Contact with other species of humans
- Thread starter Derek Jackson
- Start date
Genetic testing has proven nothing of the sort. All it shows is that Neandertals and modern humans descended from the same root stock of 'archaic homo sapiens' (though it's now considered a seperate species by many as well) around a million years ago, rather than having a more recent origin. It also suggests strongly there was not a statistically significant amount of hybridizying. But there would be no way to prove the species vs. subspecies question conclusively unless we found out that Neanderthals and humans couldn't interbreed, or they could and bred true.
I think I read this story way back when this thread was new, and for some reason I thought of it today and went looking for it. I know it's just a few paragraphs, but good stuff! At least good enough that it bizarrely stuck in my head for seven years.
Considering all we've got of the Denisovans is a finger-bone, I suspect we don't really know what they were like. Writing a TL about them would be highly speculative.
Lycaon pictus
Donor
Based on my vast wealth of knowledge of a National Geographic article I vaguely remember reading, didn't Neanderthals burn a lot more calories than us? Even as slaves, they would have been expensive in terms of the food needed to keep them alive.
If they were rare enough, kings might have raised small colonies of them, trained the males to fight and used them as a sort of palace guard.
If they were rare enough, kings might have raised small colonies of them, trained the males to fight and used them as a sort of palace guard.
They haven't confirmed it, but are fairly certain this is the case. This is also why they wouldn't have the same endurance levels humans have.
As slaves they'd have to be used for short periods of time of very heavy work and then allowed to relax. So let humans do a lot of the easy and light repetitive labour, but have the Neanderthals move the really heavy stuff that would require a lot of humans and a lot of time.
If used properly they could be useful slaves.
However as some kind of slave warrior they would be very useful in all situations except the tropics and deserts.
You stay the Hell Away from my TL.Not to get Kinky or something
I've thought of a timeline where Neanderthals, are enslaved for use as Ponygirls [boys].
Alas I've never persued the TL, For I fear the Banhammer.
Not to get Kinky or something
I've thought of a timeline where Neanderthals, are enslaved for use as Ponygirls [boys].
Alas I've never persued the TL, For I fear the Banhammer.
Once there was an enormous argument on the board about the morals of Neanderthal sex slaves. It turns out the people supporting it didn't really--this was all a joke.
I've spent some time contemplating possible locations for the survival of Neanderthal enclaves. (And this is one of the few places I'd admit to that)
I did consider Iceland for a time, but there are several things that need to be ironed out before the Neanderthals have any real prospect of success there.
Neanderthal survival requires individuals to make their way to the chosen refugee at least 20 000 years ago. So the refugee must have been inhabitable during the Ice Age, and possess some level of stability over that period. Neanderthals had some ability to flex with climate changes, in the absence of...well, us. But their toolkit can't deal with massive changes, so they might need some ability to migrate along a north/south axis to roll with the impact of changes.
Also, Iceland seems to mesh badly with the Neanderthals preferred ecological niche -up close hunting of large animals for meat.
First of all, we'd need a Neanderthal band with a bit more dietary flexibility. Not too much of a problem, most costal areas for their time is underwater now, its no biggie to assume that coastal Neanderthals also engaged in hunting of marine mammals. If we extend that to a bit of fishing, they stand a much better chance.
Problem is, the Neanderthals were notoriously bad with water-issues. didn't even cross water to islands that were visible from land. Their meat-heavy diet fits well with Iceland being poor for agriculture. But could a population based entirely on sealing and fishing last for 20 000 years without being wiped out by some environmental hiccup?
Which leads us to Icelands own problem: vulcanism. A volcanic eruption in the 1700s nearly wiped us off the place, with our advance toolkit. Could the Neanderthals last for that long in a place marginal to them without going under?
We'd get several genetic bottlenecks, maybe we'd get Neanderthlas more adapted to fishing?
I did consider Iceland for a time, but there are several things that need to be ironed out before the Neanderthals have any real prospect of success there.
Neanderthal survival requires individuals to make their way to the chosen refugee at least 20 000 years ago. So the refugee must have been inhabitable during the Ice Age, and possess some level of stability over that period. Neanderthals had some ability to flex with climate changes, in the absence of...well, us. But their toolkit can't deal with massive changes, so they might need some ability to migrate along a north/south axis to roll with the impact of changes.
Also, Iceland seems to mesh badly with the Neanderthals preferred ecological niche -up close hunting of large animals for meat.
First of all, we'd need a Neanderthal band with a bit more dietary flexibility. Not too much of a problem, most costal areas for their time is underwater now, its no biggie to assume that coastal Neanderthals also engaged in hunting of marine mammals. If we extend that to a bit of fishing, they stand a much better chance.
Problem is, the Neanderthals were notoriously bad with water-issues. didn't even cross water to islands that were visible from land. Their meat-heavy diet fits well with Iceland being poor for agriculture. But could a population based entirely on sealing and fishing last for 20 000 years without being wiped out by some environmental hiccup?
Which leads us to Icelands own problem: vulcanism. A volcanic eruption in the 1700s nearly wiped us off the place, with our advance toolkit. Could the Neanderthals last for that long in a place marginal to them without going under?
We'd get several genetic bottlenecks, maybe we'd get Neanderthlas more adapted to fishing?
Thats the idea that I came up with for my TL. A neanderthal group in Britain learned how to fish and made simple rafts. When the glaciers started to cover much of Britain they were cut off and had to survive on fish and seals. As the ice became worse, they used the last of the trees to make rafts and sailed along the ice edge living off of seals some sea birds and fish with the remnants reaching North America 40K years ago.
With no humans in the new land they could survive and prosper.
Valdemar II
Banned
One thing, there was a quite logical reason Neanderthals didn't cross to those islands, it is the same reason gorillas is terrified of water.
They couldn't swim, they simply had to big muscles. This make specialising in fishing extremely hard escecially in a arctic area. Of course they could as the Falkland Island Fox specialise in ambush hunt seals, but it leave much of the year without food.
They couldn't swim, they simply had to big muscles. This make specialising in fishing extremely hard escecially in a arctic area. Of course they could as the Falkland Island Fox specialise in ambush hunt seals, but it leave much of the year without food.
That is a serious problem. Which is why one of them would have to learn that tying itself to a log will stop them from drowning.
Not easy to do, due to the reasonable fear of drowning, but possible.
A few things here. One is I have read that even the Eskimos/Inuit apparnenly never used long term, multi year food caches, probably for health reasons, though it was possible to overcome and therefore surprising. But the Neanderthal could have.
Also, Iceland, Greenland, and the rest were connected with ice shelves much like exist now on Antarctica (e.g. Ross Ice Shelf). This wall is a problem, but the sea ice that would have formed in that are of the Atlantic almost certainly was year rather than multi year. Yearly sea ice is comparably very strong, thin (seal holes) and more importantly flat. One could have walked to America in a winter or two. Iceland is very possible.
In fact, an island existed in the form of the Rockall Bank right off of Ireland. Faroes are better, but too encased with their own Ice cap:
Faroes might have been possible, but the iceshelf would have been greatly weakened and/or highly temporary by the time that was possible.
My worry is that Iceland would have little to assist long term occupation by anyone. Recall for those who read such stuff that Greenland has been estimated to go through an incredible four extinctions of Inuit/Eskimo in the last several thousand years. Life on the margin. It may well be that the Neanderthal or the Cromagnon Man did reach Iceland or beyond via this Ice barrier route, and there is some genetic evidence of the later did leave a permanent impact upon present day Indians in the North East side of the continent (probably from a small central asian tribe found to have the same, but interestingly the dna link is found on the north east part of the continent only, as I saw the maps).
I have seen better maps on the web of showing this ice bridge and Rockall island, for those who want to search for them.
Reading through this post and other literature of the years, one possibility is not looked at well, that of the mule.
The mule is only rarely able to breed, usually sterile and so far always female. This might have been roughly the case of Neanderthals and the Hobbit Man (if this truly exists). If there were any genetic advantages of Cromagnon, and almost all species have niches, slowly this would take over. We may have negritos in Indonesia/Philippines/etc which have significant hobbit DNA.
Interestingly, with the Negritos, stealth and secrecy was common. We apparently did not know until the 1930s that the well populated pearl Aru Islands of Indonesia had a bush population. The interior was thougth unihabited. They simply completely avoided all contact with the new populations. I guess the fossil DNA evidence of the Flores cave will eventually piece that one together.
The link would be critical for the disappearence of the species, as a soft approach of a type of assimilation. When blood links exist, there tend to be more negotiations and contacts.
The mule is only rarely able to breed, usually sterile and so far always female. This might have been roughly the case of Neanderthals and the Hobbit Man (if this truly exists). If there were any genetic advantages of Cromagnon, and almost all species have niches, slowly this would take over. We may have negritos in Indonesia/Philippines/etc which have significant hobbit DNA.
Interestingly, with the Negritos, stealth and secrecy was common. We apparently did not know until the 1930s that the well populated pearl Aru Islands of Indonesia had a bush population. The interior was thougth unihabited. They simply completely avoided all contact with the new populations. I guess the fossil DNA evidence of the Flores cave will eventually piece that one together.
The link would be critical for the disappearence of the species, as a soft approach of a type of assimilation. When blood links exist, there tend to be more negotiations and contacts.