Table 2. Caliber and number of shells fired by the main artillery of enemy ships and the number of hits in Jutland

Were ancient people smarter than us?

The average volume of the brain of a modern person is about 1400 cubic centimeters, which is quite a large value for our body size. Man has grown a large brain for himself in the course of evolution - anthropogenesis. Our ape-like ancestors, who did not have large claws and teeth, descended from the trees and moved to life in open spaces, began to develop a brain. Although this development did not immediately go quickly - in Australopithecus, the volume of the brain (about 500 cubic centimeters) remained practically unchanged for six million years. The jump in its increase occurred two and a half million years ago. In early Homo sapiens, the brain has already grown significantly - in Homo erectus (Human erectus), its volume is from 900 to 1200 cubic centimeters (this overlaps with the range of the brain of a modern person). In Neanderthals, the brain was already very large - 1400-1740 cubic centimeters. which is on average more than ours. The early Homo sapiens in Europe - the Cro-Magnons - will simply plug us into the belt with their brains: 1600-1800 cubic centimeters (although the Cro-Magnons were tall - 180-190 centimeters, and anthropologists find a direct connection between brain size and height).

The brain in human evolution not only increased, but also changed in the ratio of different parts. Paleoanthropologists examine the brains of fossil hominids using a skull casting called an endocrane, which shows the relative size of the lobes. The frontal lobe developed most rapidly, which is associated with thinking, consciousness, the appearance of speech (Broca's area). The development of the parietal lobe was accompanied by the improvement of sensitivity, the synthesis of information from different sense organs and fine motor skills of the fingers. The temporal lobe supported the development of hearing, which provides sound speech (Wernicke's area). So, for example, in erectus, the brain grew in width, the occipital lobe and cerebellum increased, but the frontal lobe remained low and narrow.

And in Neanderthals, in their very large brains, the frontal and parietal lobes were relatively underdeveloped (compared to the occipital). In Cro-Magnons, the brain became much higher (due to an increase in the frontal and parietal lobes) and acquired a spherical shape.

So, the brain of our ancestors grew and grew, but, paradoxically, about 20 thousand years ago, the reverse trend began: the brain began to gradually decrease. So modern humans have a smaller average brain size than Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons. What is the reason?

WHO IS SMARTER? ANTHROPOLOGIST'S OPINION

Anthropologist Stanislav Drobyshevsky (Associate Professor of the Department of Anthropology, Faculty of Biology, Moscow State University) answers: “There are two answers to this question: everyone likes one, the other is correct. The first is that the size of the brain is not directly related to intelligence, and the Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons had a simpler structure than ours, but the technical incompleteness was compensated by large sizes, and then supposedly not completely. In fact, we know absolutely nothing about the neural structure of the brain of ancient people, so such an answer is a complete speculation that consoles the conceit of modern people. The second answer is more real: ancient people were smarter. They had to solve a bunch of survival problems, and think very quickly, unlike us, to whom everything is presented on a silver platter, and even in a chewed form, and there is no need to rush anywhere. Ancient people were generalists - each kept in his head a complete set of information necessary for survival in all situations, plus there should have been the ability to think reactively in unforeseen situations. We have a specialization: everyone knows a tiny piece of their information, and in which case - "contact a specialist."

The Neanderthal brain differs from ours in just one phase of development.

Findings of Neanderthal children provide an opportunity to trace how their large brains developed. Scientists from the Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig of the Max Planck Society, together with French colleagues, made a reconstruction of the comparative development of the brain of Neanderthal and Homo sapiens. First, scientists conducted a CT scan of the skull of 58 modern people. And then they did the same, putting the skulls of nine Neanderthals of different ages into the scanner.

Although the skull of a Neanderthal is no smaller than ours, they differ significantly in shape. But in newborns of both species, the brain box is almost the same in shape - in a Neanderthal baby, it is quite a bit more elongated. And then the paths of development diverge. In a modern person, in the period from the absence of teeth to an incomplete set of incisors, not only the size, but also the shape of the brain box changes - it becomes more spherical. And then it increases only in size, and almost does not change in shape. Biologists have decided that this is a key brain shaping process that Neanderthals lack. The shape of the skull of their newborns, adolescents and adults is almost the same. Total difference - in one critical stage right after the birth. Probably, scientists believe, such a noticeable change in shape is accompanied by a transformation of the internal structure of the brain and the development of a neural network, which creates conditions for the development of intelligence. Scientists published an article on the development of the brain of different human species in the journal Current Biology.

Who is smarter? Opinion of a neuroscientist

Sergey Savelyev, Head of the Development Laboratory, shared his opinion nervous system Institute of Human Morphology of the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences: “This is due to the fact that artificial selection operates in the human population, aimed at reducing individual variability and purposefully selecting highly socialized mediocrities. And too smart and asocial individuals to destroy. Such a community is more manageable, consists of more predictable people, which is always beneficial. At all times, society has sacrificed calmness agents in favor of non-conflict and stability. Previously, they were simply eaten, and later they were expelled from the community. It is because of this, from my point of view, because of the migration of the most intelligent outcasts, that the resettlement of mankind began. And in sedentary, conservative and more socialized groups, there was a hidden selection to consolidate some of the most convenient and favorable properties of behavior for maintaining the community. Behavioral selection led to brain shrinkage.”

Myth 1

THE BIGGER THE BRAIN, THE MORE SMART IT IS

Brain sizes vary quite a lot among modern humans as well. So, it is known that Ivan Turgenev's brain weighed 2012 grams, while Anatole France's was almost a whole kilogram less - 1017 grams. But this does not mean at all that Turgenev was twice as smart as Anatole France. Moreover, it is recorded that the owner of the heaviest brain - 2900 grams - was mentally retarded.

Since the most important part of the brain is nerve cells, or neurons (they form gray matter), it can be assumed that the larger the brain, the more neurons it has. And the more neurons, the better they work. But in the brain there is not only
neurons, but also glial cells (they perform a supporting function, direct the migration of neurons, supply them with nutrients, and according to recent data
- and participate in information processes). In addition, part of the mass of the brain is formed by white matter, which consists of conductive fibers. That is, there is a connection between the size of the brain and the number of neurons, but not a direct one. And there is obviously no connection between brain size and intelligence at all.

The brain can be “pumped up” on a treadmill

A study conducted by an international team of scientists and published in the journal PNAS found that aerobic exercise (treadmill activities) in old age builds up the hippocampus, a brain region that is very important for memory and spatial learning. Its volume was determined in a magnetic resonance tomograph. It is believed that with age, the hippocampus decreases at a rate of 1-2% per year. Experts believe that such atrophy of the hippocampus is directly related to age-related memory loss. So, in elderly subjects who worked out on a treadmill for a year, the volume of the hippocampus not only did not decrease, but even increased, and spatial memory also improved compared to the control group. The reason is again in stimulating the formation of new neurons.

Myth 2

NERVE CELLS DO NOT REPAIR

Since neurons do not divide, for a long time it was believed that the formation of new nerve cells occurs only in embryonic development. The fact that this is not so, scientists discovered a few years ago. It turned out that in the brain of adult laboratory rats and mice there are zones in which the birth of new neurons occurs - neurogenesis. Their source is the stem cells of the nervous tissue (neural stem cells). Later it was found that humans also have such zones. Studies have shown that new neurons actively grow contacts with other cells and are involved in learning and memory processes. We repeat: in adult animals and humans.

Further, scientists began to study what external factors can influence the birth of neurons. And it turned out that neurogenesis is enhanced with intensive training, with enrichment of environmental conditions and during physical activity. And the most powerful factor inhibiting neurogenesis was stress. Well, with age, this process still slows down. What is true for laboratory animals, in this case, can be completely transferred to humans. Moreover, observations and studies on humans confirm this. That is, in order to enhance the formation of new nerve cells, you need to train the brain, learn new skills, memorize more information diversify your life with new experiences and lead a physically active lifestyle.

In old age, this leads to the same effect as in younger years. But stress for the birth of new neurons is detrimental.

MICE GYM

Neuroscientists from Taiwan (National Cheng Kung University Medical College) worked with mice of different ages - young (3 months), adults (7 months), early middle age (9 months), middle age (13 months) and old (24 months). The animals received daily physical activity through training in the wheel, every day for an hour. After five weeks of training, scientists studied what changes had occurred in their brains compared to "unsportsmanlike" rodents, which all this time just sat in cages. Using special staining, the number of dividing cells, maturing neuronal cells, and mature neurons in the hippocampus was counted. Firstly. the researchers found that neurogenesis declined with age. The number of newly formed nerve cells in middle-aged mice was only about 5% of the number of new neurons in young mice. But five weeks of intense exercise did the trick: The rate of new neuron production in middle-aged athletic mice doubled compared to non-athletic mice. Understanding the mechanisms, scientists found that exercise increased the content of protein - a neurotrophic factor that stimulates the division and differentiation of neural cells. What is true in mice is also true in humans in this case, the authors of an article in Nature say. So physical activity in middle and old age gives a good chance to keep the brain healthy for a long time.

STRESS DAMAGES THE BRAIN, AN INTERESTING LIFE RESTORES

Stress in childhood is especially bad for the brain. Its consequences affect the psyche, behavior and intellectual abilities of an adult. But there is a way to offset the damaging effects of early stress. As Israeli scientists have shown on laboratory rats, you can help if you enrich the environment of the victim. Stress destroys the brain through hormones, which include corticosteroids produced in the adrenal glands, as well as hormones from the pituitary and thyroid glands. Their increased level causes changes in dendrites - short processes of neurons, reduces synaptic plasticity, especially in the hippocampus, slows down the formation of new nerve cells in the dentate gyrus of the hippocampus, and so on. Such violations during the development of the brain do not go unnoticed.

Researchers from the Institute for the Study of Affective Neuroscience at the University of Haifa divided lab rats into three groups. One at a young age was subjected to three days of stress, the second after stress was placed in an enriched environment, the third was left as a control. The rats that happened to live in an enriched environment were moved to a large cage filled with interesting items: plastic boxes, cylinders, tunnels, platforms, and running wheels.

When tested, rats from the stressed group showed increased fear and reduced curiosity and were less likely to learn. They were less motivated to explore new environments, which can be compared to the loss of interest in life that often occurs in a depressed person. But being in an enriched environment compensated for all the behavioral disturbances caused by stress.

Scientists suggest that environmental enrichment protects the brain from stress for several reasons: it stimulates the production of proteins - nerve growth factors, activates neurotransmitter systems and favors the formation of new nerve cells. They published the results in the journal PLoS ONE. These results are most directly related to orphans whose early childhood was spent in an orphanage. Only an interesting and eventful life that the adoptive parents will try to create for them. will help smooth out the difficult life experience.

THE HUMAN BRAIN WORKS AT 10/6/5/2%

This idea was very popular until recently. It was usually cited as a rationale for the fact that the brain has a hidden potential that we do not use. But modern methods studies do not support this thesis. “It arose because when they learned to register electrical activity of individual neurons, it turned out that of all the neurons at the measurement point, very few are active at any given time,” says Olga Svarnik, Head of the Laboratory of Systemic Neurophysiology and Neural Interfaces of the NBIC Center of the Kurchatov Institute. There are about 1012 neurons in the brain (the figure is being refined all the time), and they are very specialized: some are electrically active during walking, others during decision mathematical problem, others - during a love date, etc. It's hard to imagine what will happen if they suddenly decide to make money at the same time! “Just as we are not able to realize all our experience at the same time, that is, we cannot simultaneously drive a car, jump rope, read, and so on,” explains Olga Svarnik, “so are all our nerve cells cannot and should not be active at the same time. But this does not mean at all that we do not use the brain one hundred percent.

“This was invented by those psychologists who themselves use the brain by two percent,” Sergey Savelyev categorically asserts. - The brain can only be fully used, nothing can be turned off in it. According to physiological laws, the brain cannot work less than half, because even when we do not think, a constant metabolism is maintained in neurons. And when a person begins to work intensively with his head, to solve some problems, the brain begins to consume energy almost twice as much. Everything else is fiction. And no brains can be so trained as to intensify their work tenfold.

THE BRAIN IS A VERY ENERGY CONSUMING ORGAN

Scientists have long calculated that an intensively working human brain consumes a quarter of the resources of the entire organism. And at rest - 10% of the body's energy. The mass of the brain is only 2% of the mass of the body.

Myth 4

A PART OF THE BRAIN RESPONSIBLE FOR EVERY ACTION

Indeed, in the human cerebral cortex, neuroscientists distinguish zones associated with all sense organs: vision, hearing, smell, touch, taste, as well as associative zones where information is processed and synthesized.

And magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) records the activity of certain areas during different activities. But the map of the brain is not absolute, and there is growing evidence that everything is much more complicated. For example, not only the well-known Broca's area and Wernicke's area, but also other parts of the brain are involved in the process of speech. And the cerebellum, which has always been associated with the coordination of movements, is involved in a variety of types of brain activity. With the question of whether there is specialization in the brain, we turned to Olga Svarnik: “There is specialization in the brain at the level of neurons, and it is quite constant,” the specialist answered. - But it is more difficult to single out specialization at the level of structures, because completely different neurons can lie side by side. You can talk about clusters of neurons, such as columns, you can talk about segments of neurons that are activated at the same moment, but it is impossible to really isolate any large areas that are customary to highlight. MRI reflects the activity of blood flow, but not the work of individual neurons. Probably, from the pictures that are obtained by MRI, we can say where, with a greater or lesser probability, one or another specialization of neurons can be found. But to say that some zone is responsible for something seems wrong to me.”

NEURON JENNIFER ANISTON

“Neuron specialization,” says Olga Svarnik, “can be illustrated with a curious example known as the “Jennifer Aniston neuron phenomenon.” Since a person, for experimental purposes, naturally, cannot stick electrodes into the brain, this information was obtained on patients with epilepsy, in whom electrodes were implanted into the brain to localize the focus. So, in such a patient in the brain, among other neurons, they found a neuron that responded with an electrical discharge at the moment when a photograph of actress Jennifer Aniston appeared on the monitor. These could be completely different photographs of the actress - the neuron always "recognized" her. In another experiment, they found a neuron that only responded to a demonstration of The Simpsons. And so on."

Myth 5

THE BRAIN IS A COMPUTER

According to Olga Svarnik, comparing the brain with a computer is nothing more than a metaphor: “We can fantasize that there are certain algorithms in the brain, that a person has heard information and is doing something. But to say that our brain works this way would be wrong. Unlike a computer, there are no functional blocks in the brain. For example, it is believed that the hippocampus is a structure responsible for memory and spatial orientation. But hippocampal neurons behave differently, they have different specializations, they do not function as a whole.”

And here is what the biologist and popularizer of science Alexander Markov (Institute of Paleontology of the Russian Academy of Sciences) thinks on the same issue: “In a computer, all signals exchanged between elements of logical circuits have the same nature - electrical, and these signals can receive only one of two values ​​- 0 or 1. The transmission of information in the brain is not based on a binary code, but rather on a ternary one. If the excitatory signal is correlated with one, and its absence with zero, then the inhibitory signal can be likened to minus one.

But in fact, the brain uses several dozen types of chemical signals - it's the same as if a computer uses dozens of different electric currents ... And zeros and ones could have dozens of different, say, colors. The most important difference is that the conductivity of each particular synapse ... can vary depending on the circumstances. This property is called synaptic plasticity. There is another radical difference between the brain and an electronic computer. In a computer, the main amount of memory is stored not in the logical electronic circuits of the processor, but separately, in special storage devices. In the brain, there are no areas specially allocated for the long-term storage of memories. All memory is recorded in the same structure of interneuronal synaptic connections, which is at the same time a grandiose computing device - an analog of a processor.

Popular science magazine
"Details of the World"

Neanderthals are something alternative humanity, people who lived in Europe and Western Asia (in the Middle East to Central Asia, Altai inclusive), who developed relatively isolated and independently over hundreds of thousands of years, without any special ties with other mankind that existed at the same time in other places. Our ancestors at that time lived in Africa, in East Asia, and Europe and West Asia were the territories of the Neanderthals.

1

Neanderthals evolved from their ancestors Homo heidelbergensis smoothly and gradually. They can be considered the only super-native Europeans. The ancestors of the Neanderthals were the first to populate Europe and for all subsequent centuries, millennia and hundreds of millennia existed there. during this time they created their own unique cultures: this is the Mousterian (Mousterian culture), although some sapiens also used it, and the Mykok culture. They had their own way of life: Neanderthals were almost predatory. And in fact, these are the most predatory of all primates, which there are. Today, the most predatory modern populations are the Eskimos that exist in Alaska, in Greenland - who practically eat only meat. They are approaching the level of the Neanderthals.

Alekseev V.P. Hominids of the second half of the Middle and Early Upper Pleistocene of Europe // Fossil hominids and human origin. Proceedings of the Institute of Ethnography of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, new. Ser., vol. 92, M., Nauka, 1966, p. 143-181.

2

Neanderthals are unique in that their brain volume was the same as ours, and if you count in a certain way, even more than ours, on average. In other words, there were larger individuals, smaller ones, but on average their size was slightly larger than ours. However, their brain structure was different, it was more flattened, with flattened frontal lobes, very wide, with a huge occipital lobe. The skull was rather peculiar: huge brow ridges, large jaws, but not protruding forward, the back of the head sharply protruding back. Neanderthals are distinguished by their adaptability to very cold living conditions, since they lived during the alternation of glacial and interglacial periods. True, as paleontological reconstructions show, most Neanderthals still lived in a more or less warm climate. Nevertheless, they lived in a rather cold climate, despite the fact that their culture was rather low, which is why their body acquired such hypertrophied proportions: very broad shoulders, a wide pelvis, a large barrel-shaped chest, powerful muscles. Well, the closer the shape of the body to the ball and the more muscular it is, the better it is to keep warm, the less heat loss. Again, modern ones are as close as possible to this option. But the Neanderthals were even more powerful.

That is, Neanderthals were maximally adapted to their habitat. They lived and hunted for thousands of years. Moreover, they hunted mammoth, woolly rhinos, bison, cave bears, that is, large animals.

Alekseev V.P. Paleoanthropology of the globe and formation human races. Paleolithic. M., Nauka, 1978, 284 p.

3

About 40 thousand years ago, Neanderthals became sharply smaller. Although before that there were few of them, since Neanderthals were predators, and there are never many of them. But, nevertheless, they became very few. And the last Neanderthals, as far as is known, died out about 28 thousand years ago. But here, in the range from 40 to 28, very small scattered groups remained, mainly in hard-to-reach mountain regions: in the Pyrenees, in the Alps, in the Caucasus, in the Balkans, that is, in the most mountainous hard-to-reach areas. Apparently, where the Cro-Magnons did not reach, that is, people of a modern structure, where sapiens have already come last. And in this time interval from 40 to 28 thousand years, Neanderthals are replaced by Cro-Magnons, our ancestors, sapiens.

There are several concepts of what happened to the Neanderthals, where they went. There are three main points of view. The first point of view, the main author of which is Alesh Hrdlichka, is an American anthropologist (although he did not invent it, but developed it in full). This view says that the Neanderthals were our ancestors, that they were some stage of evolution that gradually changed, evolved and eventually became a group of Cro-Magnons. But, despite the fact that this point of view in the middle of the 20th century was sometimes even dominant among anthropologists, since the 70s of the 20th century it has not been considered relevant and no one adheres to it at present.

Bunak VV Genus Homo, its origin and subsequent evolution. M., Nauka, 1980.

4

The problem is that morphologically, Neanderthals were very different from us. And when we study cave deposits, we see a sharp change both in culture and morphology. We don't have any smooth transition. So there was clearly a change. A second concept arose that the Neanderthals were literally exterminated by the Cro-Magnons. The question remains how they did it, forcefully or not. And they have nothing to do with the modern population. This point of view at the end of the 20th century and at the very beginning of the 21st century was dominant, but nevertheless, since the 30s of the 20th century and later, finds of people with intermediate features were found, which, in terms of features, seem to be Neanderthals, but parts seem to be Cro-Magnons. An example of this is Saint Sezer in France, or Skhul in Israel, or Qafzeh in the same place in Israel. In these areas, they are almost sapiens, but with Neanderthal features. Accordingly, a third concept arose, which says that Neanderthals could still have crossed paths with modern humans. That is, they were more or less independent, but some genetic contribution to modern population they gave. Well, the question was when and where they gave this contribution. This point of view has actually existed since the 19th century, but somehow it has always been in third roles.

Vishnyatsky L. B. Neanderthals: the history of a failed humanity. L., Nestor-History, 2010.

5

6

There are several theories as to why they disappeared. It is flattering to think that the Cro-Magnons somehow surpassed the Neanderthals in intelligence (they definitely did not surpass the physical strength), especially since the culture of the Cro-Magnons was noticeably better than that of the Neanderthals. Neanderthals were mowed down by natural disasters. One of these global cataclysms, which not so much knocked down as created the Neanderthals, was the eruption of the Toba volcano in Sumatra. A grandiose eruption, one of the most powerful in the entire history of the planet, after which a volcanic winter set in for almost two years. This happened 73.5 thousand years ago. At this time, the Neanderthals acquired their hyperarctic proportions. But their number has drastically decreased. And to a greater extent, perhaps, Neanderthals were crippled by other eruptions, on a much smaller scale, about 40 thousand years ago. Well, a little more, 40-42 thousand years ago occurred. Eruptions of the so-called Phlegrean fields in Italy and the eruption of Kazbek in the Caucasus. Very powerful eruptions, which, with an interval of 2 thousand years, poisoned the soil, air, water, and there was also a volcanic winter, but on the scale of Europe and the Caucasus, after which a decrease in the species of ungulates, the extinction of, say, bison, including Neanderthals . It turns out that the Neanderthals were actually not so much inferior to the Cro-Magnons, but they were simply unlucky with the place and time. And when the Cro-Magnons once again looked out of the corner of their eye into Europe, they found that there was practically no one there and it was possible to settle in empty territories. On the other hand, there is such a version that the heyday of the Upper Paleolithic (that is, the era of the first modern people, Cro-Magnons, about 40-30-20 thousand years ago) is associated with the competition of Cro-Magnons and Neanderthals. That is, when they collided, they began to compete and, accordingly, both of them tried to overtake each other. The Neanderthals were less successful. And the Cro-Magnons, which again is flattering to think to us, since we are the descendants of the Cro-Magnons, got ahead. And the Neanderthals were on the sidelines of the evolutionary and safely disappeared. And the Cro-Magnons replaced them.

Drobyshevsky S. V. Predecessors. Ancestors? Part V "Paleoanthropes". 2nd edition. M., publishing house LKI, 2010, 312 p., ill.

7

At the very recent times, in the 2010s, in particular, studies of the skeleton of a Neanderthal child from the Mezmayskaya cave in the Caucasus were made by St. Petersburg archaeologists, anthropologists, who show that in the Mezmayskaya cave, the number of Neanderthals, apparently, was most fundamentally influenced by volcanic eruptions. That is, this is one of the strongest confirmations of the catastrophic hypothesis of the extinction of the Neanderthals. On the other hand, there are sites in the European Arctic, which show that Neanderthals lived quite late, after these catastrophic eruptions. Perhaps some groups of Neanderthals survived very late, when the whole of Europe was practically occupied by the Cro-Magnons. In fact, archaeological data for different regions show a slightly different picture. In the south of Europe, perhaps, there was a mass extinction (it is possible that the first Cro-Magnons also died out safely there), and in the north, in Siberia, for example, in Altai, some groups of Neanderthals could have survived for a very long time. In Spain, such a situation with the “Ebro border” is known: at almost the same time, Cro-Magnons lived on the northern bank of the Ebro River, and Neanderthals lived on the southern bank - the latest, but in very poor conditions (there were edaphic - dry, arid - steppes ). And there the last Neanderthals lived out their lives. Determining the moment of existence of the last Neanderthals is now the most interesting moment in this area.

Roginsky Ya. Ya. Extra-European paleoanthropes // Fossil hominids and human origin. Proceedings of the Institute of Ethnography of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, new. Ser., vol. 92, M., Nauka, 1966b, pp. 205-226.

Patte E. Les Neanderthaliens. Anatomy, physiology, comparisons. Paris, Masson et Cie, 1955, 559 p.

There is no movement, said the bearded sage.
The other was silent and began to walk before him.
He could not have objected more strongly;
All praised the convoluted answer.
But, gentlemen, this is a funny case
Another example comes to mind:
After all, every day the sun walks before us,
However, the stubborn Galileo is right.
(A.S. Pushkin)

Who is right, gentlemen? Our stubborn Galileo, who knows (sic!) that the Neanderthals "were not human"?

The problem is that a lot of people really think that way. Or rather, they believe it. There is no point in arguing, I will give only a few facts.

1. Classical Neanderthals lived in Europe and Asia Minor for about 40 thousand years (period 80-35 thousand years ago). Climatic conditions were more severe than now.
0. Modern man exists for only 15 thousand years (will it last 40?)

1. The volume of the brain of classical Neanderthals was about 1500-1800 cc.
0. The average volume of the brain of a modern person is about 1400 cubic meters. cm (Australoids 1200, Caucasians and Mongoloids up to 1600).
Next, I combined the reconstructions of Neanderthals with portraits of modern humans.

And here are the bearded wise men (yes, you are not looking at the mind, but at the middle floor of the face!)

Norris' resemblance to Neanderthals, it turns out, I'm not the only one to note (.).

About a hundred years ago, an ancient man had to look like this.

Modern patterns of mass culture are not far from the image of the "monkey man". In order for the mass audience to recognize the "cave dweller", it is necessary to make him homeless: shaggy, dirty and grimacing!

It is advisable to goggle your eyes: "Horror, how I'm afraid of the entih of their skulls!"

And don't be afraid of skulls. They need to be considered more closely. Here from left to right: Neanderthal - modern man (Cro-Magnonoid or Eastern Paleo-Caucasoid) - modern man (Australoid) - modern man (Northern Caucasoid). The Neanderthal skull is knocked out of this row, but not too much. Differences from the Australoid will be noticed only by a trained eye.

Then there will be no need to do such "dioxin" reconstructions ...
(NB: we have no politics - only gestalt anthropology)

Here is a map of Neanderthal finds. It can be seen that they lived in Europe and Asia Minor, in mountainous regions with a rather harsh climate.

In the Holocene, in our time, the mountainous regions of Europe are no longer inhabited by Neanderthals, but by people of the Paleo-European and Balkan-Caucasian race. Are they very different? Judge for yourself. On the left is a reconstruction of a Neanderthal, on the right is a young Pakistani.

On the left is a representative of the Caucasian type, on the right is a Paleo-European type.

On the left - a modern inhabitant of Western Asia, on the right - the Neanderthal period. And what bandanas they have!

On the sides - modern inhabitants of Western Asia, in the center - a classic Neanderthal (museum reconstruction).

This reconstruction of a Neanderthal I had to modify a little. However, the "citizen chief" of him turned out to be unimportant - clearly a disguised proletarian ... Still, high posts in our country are more often occupied by northern Caucasians or graceful Mediterraneans.

The skull of the Neanderthal (on the right) is prettier than that of the Australoid, but it is more archaic: the maxillae are more massive, the chin is sloping, the forehead is low (the back of the head and base have their own differences).

With Australoids, the situation is unusual. Their anthropological indicators (thickness of bones, width of the dental arch, height of the vault of the skull, etc.) are more "sapient" than the Neanderthals. The absence of a genetic hiatus makes them undeniably Homo sapiens recens.
However, the Australoid species is even more ancient than that of the Neanderthals - their gestalt is closer to Homo erectus. As well as the volume of the brain, which is SIGNIFICANTLY less than the Neanderthal (about 30%).

Personally, I treat Neanderthals with respect (albeit without love). And I have my own, secret idea about them.

My intuition (based on education and ecological extrapolations) tells me that Neanderthals were quite extraordinary creatures - Europeans after all! In terms of lifestyle, they are similar to the Arctic natives (who in pre-civilized times were almost the most advanced group in their race). The Neanderthals had a developed instrumental and magical culture with burials.

Classical Neanderthals are a strong branch of the human continuum, which has gone through its own, rather intensive evolution in parallel channels. During which Neanderthals took new refreshing genes and were selected. They did not die out at all, but still live - and not bad: where the climate and soils are perhaps the best on the planet. And the northern Caucasians have been trying for thousands of years to win back at least an inch of these territories from them. Arrange campaigns, shoot, bomb. While in vain!

In the second half of the XIX century. paleontological information about the ancestors of modern man was very scarce. With amazing scientific foresight, Charles Darwin put forward a hypothesis about the origin from an ape-like ancestor, predicted future fossil finds, and finally suggested that Africa was the homeland of people. All this is very convincingly confirmed today.

Over the past hundred-odd years, a large number of fossil remains of extinct great apes and ancient people(many of which were found on the African continent). Modern paleontological data make it possible even today to get an idea of ​​the origin and development of man, of kinship with great apes (Fig. 1).

Rice. one. human pedigree

As can be seen from the above diagram, the common ancestor of all modern great apes and humans was driopithecus. He lived 25 million years ago on the African continent. Dryopithecus led an arboreal lifestyle, apparently fed on fruits, since their molars are not adapted for chewing rough food (they have a very thin layer of enamel). The brain was inferior in volume to the brain of modern great apes and was about 350 cm 3 .

Approximately 8–6 million years ago, as a result of divergence, two evolutionary branches were formed - one leading to modern great apes, and the other to humans. Australopithecus, which appeared in Africa about 4 million years ago, are the first among the ancestors of modern man (Fig. 2 and 3).

Rice. 2.Australopithecus African. In this figure Australopithecus africanus is shown side by side for comparisonwith modern man. Height 1–1.3 m, body weight 20–40 kg

Rice. 3.Australopithecus Boyce. Height 1.6–1.78 m. Body weight 60–80 kg

australopithecines, the so-called monkey-people, inhabited open plains and semi-deserts, lived in herds, walked on the lower (hind) limbs, and the body position was almost vertical. The hands, freed from the function of movement, could be used for obtaining food and protection from enemies. The lack of vegetable food (fruits of tropical trees) was replenished with meat (due to hunting). This is evidenced by the crushed bones of small animals found together with the remains of Australopithecus. The brain reached 550 cm 3 in volume. Four species of Australopithecus are known that lived in the southern and eastern regions of the African continent.

The appearance of these "human apes" with their inherent upright posture is associated with a cooling of the climate and a sharp reduction in the area occupied by tropical forests, which forced Australopithecus to adapt to existence in open areas.

skillful man, according to the general opinion, represented the first known species of the genus "man" (Fig. 4).

Rice. 4.A skilled man. Height 1.2–1.5 m. Body weight about 50 kg

This species existed about 1.5–2 million years ago in Eastern and South Africa and in Southeast Asia. The height of a skilled man was about 1.5 m. His face had supraorbital ridges, a flat nose and protruding jaws. The brain has become larger (volume up to 775 cm 3) than that of Australopithecus, and the 1st toe is no longer opposed to others. The remains of material culture suggest that these "first people" built simple shelters in the form of hedges that protect from the wind, and primitive huts from stones and branches. They made stone tools - axes, scrapers, something like axes. There is evidence that a skilled person used fire.

From a skilled man, probably descended Homo erectus(Fig. 5) .

Rice. 5.Upright man. Height 1.5–1.8 m. Body weight 40–72.7 kg

Larger, with a larger brain and more highly developed intellect, with improved tool-making techniques, this man of the early Stone Age mastered new habitats, populating Africa, Europe and Asia in small groups.

Homo erectus was in many respects similar to modern man in body structure. His height was 1.6-1.8 m, and his weight was 50-75 kg. The volume of the brain reached 880-1110 cm 3 . This ancestor widely used various tools made of stone (chopped, strikers, blades), wood and bones; was an active hunter, using clubs, primitive spears. There are a fairly large number of people in the hunt, and this made it possible to attack large game.

It was typical for Homo erectus to build a dwelling in the form of huts, to use caves. A primitive hearth was arranged inside the dwelling. Fire was already systematically used for heating and cooking, kept and maintained.

At this stage of evolution, there were hard natural selection and a sharp intraspecific struggle for existence: broken bones of human limbs, human skulls with a broken base testify to cannibalism.

During the ice age, there was Neanderthal(Fig. 6).

Rice. 6.Neanderthal. Height is about 1.7 m. Body weight is about 70 kg

He was short and stocky (height up to 1.7 m, weighing up to 75 kg), with a massive skull, thick supraorbital ridges and a sloping forehead. In terms of brain volume (up to 1500 cm 3) it surpassed modern man.

Neanderthals were engaged in hunting and fishing; they hunted, in particular, such large animals as mammoths; they made clothes from skins, built dwellings, knew how to make fire. Their tools are characterized by a fine finish. They made axes, axes, knives, spearheads, fishhooks.

Burials, rituals and the beginnings of art indicate that Neanderthals were more self-aware, capable of thinking, were more “social” than their ancestor Homo erectus. Presumably, Neanderthals were capable of speech.

These are the first people who systematically buried their dead. Burial was a ritual. Skeletons are found in holes dug in the floor of caves. Many are laid in the sleeping position and equipped with household items - tools, weapons, pieces of fried meat, horsetail bedding, and also decorated with flowers. All this indicates that the Neanderthals attached importance to the life and death of an individual and, perhaps, had ideas about the afterlife.

The first evidence of the appearance of a completely modern man was the finds in the Cro-Magnon grotto in southwestern France in 1868. Subsequently, numerous remains of Cro-Magnons were found in various parts of Europe, Asia, America and Australia (Fig. 7).

Rice. 7. Cro-Magnon. Height 1.69–1.77 m. Body weight about 68 kg

It is believed that the Cro-Magnons appeared on the African continent, and then spread to all the rest. They were taller (up to 1.8 m) and less roughly built than Neanderthals. The head is relatively high, shortened in the direction of the face-occiput, and the cranium is more rounded; the average brain volume was 1400 cm 3 .

There were also other new characteristic features: the head was set straight, the front part was straight and did not protrude, the supraorbital ridges were absent or poorly developed, the nose and jaws were relatively small, and the teeth were seated more closely.

It is believed that the occurrence modern races human occurred in the process of settling Cro-Magnons in different regions of the Earth and ended 30-40 thousand years ago.

Compared to Neanderthals, Cro-Magnons produced much more carefully crafted knives, scrapers, saws, arrowheads, drills, and other stone tools. About half of all tools were made from bone. Stone chisels were used to make products from horn, wood and bone. The Cro-Magnons also made such new tools as needles with eyes, fish hooks, harpoons and spear throwers. All these seemingly simple devices greatly contributed to the development of the human world around.

During this period, the domestication of animals and the cultivation of plants began. The opportunity to live in the conditions of the ice age was provided by more advanced dwellings and new types of clothing (trousers, parkas with hoods, shoes, mittens), the systematic use of fire. In the period 35–10 thousand years BC. e. Cro-Magnons have passed the era of their prehistoric art. The range of works was wide: engravings of animals and people on small pieces of stone, bones, deer antlers; drawings in ocher, manganese and charcoal, as well as engraved images on the walls of caves; making necklaces, bracelets and rings.

The study of the skeletons suggests that the life expectancy of the Cro-Magnons was significantly higher than that of the Neanderthals, indicating a higher social status and an increase in the "wealth" of the Cro-Magnons. The presence of "poor" and "rich" burials (the number of decorations, various tools, household items placed in the grave during the funeral ceremony) may mean the beginning of the social stratification of primitive society.

The high level of human sociality, the ability to joint productive activities, the use of more and more sophisticated tools, the availability of housing, clothing, reduced dependence on conditions environment(physicochemical and biological factors), and therefore the evolution of man has gone beyond the leading action of biological laws of development and is now directed by social ones.