Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31427508›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2019

Birch tar production does not prove Neanderthal behavioral complexity.

Patrick Schmidt, Matthias Blessing, Maxime Rageot, Radu Iovita, Johannes Pfleging, Klaus G Nickel, Ludovic Righetti, Claudio Tennie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Neandertal Cold Adaptation: Technological, Anatomical, and Physiological Responses to Cold Stress in One of Our Closest Fossil Relatives.American journal of human biology : the official journal of the Human Biology Council · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. ArchaeologicalProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Archaeological evidence for thinking about possibilities in hominin evolution.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022
    Review
  15. Archaeological adhesives made fromProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  16. Human cumulative culture and the exploitation of natural phenomena.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Patrick SchmidtDepartment of Early Prehistory and Quaternary Ecology, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, 72070 Tübingen, Germany; patrick.schmidt@uni-tuebingen.de.ORCID 0000-0002-8727-6127
Matthias BlessingDepartment of Early Prehistory and Quaternary Ecology, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, 72070 Tübingen, Germany.
Maxime RageotDepartment of Early Prehistory and Quaternary Ecology, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, 72070 Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2216-0676
Radu IovitaDepartment of Early Prehistory and Quaternary Ecology, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, 72070 Tübingen, Germany.
Johannes PflegingThe Center for the Study of Human Origins, Department of Anthropology, New York University, New York, NY 10003.
Klaus G NickelCompetence Center Archaeometry-Baden-Wuerttemberg (CCA-BW), Applied Mineralogy, Department of Geosciences, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, 72074 Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6986-2982
Ludovic RighettiMax Planck Institute for Intelligent Systems, 72076 Tübingen, Germany.
Claudio TennieDepartment of Early Prehistory and Quaternary Ecology, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, 72070 Tübingen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

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.

Indexed as

ArchaeologyBetulaAnimalsBehavior, AnimalCognitionNeanderthalsadhesivescognitive complexityearly pyrotechnologymodern behaviorsNeanderthal birch tar

Identifiers

PMID31427508
PMCPMC6731756

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.