Page 222 - Kavur, Boris. Devet esejev o (skoraj) človeški podobi. Založba Univerze na Primorskem, Koper 2014.
P. 222
devet esejev o (skoraj) človeški podobi
portraits depicting anatomy, limited to scenes of hunt, tool making, scraping
hides, herding fires and silly standing around – activities derived from evolu-
tionary explanations of life as a constant struggle for survival.
Activities, today considered as being of major importance, such as com-
munication were only rarely depicted. Even looking at modern depictions we
can see that they do not present a way of life but make sense to discovered
finds. And since items are sensible only when used, they have to be used – and
Neanderthals are always doing something. Generally males are mostly depict-
ed with weapons and in motion – making weapons and lifting and carrying
around heavy loads. Females are only rarely depicted in these activities while
the children are never. Older persons are never standing but sitting and only
rarely doing something. Males are creating, communicating and making
weapons, while females are scraping skins, holding babies and touching chil-
dren.
Consequently the reconstructions again and again depicted the existing
social relations presenting them as being long lasting as natural state of things.
Images of wild men with males standing sturdy with a club and women nurs-
ing babies do not differ from Victorian images where men are hitting bears
with clubs, making tools and females are nursing babies, nor from modern il-
lustrations where men are making tools and women are nursing babies. Imag-
es mediate an erroneous feeling that habits and customs remained unchanged
– as if the western capitalistic system of production, social relations and gen-
der roles was always present, unchanged and universal (Berman 1999, 298).
The period of scientific reconstructions in physical anthropology was
marked by the denial of human characteristics to the Neanderthals. It seems
as if the victims were blamed for the crime – since they became extinct, they
were denied their human characteristics by exposing every, even so senseless
inferiority. Of course there were periods of their inclusion in to our ancestral
line, but they have spent the major part of the last century as a side branch of
human evolution.
Despite anticipated change of images the movement which at the end of
the sixties created the so called new archaeology in the USA, only strength-
ened the static and unchangeable image of Neanderthals. New archaeology,
considering culture in a neo-evolutionary sense as an adaptive system saw the
easiest way for the reconstruction of prehistoric cultural systems in the analy-
ses of primary economic strategies. These trends were performed in a specific
epistemological context – in an archaeology still firmly grounded in the spir-
it of positivism. In archaeological terms it meant that individual aspects of
culture were considered as archaeologically easier accessible and understand-
222
portraits depicting anatomy, limited to scenes of hunt, tool making, scraping
hides, herding fires and silly standing around – activities derived from evolu-
tionary explanations of life as a constant struggle for survival.
Activities, today considered as being of major importance, such as com-
munication were only rarely depicted. Even looking at modern depictions we
can see that they do not present a way of life but make sense to discovered
finds. And since items are sensible only when used, they have to be used – and
Neanderthals are always doing something. Generally males are mostly depict-
ed with weapons and in motion – making weapons and lifting and carrying
around heavy loads. Females are only rarely depicted in these activities while
the children are never. Older persons are never standing but sitting and only
rarely doing something. Males are creating, communicating and making
weapons, while females are scraping skins, holding babies and touching chil-
dren.
Consequently the reconstructions again and again depicted the existing
social relations presenting them as being long lasting as natural state of things.
Images of wild men with males standing sturdy with a club and women nurs-
ing babies do not differ from Victorian images where men are hitting bears
with clubs, making tools and females are nursing babies, nor from modern il-
lustrations where men are making tools and women are nursing babies. Imag-
es mediate an erroneous feeling that habits and customs remained unchanged
– as if the western capitalistic system of production, social relations and gen-
der roles was always present, unchanged and universal (Berman 1999, 298).
The period of scientific reconstructions in physical anthropology was
marked by the denial of human characteristics to the Neanderthals. It seems
as if the victims were blamed for the crime – since they became extinct, they
were denied their human characteristics by exposing every, even so senseless
inferiority. Of course there were periods of their inclusion in to our ancestral
line, but they have spent the major part of the last century as a side branch of
human evolution.
Despite anticipated change of images the movement which at the end of
the sixties created the so called new archaeology in the USA, only strength-
ened the static and unchangeable image of Neanderthals. New archaeology,
considering culture in a neo-evolutionary sense as an adaptive system saw the
easiest way for the reconstruction of prehistoric cultural systems in the analy-
ses of primary economic strategies. These trends were performed in a specific
epistemological context – in an archaeology still firmly grounded in the spir-
it of positivism. In archaeological terms it meant that individual aspects of
culture were considered as archaeologically easier accessible and understand-
222
