Cognitive Archaeology and the Cognitive Sciences

Cognitive archaeology uses cognitive and psychological models to interpret the archaeological record. This chapter outlines several components that may be essential in building effective cognitive archaeological arguments. It also presents a two-stage perspective for the development of modern cognition, primarily based upon the work of Coolidge and Wynn. The first describes the transition from arboreal to terrestrial life in later Homo and the possible cognitive repercussions of terrestrial sleep. The second stage proposes that a genetic event may have enhanced working memory in Homo sapiens (specifically in terms of Baddeley’s multicomponent working memory model). The present chapter also reviews the archaeological and neurological bases for modern thinking, and the latter arguments are primarily grounded in the significance of the morphometric rescaling of the parietal lobes, which appears to have distinguished Homo sapiens from Neandertals.

Theory of mind as a proxy for Palaeolithic language ability

Symbolic artefacts have long been archaeology’s primary contribution to tracing the origin and subsequent development of human language. But the identification and interpretation of symbolic behaviour poses numerous interpretive problems, particularly before the Upper Palaeolithic where clearly referential forms of symbolic material are rare. As an alternative, theory of mind is presented here, detailing its intimate relationship with language and likely coevolution, alongside the factors which make it a more effective proxy. As a cognitive ability that grades in complexity and predicts linguistic skill in modern cognition, theory of mind also has the potential to denote specific syntactic and semantic features of language such as word reference, mental state verbs and complementation. The potential to detect theory of mind in the archaeological record is considered here, such as within the cultural transmission of stone tool technology and forms of complex social learning like imitation and teaching in early hominin technologies.

Birch tar production does not prove Neanderthal behavioral complexity

Birch tar production by Neanderthals—used for hafting tools—has been interpreted as one of the earliest manifestations of modern cultural behavior. This is because birch tar production per se was assumed to require a cognitively demanding setup, in which birch bark is heated in anaerobic conditions, a setup whose inherent complexity was thought to require modern levels of cognition and cultural transmission. Here we demonstrate that recognizable amounts of birch tar were likely a relatively frequent byproduct of burning birch bark (a natural tinder) under common, i.e., aerobic, conditions. We show that when birch bark burns close to a vertical to subvertical hard surface, such as an adjacent stone, birch tar is naturally deposited and can be easily scraped off the surface. The burning of birch bark near suitable surfaces provides useable quantities of birch tar in a single work session (3 h; including birch bark procurement). Chemical analysis of the resulting tar showed typical markers present in archaeological tar. Mechanical tests verify the tar’s suitability for hafting and for hafted tools use. Given that similarly sized stones as in our experiment are frequently found in archaeological contexts associated with Neanderthals, the cognitively undemanding connection between burning birch bark and the production of birch tar would have been readily discoverable multiple times. Thus, the presence of birch tar alone cannot indicate the presence of modern cognition and/or cultural behaviors in Neanderthals.

Peculiarities of modern cognition and its enlightening grounds

With the aim of tracing the peculiarities of modern cognition and its educational explications, we are aware that the fundamental provisions of the stated topic are properly and comprehensively studied. The convincing evidence of this is the hundreds of publications on the most diverse range of issues in the problematic complex, as well as the depth and systematic comprehension of them. Many of these studies can be safely classified as fundamental and combined with the specifics of cognition, whose ideological and aesthetic and cultural-intellectual discourse impresses with interpretive polyphony. Do not make an exception in this context, and domestic researchers, for most of thempost-Soviet realities have become an important factor for scientific and theological reflections, and often also for changing philosophical and methodological approaches to the consideration of the problem of cognition

Evolution, revolution or saltation scenario for the emergence of modern cultures?

Crucial questions in the debate on the origin of quintessential human behaviours are whether modern cognition and associated innovations are unique to our species and whether they emerged abruptly, gradually or as the result of a discontinuous process. Three scenarios have been proposed to account for the origin of cultural modernity. The first argues that modern cognition is unique to our species and the consequence of a genetic mutation that took place approximately 50 ka in Africa among already evolved anatomically modern humans. The second posits that cultural modernity emerged gradually in Africa starting at least 200 ka in concert with the origin of our species on that continent. The third states that innovations indicative of modern cognition are not restricted to our species and appear and disappear in Africa and Eurasia between 200 and 40 ka before becoming fully consolidated. We evaluate these scenarios in the light of new evidence from Africa, Asia and Europe and explore the mechanisms that may have led to modern cultures. Such reflections will demonstrate the need for further inquiry into the relationship between climate and demographic/cultural change in order to better understand the mechanisms of cultural transmission at work in Neanderthals and early Homo sapiens populations.

The Implications of the Working Memory Model for the Evolution of Modern Cognition

What distinguishes the cognition of biologically modern humans from that of more archaic populations such as Neandertals? The norm in paleoanthropology has been to emphasize the role of language and symbolism. But the modern mind is more than just an archaic mind enhanced by symbol use. It also possesses an important problem solving and planning component. In cognitive neuroscience these advanced planning abilities have been extensively investigated through a formal model known as working memory. The working memory model is now well-enough established to provide a powerful lens through which paleoanthropologists can view the fossil and archaeological records. The challenge is methodological. The following essay reviews the controversial hypothesis that a recent enhancement of working memory capacity was the final piece in the evolution of modern cognition.

Ritual Behaviour and the Origins of Modern Cognition

This article argues that ritual behaviour was a critical selective force in the emergence of modern cognition. The argument is based on the following observations: (1) Upper Palaeolithic Cro-Magnons exhibited unprecedented levels of social complexity and there is evidence to suggest that this complexity may have begun even earlier in Africa, possibly connected with the Toba eruption. (2) Creating larger, more complex social arrangements, especially those that cut across traditional within-group boundaries, would have required more elaborate and demanding social rituals. (3) Ritual behaviour requiring focused attention and the inhibition of pre-potent responses places demands on areas of the brain known to be associated with working memory. (4) An enhancement of working-memory capacity was very likely necessary for the emergence of modern cognition. (5) The social rituals of traditional societies, which provide the best window on the social rituals of our ancestors, are highly demanding in terms of maintaining focused attention and inhibiting pre-potent responses. (6) Those of our ancestors best able to successfully engage in ritual behaviour would have accrued fitness advantages from increased access to resources, status enhancements and psychophysical health effects. (7) Larger working-memory capacity was very likely a characteristic of these more ritually-capable hominins.