The Roc de Marsal Neandertal child: A reassessment of its status as a deliberate burial
Abstract
Whether Neandertals buried their dead has considerable bearing on the debate concerning the nature of their cultural behavior. Among the claims for intentional Neandertal burial in Europe, the child from Roc de Marsal has long been one of the less contentious examples because its articulated skeleton was found in what has become widely accepted as an intentionally excavated pit. However, what is known about the context of the Roc de Marsal remains from the original descriptions, coupled with new stratigraphic, sedimentological, and archaeological data on the site from recent excavations, cast serious doubt on this interpretation.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
There is increasing evidence that Neanderthals may have been as socially complex and varied on an intra- and inter-group level as modern humans in the treatment of their dead and within the symbolic realm.
“In regards to Neanderthals there is an increasing body of evidence that suggests they may well have been as socially complex and varied on an intra- and inter-group level as modern humans in the treatment of their dead606162 and within the symbolic realm636465.”
From Assessing the calorific significance of episodes of human cannibalism in the Palaeolithic (2017) · cites this paper as [61]
Neanderthals seem to have had varying attitudes to the burial and treatment of their dead.
“Why then would a hominin species such as the Neanderthals, who seem to have had varying attitudes to the burial and treatment of their dead2260616272, not have an equally complex attitude towards cannibalism?”
From Assessing the calorific significance of episodes of human cannibalism in the Palaeolithic (2017) · cites this paper as [61]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 38 · Cited by 102
- Authors
- Sandgathe, D. M., Dibble, H. L., Goldberg, P., & McPherron, S. P.
- Affiliations
- Simon Fraser University (CA)
- Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology (DE)
- Boston University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Sandgathe, Dennis M.
- Venue
- Journal of Human Evolution
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2011-09
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 243-253
- ISSN
- 0047-2484 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2046810370
- Cited by
- 102
- References
- 38
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 27.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Human Evolution (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Online (University of Wollongong) (submittedVersion)
- Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (submittedVersion)
- MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Anthropology › Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Archaeological and Geological Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
- Keywords
- stratigraphy, sedimentology
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Archaeology, Bone and Bones, Burial, Fossils, France, Paleontology, Neanderthals, Caves
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
