portrayed as highly muscular, hairy, or monstrous, and to represent a
wild and animalistic character, drawing on the characteristics of a wild man.
Cavemen are often represented in front of a cave or fighting a
dangerous animal; wielding stone, bone, or wooden tools usually for
combat; and dressed in an exposing fur cloak. Men often are depicting
with unkempt, unstyled, shoulder-length or longer hair, usually with a
beard. Cavemen first appeared in visual media in D. W. Griffith's 1912 Man's Genesis, and among the first appearances in fictional literature were Stanley Waterloo's 1897
The Story of Ab and Jack London's 1907 Before Adam.
.JPG)
_-_Pygmy_Drummers.jpg)
.jpg)
)_(17972406310).jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.JPG)
BisonsPoursuivisParDesLions.jpg)
.png)
.jpg)
_(14592689010).jpg)
