The Neanderthal dead: exploring mortuary variability in Middle Palaeolithic Eurasia
Abstract
Recent discussions about Neanderthal mortuary behaviour have tended to polarise around opinions that they did, or did not, bury their dead. Gargett, in particular, has forwarded a largely unconvincing critique of Neanderthal burial, but most scholars agree that at least some Neanderthals, at some times, treated the dead body. This article demonstrates that Neanderthal mortuary activity was a real phenomenon that requires exploration and interpretation and examines the nature and extent of variability in mortuary behaviour. In the later Middle Pleistocene Neanderthals may have been caching the dead in unmodified natural surroundings. After 70 ka BP some Neanderthal groups buried infants, or parts of them, in pits, infants and adults in shallow grave cuttings and indulged in primary corpse modification and subsequent burial. It may have been on occasion too that certain enclosed sites served as mortuary centres, and that their function as such was perpetuated in the memory of Neanderthal groups either through physical grave markers or social tradition. In all it would seem that at least in some Neanderthal groups the dead body was explored and treated in socially meaningful ways.
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 [62]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 35 · Cited by 114
- Authors
- Pettitt, P.
- Affiliations
- University of Bristol (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Pettitt, Paul
- ORCID
- Pettitt, Paul
- Venue
- Before Farming
- Publisher
- Liverpool University Press
- Published
- 2002-01
- Volume
- 2002
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-26
- ISSN
- 1476-4253 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-4261
- OpenAlex
- W2108968651
- Cited by
- 114
- References
- 35
- Citations by year
- 2025: 9 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Before Farming (publishedVersion)
- 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
- Neanderthals, Neanderthal burials, infant burials, Middle Pleistocene, gravestones, social memory
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