Neanderthal slaves

[Garyjohn2]

You might want to think some more about this. Your standard would allow enslaving many of the mentally disabled, not to mention some of the truly stupid.

And the lazy!

 

[A_G]

Did Neanderthals come from Adam and Eve?

 

[Garyjohn2]

Did Neanderthals come from Adam and Eve?

Good question! I don’t believe so. Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens are different species…but they do have a common ancestor if you go back far enough (400,000 years). This common ancestor is Homo Rhodesiensis. Were Homo Rhodesiensis human?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_rhodesiensis
(note: not all scientists agree this was the common ancestor, so it is tentative)

I think it is commonly believed that Adam and Eve were Homo Sapien…but I don’t know if there is any way to say for sure! Maybe someone else knows.

 

[SurlyMermaid]

I’m sure we wouldn’t enslave Neanderthals. They are too close to modern homo sapiens. I studied anthropology in the early '90s and this is an interesting subject!

 

[JDaniel]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal

It is widely believed that we have no moral right to own people as slaves, but we do have a moral right to own animals and use them for labor and food, so long as we treat them correctly.

Neanderthals are now extinct. But if they existed today would we have a right to own them and use them for labor and eat them as food?

I have my own opinion on the matter, but i would like to see other peoples responses and opinions.

Thanks. No theology please.

MoM:

Well, since I can’t seem to get my elderly mom to carry my barbells upstairs for me any more, I was thinking that it might not be such a bad idea!

All seriousness aside, I think that the “enslavement” of any creature might be cruel and unusual. But, I suppose that is scalar. All lower animals are here for us, for varying purposes. Provided, or course, that they are treated humanely. We have a duty to God to care for the earth and its creatures, animal and plant. We must weigh that with our needs for health and survival. But, I don’t think I could eat soylent green!

God bless,
jd

 

[carn]

Neanderthals are now extinct. But if they existed today would we have a right to own them and use them for labor and eat them as food?

For me its simple:

Does one of them complain and tries to whip up his fellow neaderthals to voice discontent about their teatment or use their clubs to bash in our heads?

If yes, then neanderthals should be treated as humans.
And if no, the decision is not final because any neanderthal is free to challenge it before any court, if he personally communicates his desire to the court.

(Or in other words, if by any method intelligence similar to human intelligence is visible, they are all to be treated as humans. Identifying their mistreatment and act in a planned way regarding this would be one way to prove they have similar intelligence.)

 

[empther]

Garyjohn2 wrote:
Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens are different species

It would be impossible to prove that now. “Different species” means genetic isolation, no cross breeding. But some scientists suspect the Neanderthals disappeared because they were crossbreeding with Cro-Magnons and the genes were lost in the larger gene pool.

Cro-Magnons are essentially identical with modern man. Some would say there’s no difference.

The Iceman, found frozen in the Austrian-Italian mountains, was carrying tools made of forty types of wood, each one chosen for a specific purpose, besides carrying a copper ax.
The smelting of usable copper using primitive tools is an extremely difficult process. Few people could do it today. And there is the forty kinds of wood.

Iceman lived six thousand years ago, but these people were as smart as we are. Try smelting copper with nothing but firewood and bricks to work with. Good luck.

 

[Garyjohn2]

It would be impossible to prove that now. “Different species” means genetic isolation, no cross breeding. But some scientists suspect the Neanderthals disappeared because they were crossbreeding with Cro-Magnons and the genes were lost in the larger gene pool.

Hmm, I think different species doesn’t necessarily mean no cross-breeding. Take a horse and a donkey for example. True, their offspring is sterile…so instead take a look at savannah cats. [en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savannah_(cat)]](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savannah_(cat)])
It’s a crossbreed between a serval (Leptailurus serval) and a house cat (Felis catus). They are certainly different species, but they can interbreed…and their offspring can reproduce.

From the studies I’ve read, Neaderthals either didn’t breed with homo sapiens, or didn’t interbreed enough to make a functional difference to the DNA of homo sapiens. There might have been more research since I read that though.

The most convincing theory I’ve read for the extinction of the neaderthals was that they were out-competed by homo sapiens. Neaderthals had large, stocky body types, and on average had larger brains. They needed significantly more calories to keep themselves going than homo sapiens did. There was also evidence that neaderthals may have had smaller social structures compared to homo sapiens…so we were more social. By combining a more efficient physical design and a more complex and larger social structure, we were able to out-compete the Neaderthal for resources. Neaderthals used to be wide-spread across Europe…however the most recent fossils (closer to their extinction) are only found in remote and less-favorable mountain regions. This implies they were kind of pushed to more marginal territories as homo sapiens moved in, and they eventually died out.

Plenty of room for other theories though. Super interesting stuff !

 

[empther]

The most convincing theory I’ve read for the extinction of the neaderthals was that they were out-competed by homo sapiens.

That’s pure speculation.

If tens of thousands of remains of Neanderthal had been found of a vast region, over a long time, and accompanied by evidence of what he was eatiing, what game he slaughtered, which books he read, etc etc,
we could paint a picture of what happened.
But since only a few dozen Neaderthals have been found we can only guess what happened.
It’s like having only fifty frames from the four hour long Gone With the Wind film. What was the movie about?

 

[Garyjohn2]

That’s pure speculation.

Well, it’s not pure speculation. It’s an educated guess based on science and archaeology…but there is some speculation too. It’s not my theory though…I’m getting my information from Dawn of Man: The Story of Human Evolution by Ron Mckie (highly recommend!), a National Geographic article, and a history channel special I caught on Netflix. Here’s the Nat’l Geo article:
ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/10/neanderthals/hall-text

Also, between 400 and 500 neaderthal fossils have been found. The facts are that they were larger…so needed more calories to sustain them and the more recent fossils are in more remote and marginalized areas. I forget how they determined the hypothesis about social structure. I think it had something to do with the tools found at neaderthal sites and the tools found at ancient human sites and indications that there was more trade going on with the humans…but I don’t remember!

 

[tonyrey]

We’re talking about apes here, just to make it clear.

I believe apes are animals; certainly a higher order than many, but animals nonetheless. As animals, I believe they were created for the proper service of mankind. When one says “proper”, one takes into account that apes might, for instance, be more subject to, say, foreboding than, say, cattle, just as cattle are more subject to it than, say, earthworms. We must consider the nature of each creature in making these judgments.

So, for instance, if we keep apes in captivity, which I believe is at least mildly educational for mankind, I would say we ought to make it as natural and comfortable an environment as possible, given their nature. In doing so, of course, we ought to also protect them against the natural hazards that nature itself has in store for them. So, for example, since some apes are given to murdering and cannibalizing their own kind, this should be prevented in the course of captivity.

If experimenting on apes can lead to important cures for humans, then I certainly accept the idea of experimentation. Every precaution, however, should be taken to prevent undue panic or pain.

I would not support killing apes unless they pose a hazard to humans in a particular environment. I feel the same about any animal.

Then you do believe apes have rights?

 

[buffalo]

We now know Neandertals are human.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Then you do believe apes have rights?

No. But I believe we have obligations toward animals.

 

[Garyjohn2]

We now know Neandertals are human.

Says who?
The common definition for human is “homo sapien” I thought. Neaderthals are not classified as homo sapien. I think the question should be not “were they human” but “were they people.”

BTW early humans ate neaderthals (and likely vice-versa). I re-read that national geographic article I referenced in an earlier post and picked up that little nugget. There are marks on neaderthal bones indicating we were after their brains and marrow (sorry if that’s gross, this is science…those are calorie-rich tissues). So we might have treated them as animals some time in the distant past when we were little more than animals ourselves!

 

[Ridgerunner]

We now know Neandertals are human.

That is what I think is most likely. Whether it is somehow proved scientifically, I don’t know. Anthropologically, I think we pretty much do.

I liked the post about the fifty frames of Gone with the Wind. We don’t know the big story about them, and might never know. It is intriguing to know that Neanderthals and Cro Magnons had contact. So, where did the Neanderthals go? To me, the most likely story is that, while they were in some respects physiologically different, they were not sufficiently different for Cro Magnons to not think of them as human. And if they didn’t, why should we? And, unless some Cro Magnon vector disease wiped them out, the scenario that seems most probable to me is that they were simply incorporated into the larger Cro Magnon population. It is interesting that nobody has yet found a Cro Magnon arrow in a Neanderthal’s verterbra or a Neanderthal ax buried in a Cro Magnon’s skull. They seemed not to have warred, and, knowing Cro Magnon’s propensity to war against extreme “differentness” (if Cro Magnons are us) it’s remarkable.

It’s interesting to realize that northern Chinese are genetically closer to Europeans than they are to southern Chinese. It’s interesting as well to read about the Tarim mummies who seem as Celtic as Vercingetorix, but disappeared, and to think those people were incorporated over time into the population of a more numerous Mongolic populace, thus perhaps explaining the differences and affinities among Chinese on one hand, and the very existence of Turkmen on the other.

Would Neanderthals have seemed greatly stranger to Cro-Magnons than a Swede would seem to an Annamese or a Kalahari bushman? Possibly not. Depending on which anthropologist you read, one is inclined to think “probably not”.

 

[JDaniel]

We now know Neandertals are human.

Buffalo:

Knowing you for as long as I have, I would expect that you have a referent?

God bless,
jd

 

[Ridgerunner]

BTW early humans ate neaderthals (and likely vice-versa). I re-read that national geographic article I referenced in an earlier post and picked up that little nugget. There are marks on neaderthal bones indicating we were after their brains and marrow (sorry if that’s gross, this is science…those are calorie-rich tissues). So we might have treated them as animals some time in the distant past when we were little more than animals ourselves!

Indisputable humans also treated other indisputable humans as food well into the 20th century in some places. I am unaware of the Nat Geo article, but if the assertions are true, it falls pretty short of proving that Neanderthals were non-human. It may prove nothing but that “Homo Sapiens” were not entirely averse to eating carrion, like the people in the Donner party or those South Americans whose plane crashed in the Andes. The recorded history of mankind makes it very clear that humans often resorted to eating animal carrion as recently as the 1940s.

Of possible but not terribly topical interest, one of my daughters is a forensic anthropologist. In a drug raid, police found a human skull. Alarmed, they brought it to her. She examined it with care and asked the police whether any of the owners of the house was a Vietnam veteran. Well, turns out one was. She then explained in detail why the skull was not that of some recent local murder victim, but a “trophy skull”, acquired under inevitably grim circumstances in Vietnam. The fact that the skull was that of a young Asian male is not a terribly difficult finding. The marks on the skull, however, were those one makes when one strips a skull of the more adherent flesh after boiling most of it away. The level of oxidation pointed to a Vietnam-era death.

By no means did all, or even very many, soldiers in Vietnam acquire things like “trophy skulls”, but some did.

Mystery solved.

 

[tonyrey]

Then you do believe apes have rights?

Do only human beings have rights? If so why?

 

[Garyjohn2]

It is interesting that nobody has yet found a Cro Magnon arrow in a Neanderthal’s verterbra or a Neanderthal ax buried in a Cro Magnon’s skull. They seemed not to have warred…

Ridgerunner, but where are you getting your information? There is evidence that neaderthals and early homo sapiens warred.

“Using modern-day forensics, Steven Churchill, an associate professor of evolutionary anthropology at Duke University, has determined that [Neaderthal ]Shanidar 3’s wound was most likely caused by a thrown spear. At the time of his death, only humans, who had adapted their hunting techniques to the open plains of Africa, had developed projectile weapons;”
time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1913769,00.html

There is some evidence that they bred with homo sapiens, but some evidence against it. Really, check on the Nat Geo article, its really interesting and informative.
ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/10/neanderthals/hall-text/1

 

[Ridgerunner]

Ridgerunner, but where are you getting your information? There is evidence that neaderthals and early homo sapiens warred.

“Using modern-day forensics, Steven Churchill, an associate professor of evolutionary anthropology at Duke University, has determined that [Neaderthal ]Shanidar 3’s wound was most likely caused by a thrown spear. At the time of his death, only humans, who had adapted their hunting techniques to the open plains of Africa, had developed projectile weapons;”
time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1913769,00.html

There is some evidence that they bred with homo sapiens, but some evidence against it. Really, check on the Nat Geo article, its really interesting and informative.
ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/10/neanderthals/hall-text/1

Unfortunately, Nat Geo has become pretty politicized, which is one of the reasons (diminishing and less scholarly text is another) why I no longer subscribe. Nevertheless, I’ll read it.

I am not an anthropologist, but I will say that utilization of projectile weapons has more to do with physiognomy than with hunting in wide open spaces, let alone on the “plains of Africa” (Cro Magnon would have to have crossed a great deal of open country to reach Europe from any direction. It would not necessarily have been in Africa.) And, as Roman soldiers and early American pioneers could tell you, spears are, indeed, thrown in forests as well. The part about the “open plains of Africa” sounds just a bit strained to me in accounting for cause and effect. This writer has no idea where or how or among whom projectile weapons originated, which makes me wonder how much more of this is speculation.