Editing Behavioral modernity

{{Short description|Transition of human species to anthropologically modern behavior}}
{{Use American English|date=December 2020}}
{{Use mdy dates|date=December 2020}}

{{Stack|
[[File:Lascaux painting.jpg|thumb|300px| [[Upper Paleolithic]] (16,000-year-old) [[cave painting]] from [[Lascaux|Lascaux cave]] in France]]
{{Paleolithic}}
}}

'''Behavioral modernity''' is a suite of [[behavior|behavioral]] and [[cognition|cognitive]] traits believed to distinguish current ''[[human|Homo sapiens]]'' from other [[early modern human|anatomically modern humans]], [[Hominini|hominins]], and [[primate]]s.<ref>{{cite book |url= https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263296077 |title= Early Human Behaviour in Global Context |first= Ravi |last= Korisettar | publisher= Routledge |year= 1998}}</ref> Most scholars agree that modern [[human]] behavior can be characterized by [[abstraction|abstract thinking]], [[planning]] depth, [[symbol]]ic behavior (e.g., [[art]], [[Ornament (art)|ornamentation]]), [[music]] and [[dance]], exploitation of large [[Game (hunting)|game]], and [[Blade (archaeology)|blade]] technology, among others.<ref>{{cite journal |last1= McBrearty |first1= Sally |last2= Brooks |first2= Allison |date= 2000 |title= The revolution that wasn't: a new interpretation of the origin of modern human behavior |journal= Journal of Human Evolution |volume= 39 |issue= 5 |pages= 453–563 |doi= 10.1006/jhev.2000.0435 |pmid= 11102266 |bibcode= 2000JHumE..39..453M | quote = Proponents of the model known as the 'human revolution' claim that modern human behaviors arose suddenly, and nearly simultaneously, throughout the Old World ca. 40–50 ka. [...] In fact, many of the components of the 'human revolution' claimed to appear at 40–50 ka are found in the African Middle Stone Age tens of thousands of years earlier. These features include blade and [[microlithic technology]], bone tools, increased geographic range, specialized hunting, the use of aquatic resources, long distance trade, systematic processing and use of pigment, and art and decoration.
}}</ref><ref name="Henshilwood Marean 2003">{{cite journal |last1= Henshilwood |first1= Christopher |last2= Marean |first2= Curtis |date= 2003 |title= The Origin of Modern Human Behavior: Critique of the Models and Their Test Implications |journal= Current Anthropology |volume= 44 |issue= 5 |pages= 627–651 |doi= 10.1086/377665 |pmid= 14971366|s2cid= 11081605 }}</ref>

Underlying these behaviors and technological innovations are cognitive and cultural foundations that have been documented experimentally and ethnographically by [[evolutionary anthropology|evolutionary]] and [[cultural anthropology|cultural anthropologists]]. These human universal patterns include cumulative cultural adaptation, [[social norm]]s, [[language]], and extensive help and [[cooperation]] beyond close [[Kinship|kin]].<ref name="Hill et al 2009">{{cite journal |last1= Hill |first1= Kim |title= The Emergence of Human Uniqueness: Characters Underlying Behavioral Modernity |journal= Evolutionary Anthropology |date= 2009 |volume= 18 |issue= 5 |pages= 187–200 |display-authors= etal |doi= 10.1002/evan.20224 |citeseerx= 10.1.1.469.5702|s2cid= 56384790 }}</ref><ref>Klein, R. G. 1999. ''The human career: human biological and cultural origins.'' Chicago: University of Chicago Press.</ref>

Within the tradition of evolutionary anthropology and related disciplines, it has been argued that the development of these modern behavioral traits, in combination with the climatic conditions of the [[Last Glacial Period]] and [[Last Glacial Maximum]] causing [[population bottleneck]]s, contributed to the evolutionary success of ''Homo sapiens'' worldwide relative to [[Neanderthal]]s, [[Denisovans]], and other [[archaic humans]].<ref name="Henshilwood Marean 2003" /><ref name="D'Errico 1998">{{cite journal |last1= D'Errico |first1= F |title= Neanderthal Acculturation in Western Europe? A Critical Review of the Evidence and Its Interpretation |journal= Current Anthropology |date= 1998 |volume= 39 |issue= S1 |page= S1–S44 |display-authors= etal |doi= 10.1086/204689|s2cid= 144799519 }}</ref>

Debate continues as to whether anatomically modern humans were behaviorally modern as well. There are many theories on the evolution of behavioral modernity. These approaches tend to fall into two camps: cognitive and gradualist. The Later [[Upper Paleolithic]] Model theorizes that modern human behavior arose through cognitive, genetic changes in Africa abruptly around 40,000–50,000 years ago around the time of the [[Out-of-Africa migration]], prompting the movement of some modern humans out of Africa and across the world.<ref name="Klein 1995">{{cite journal |last= Klein |first= Richard |title= Anatomy, behavior, and modern human origins |journal= Journal of World Prehistory |date= 1995 |volume= 9 |issue= 2 |pages= 167–198 |doi= 10.1007/bf02221838|s2cid= 10402296 }}</ref>

Other models focus on how modern human behavior may have arisen through gradual steps, with the archaeological signatures of such behavior appearing only through demographic or subsistence-based changes. Many cite evidence of behavioral modernity earlier (by at least about 150,000–75,000 years ago and possibly earlier) namely in the African [[Middle Stone Age]].<ref name="McBrearty Brooks 2000">
{{cite journal |last1= McBrearty |first1= Sally |last2= Brooks |first2= Allison |date= 2000 |title= The revolution that wasn't: a new interpretation of the origin of modern human behavior |journal= Journal of Human Evolution |volume= 39 |issue= 5 |pages= 453–563 |doi= 10.1006/jhev.2000.0435 |pmid= 11102266 |bibcode= 2000JHumE..39..453M }}</ref><ref name="Henshilwood Marean 2003" /><ref name="Marean et al 2007">{{cite journal |last1= Marean |first1= Curtis |title= Early human use of marine resources and pigment in South Africa during the Middle Pleistocene |journal= Nature |date= 2007 |volume= 449 |issue= 7164 |display-authors= etal |doi= 10.1038/nature06204 |pages= 905–908 |pmid= 17943129 |bibcode= 2007Natur.449..905M|s2cid= 4387442 |url= http://doc.rero.ch/record/15550/files/PAL_E2962.pdf }}</ref><ref name="Powell et al 2009">{{cite journal |last1= Powell |first1= Adam |title= Late Pleistocene Demography and the Appearance of Modern Human Behavior |journal= Science |date= 2009 |volume= 324 |issue= 5932 |pages= 1298–1301 |display-authors= etal |doi= 10.1126/science.1170165 |bibcode= 2009Sci...324.1298P |pmid= 19498164 |s2cid= 206518315 | url= http://doc.rero.ch/record/210393/files/PAL_E4401.pdf}}</ref><ref name="Premo Kuhn 2010">{{cite journal |last1= Premo |first1= Luke |last2= Kuhn |first2= Steve |title= Modeling Effects of Local Extinctions on Culture Change and Diversity in the Paleolithic |journal= PLOS ONE |date= 2010 |volume= 5 |issue= 12 |doi= 10.1371/journal.pone.0015582 |pages= e15582 |pmid= 21179418 |pmc= 3003693 |bibcode= 2010PLoSO...515582P
|doi-access= free }}</ref> Anthropologists [[Sally McBrearty]] and [[Alison S. Brooks]] have been notable proponents of gradualism—challenging Europe-centered models by situating more change in the African Middle Stone Age—though this model is more difficult to substantiate due to the general thinning of the [[fossil record]] as one goes further back in time.

== Definition ==

[[File:Festiwal Polka 1 Fot.Wojtek Korpusik.jpg|thumb|right|A [[Māori people|Māori]] man performing [[haka]], a ceremonial dance. He is displaying several hallmarks of behavioral modernity including the use of jewelry, application of body paint, music and dance, and symbolic behavior.]]

To classify what should be included in modern human behavior, it is necessary to define behaviors that are universal among living human groups. Some examples of these [[human universals]] are [[abstract thought]], planning, trade, cooperative labor, body decoration, and the control and use of fire. Along with these traits, humans possess much reliance on [[Social learning theory|social learning]].<ref name="Culture and the Evo Process">{{cite book |last1=Boyd |first1=Robert |last2=Richerson |first2=Peter |title=Culture and the Evolutionary Process |date=1988 |publisher=University of Chicago Press |isbn=9780226069333 |edition=2}}</ref><ref name="Nakahashi 2013">{{cite journal |last1=Nakahashi |first1=Wataru |title=Evolution of improvement and cumulative culture |journal=Theoretical Population Biology |date=2013 |volume=83 |pages=30–38 |doi=10.1016/j.tpb.2012.11.001 |pmid=23153511|bibcode=2013TPBio..83...30N }}</ref> This cumulative cultural change or cultural "ratchet" separates human culture from [[social learning in animals]]. In addition, a reliance on social learning may be responsible in part for humans' rapid adaptation to many environments outside of [[Africa]]. Since cultural universals are found in all cultures, including isolated indigenous groups, these traits must have evolved or have been invented in Africa prior to the [[Recent African origin of modern humans|exodus]].<ref>{{cite book |last=Buller |first=David |title=Adapting Minds: Evolutionary Psychology and the Persistent Quest for Human Nature |page=[https://archive.org/details/adaptingminds00davi/page/468 468] |publisher=PMIT Press |year=2005 |isbn=978-0-262-02579-9 |url-access=registration |url=https://archive.org/details/adaptingminds00davi/page/468 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url= http://www.livescience.com/history/070618_morocco_beads.html |title=80,000-year-old Beads Shed Light on Early Culture |publisher=Livescience.com |date=2007-06-18 |access-date=2009-09-10}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url= http://www.accessexcellence.org/BF/bf02/klein/bf02e3.html |title=three distinct human populations |publisher=Accessexcellence.org |access-date=2009-09-10}}</ref>

Archaeologically, a number of empirical traits have been used as indicators of modern human behavior. While these are often debated<ref name="Shea 2011">{{cite journal |last1=Shea |first1=John |title=Homo sapiens Is as Homo sapiens Was |journal=Current Anthropology |date=2011 |volume=52 |issue=1 |pages=1–35 |doi=10.1086/658067|s2cid=142517998 }}</ref> a few are generally agreed upon. Archaeological evidence of behavioral modernity includes:<ref name="Henshilwood Marean 2003" /><ref name="Klein 1995" />

* [[Burial]]
* [[Fishing#History|Fishing]]
* [[Art of the Upper Paleolithic|Figurative art]] ([[cave painting]]s, [[petroglyph]]s, [[dendroglyph]]s, [[Venus figurines|figurines]])
* Use of [[pigment]]s (such as [[ochre]]) and [[Jewelry#Prehistory|jewelry]] for decoration or [[self-ornamentation]]
* Using [[Bone tool|bone material for tools]]
* Transport of resources over long distances
* [[Blade (archaeology)|Blade technology]]
* Diversity, standardization, and regionally distinct artifacts
* [[Hearth]]s
* Composite tools

=== Critiques ===
{{expand section|date=August 2023}}
Several critiques have been placed against the traditional concept of behavioral modernity, both methodologically and philosophically.<ref name="Henshilwood Marean 2003" /><ref name="Shea 2011" /> Anthropologist [[John Shea (archaeologist)|John Shea]] outlines a variety of problems with this concept, arguing instead for "behavioral variability", which, according to the author, better describes the archaeological record. The use of trait lists, according to Shea, runs the risk of [[Taphonomy|taphonomic]] bias, where some sites may yield more artifacts than others despite similar populations; as well, trait lists can be ambiguous in how behaviors may be empirically recognized in the archaeological record.<ref name="Shea 2011" /> In particular, Shea cautions that [[population pressure]], cultural change, or optimality models, like those in [[human behavioral ecology]], might better predict changes in tool types or subsistence strategies than a change from "archaic" to "modern" behavior.<ref name="Shea 2011" /> Some researchers argue that a greater emphasis should be placed on identifying only those artifacts which are unquestionably, or purely, symbolic as a metric for modern human behavior.<ref name="Henshilwood Marean 2003" />

Since 2018, recent dating methods utilized on various [[Cave painting|cave art]] sites in [[Spain]] and [[France]] have shown that Neanderthals performed symbolic artistic expression, consisting of red "lines, dots, and hand stencils" found in caves, prior to contact with anatomically modern humans. This is contrary to previous suggestions that Neanderthals lacked these capabilities.<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Pike |first1=Alistair |last2=Standish |first2=Chris |date=2018-05-22 |title=It's Official: Neanderthals Created Art |url=https://www.sapiens.org/archaeology/neanderthal-art-discovery/ |access-date=2024-03-18 |website=SAPIENS |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Hunt |first=Katie |date=2021-08-02 |title=Neanderthals were painting caves in Europe long before modern humans |url=https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/02/world/neanderthals-cave-painting-spain-scn/index.html |access-date=2024-03-18 |website=CNN |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Handwerk |first=Brian |date=June 21, 2023 |title=Oldest Known Neanderthal Engravings Were Sealed in a Cave for 57,000 Years |url=https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/oldest-known-neanderthal-engravings-discovered-in-french-cave-180982408/ |access-date=2024-03-18 |website=Smithsonian Magazine |language=en}}</ref>

== Theories and models ==
{{Human timeline}}

===Late Upper Paleolithic Model or "Upper Paleolithic Revolution"===
The Late Upper Paleolithic Model, or Upper Paleolithic Revolution, refers to the idea that, though [[anatomically modern humans]] first appear around 150,000 years ago (as was once believed), they were not cognitively or behaviorally "modern" until around 50,000 years ago, leading to their expansion out of Africa and into Europe and Asia.<ref name="Klein 1995" /><ref name="Hoffecker 2009">{{cite journal |last1=Hoffecker |first1=John |title=The spread of modern humans in Europe |journal=PNAS |date=2009 |volume=106 |issue=38 |pages=16040–16045 |doi=10.1073/pnas.0903446106 |pmid=19571003 |pmc=2752585 |bibcode=2009PNAS..10616040H|doi-access=free }}</ref><ref name="Tattersall 2009">{{cite journal |last1=Tattersall |first1=Ian |title=Human origins: Out of Africa |journal=PNAS |date=2009 |volume=106 |issue=38 |pages=16018–16021 |doi=10.1073/pnas.0903207106 |pmid=19805256 |bibcode=2009PNAS..10616018T |pmc=2752574|doi-access=free }}</ref> These authors note that traits used as a metric for behavioral modernity do not appear as a package until around 40–50,000 years ago. Anthropologist [[Richard Klein (paleoanthropologist)|Richard Klein]] specifically describes that evidence of fishing, tools made from bone, hearths, significant artifact diversity, and elaborate graves are all absent before this point.<ref name="Klein 1995" /><ref name="Hoffecker 2009" /> According to both Shea and Klein, art only becomes common beyond this switching point, signifying a change from archaic to modern humans.<ref name="Klein 1995" /> Most researchers argue that a neurological or genetic change, perhaps one enabling complex language, such as [[FOXP2]], caused this revolutionary change in humans.<ref name="Klein 1995" /><ref name="Tattersall 2009" /> The role of FOXP2 as a driver of evolutionary selection has been called into question following recent research results.{{clarifyme|date=October 2023}}<ref>{{Cite web |title=Language Gene Dethroned |url=https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/language-gene-dethroned-64608 |access-date=2023-01-23 |website=The Scientist Magazine® |language=en}}</ref>

Building on the FOXP2 gene hypothesis, cognitive scientist [[Philip Lieberman]] has argued that proto-language behaviour existed prior to 50,000 BP, albeit in a more primitive form. Lieberman has advanced fossil evidence, such as neck and throat dimensions, to demonstrate that so-called “anatomically modern” humans from 100,000 BP continued to evolve their SVT (supralaryngeal vocal tract), which already possessed a horizontal portion (SVTh) capable of producing many phonemes which were mostly consonants. According to his theory, Neanderthals and early ''Homo sapiens'' would have been able to communicate using sounds and gestures.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Pagel |first=Mark |date=2017-07-24 |title=Q&A: What is human language, when did it evolve and why should we care? |journal=BMC Biology |volume=15 |issue=1 |pages=64 |doi=10.1186/s12915-017-0405-3 |issn=1741-7007 |pmc=5525259 |pmid=28738867 |doi-access=free }}</ref>

From 100,000 BP, ''Homo sapiens'' necks continued to lengthen to a point, by around 50,000 BP, where Homo sapiens necks were long enough to accommodate a vertical portion to their SVT (SVTv), which is now a universal trait among humans. This SVTv enabled the enunciation of [[Quantal theory of speech|quantal vowels]]: [i]; [u]; and [a]. These quantal vowels could then be immediately put to use by the already sophisticated neuro-motor-control features of the FOXP2 gene to generate more nuanced sounds and in effect increase by orders of magnitude the number of distinct sounds that can be produced, allowing for fully symbolic language.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Lieberman |first=Philip |date=2007 |title=The Evolution of Human Speech: Its Anatomical and Neural Bases |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/509092 |journal=Current Anthropology |volume=48 |issue=1 |pages=39–66 |doi=10.1086/509092 |jstor=10.1086/509092 |s2cid=28651524 |issn=0011-3204|url-access=subscription }}</ref>

Goody (1986) draws an analogy between the development of spoken language and that of [[writing]]: the shift from [[pictographic]] or [[ideographic]] symbols into a fully abstract [[logographic]] writing system (such as [[hieroglyphics]]), or from a logoprahic system into an [[abjad]] or [[alphabet]], led to dramatic changes in human civilization.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Goody |first=Jack |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/logic-of-writing-and-the-organization-of-society/A58ECF96A6302FDC7972E713BDE5568D |title=The Logic of Writing and the Organization of Society |date=1986 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-0-521-33962-9 |series=Studies in Literacy, the Family, Culture and the State |location=Cambridge}}</ref>

===Alternative models===
Contrasted with this view of a spontaneous leap in cognition among ancient humans, some anthropologists like [[Alison S. Brooks]], primarily working in African archaeology, point to the gradual accumulation of "modern" behaviors, starting well before the 50,000-year benchmark of the Upper Paleolithic Revolution models.<ref name="McBrearty Brooks 2000" /><ref name="Henshilwood Marean 2003" /><ref name="Foley Lahr 1997">{{cite journal |last1=Foley |first1=Robert |last2=Lahr |first2=Marta |title=Mode 3 Technologies and the Evolution of Modern Humans |journal=Cambridge Archaeological Journal |date=1997 |volume=7 |issue=1 |pages=3–36 |doi=10.1017/s0959774300001451|s2cid=163040120 }}</ref> [[Howiesons Poort]], [[Blombos]], and other South African archaeological sites, for example, show evidence of marine resource acquisition, trade, the making of bone tools, blade and [[microlithic technology]], and abstract ornamentation at least by 80,000 years ago.<ref name="McBrearty Brooks 2000" /><ref name="Marean et al 2007"/> Given evidence from Africa and the Middle East, a variety of hypotheses have been put forth to describe an earlier, gradual transition from simple to more complex human behavior. Some authors have pushed back the appearance of fully modern behavior to around 80,000 years ago or earlier in order to incorporate the South African data.<ref name="Foley Lahr 1997"/>

Others focus on the slow accumulation of different technologies and behaviors across time. These researchers describe how anatomically modern humans could have been cognitively the same, and what we define as behavioral modernity is just the result of thousands of years of cultural adaptation and learning.<ref name="McBrearty Brooks 2000" /><ref name="Henshilwood Marean 2003" /> Archaeologist [[Francesco d'Errico]], and others, have looked at [[Neanderthal]] culture, rather than early human behavior exclusively, for clues into behavioral modernity.<ref name="D'Errico 1998" /> Noting that Neanderthal assemblages often portray traits similar to those listed for modern human behavior, researchers stress that the foundations for behavioral modernity may in fact, lie deeper in our hominin ancestors.<ref name="D'Errico 2003">{{cite journal |last1=D'Errico |first1=Francesco |title=The Invisible Frontier A Multiple Species Model for the Origin of Behavioral Modernity |journal=Evolutionary Anthropology |date=2003 |volume=12 |issue=4 |doi=10.1002/evan.10113 |pages=188–202|s2cid=1904963 }}</ref> If both modern humans and Neanderthals express abstract art and complex tools then "modern human behavior" cannot be a derived trait for our species. They argue that the original "human revolution" theory reflects a profound Eurocentric bias. Recent archaeological evidence, they argue, proves that humans evolving in Africa some 300,000 or even 400,000 years ago were already becoming cognitively and behaviourally "modern". These features include blade and microlithic technology, bone tools, increased geographic range, specialized hunting, the use of aquatic resources, long-distance trade, systematic processing and use of pigment, and art and decoration. These items do not occur suddenly together as predicted by the "human revolution" model, but at sites that are widely separated in space and time. This suggests a gradual assembling of the package of modern human behaviours in Africa, and its later export to other regions of the Old World.

Between these extremes is the view—currently supported by archaeologists Chris Henshilwood,<ref name="Henshilwood 2002" /> [[Curtis Marean]],<ref name="Henshilwood Marean 2003" /> Ian Watts<ref>Watts, I. 2009. Red ochre, body painting, and language: interpreting the Blombos ochre. In R. Botha and C. Knight (eds), ''The Cradle of Language.'' Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 62–92.</ref> and others—that there was indeed some kind of "human revolution" but that it occurred in Africa and spanned tens of thousands of years. The term "revolution," in this context, would mean not a sudden mutation but a historical development along the lines of the [[Industrial Revolution|industrial revolution]] or the [[Neolithic Revolution|Neolithic revolution]].<ref>Mellars, P. A., [[Katherine Boyle|K. Boyle]], O. Bar-Yosef and C. Stringer (eds), 2007. ''Rethinking the Human Revolution: new behavioural and biological perspectives on the origin and dispersal of modern humans.'' Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.</ref> In other words, it was a relatively accelerated process, too rapid for ordinary Darwinian "descent with modification" yet too gradual to be attributed to a single genetic or other sudden event. These archaeologists point in particular to the relatively explosive emergence of ochre crayons and shell necklaces, apparently used for cosmetic purposes. These archaeologists see symbolic organisation of human social life as the key transition in modern human evolution. Recently discovered at sites such as Blombos Cave and Pinnacle Point, South Africa, pierced shells, pigments and other striking signs of personal ornamentation have been dated within a time-window of 70,000–160,000 years ago in the African Middle Stone Age, suggesting that the emergence of ''Homo sapiens'' coincided, after all, with the transition to modern cognition and behaviour.<ref>Henshilwood, C. S. and B. Dubreuil 2009. Reading the artifacts: gleaning language skills from the Middle Stone Age in Southern Africa. In R. Botha and C. Knight (eds), ''The Cradle of Language.'' Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 41–61.</ref> While viewing the emergence of language as a "revolutionary" development, this school of thought generally attributes it to cumulative social, cognitive and cultural evolutionary processes as opposed to a single genetic mutation.<ref>Botha, R. and C. Knight (eds), ''The Cradle of Language.'' Oxford: Oxford University Press.</ref>

A further view, taken by archaeologists such as Francesco d'Errico<ref name="D'Errico 2003" /> and João Zilhão,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Zilhão |first1=J |year=2006 |title=Neandertals and moderns mixed, and it matters |journal=Evolutionary Anthropology |volume=15 |issue=5 |pages=183–195 |doi=10.1002/evan.20110|s2cid=18565967 }}</ref> is a multi-species perspective arguing that evidence for [[symbolic culture]], in the form of utilised pigments and pierced shells, are also found in Neanderthal sites, independently of any "modern" human influence.

Cultural evolutionary models may also shed light on why although evidence of behavioral modernity exists before 50,000 years ago, it is not expressed consistently until that point. With small population sizes, human groups would have been affected by demographic and cultural evolutionary forces that may not have allowed for complex cultural traits.<ref name="Powell et al 2009" /><ref name="Premo Kuhn 2010" /><ref name="Culture and the Evo Process" /><ref name="Nakahashi 2013" /> According to some authors,<ref name="Powell et al 2009" /> until population density became significantly high, complex traits could not have been maintained effectively. Some genetic evidence supports a dramatic increase in population size before human migration out of Africa.<ref name="Tattersall 2009" /> High local extinction rates within a population also can significantly decrease the amount of diversity in neutral cultural traits, regardless of cognitive ability.<ref name="Premo Kuhn 2010" />

== Archaeological evidence ==

=== Africa ===
{{see also|Early expansions of hominins out of Africa|Early human migrations|Recent African origin of modern humans}}

Research from 2017 indicates that ''Homo sapiens'' originated in Africa between around 350,000 and 260,000 years ago.<ref name=Schlebusch2017>{{cite journal |doi=10.1126/science.aao6266 |pmid=28971970 |title=Southern African ancient genomes estimate modern human divergence to 350,000 to 260,000 years ago |journal=Science |volume=358 |issue=6363 |pages=652–655 |year=2017 |last1=Schlebusch |first1=Carina M |last2=Malmström |first2=Helena |last3=Günther |first3=Torsten |last4=Sjödin |first4=Per |last5=Coutinho |first5=Alexandra |last6=Edlund |first6=Hanna |last7=Munters |first7=Arielle R |last8=Vicente |first8=Mário |last9=Steyn |first9=Maryna |last10=Soodyall |first10=Himla |last11=Lombard |first11=Marlize |last12=Jakobsson |first12=Mattias |bibcode=2017Sci...358..652S |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref name="Guardian">{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/07/oldest-homo-sapiens-bones-ever-found-shake-foundations-of-the-human-story|title=Oldest ''Homo sapiens'' bones ever found shake foundations of the human story|last=Sample|first=Ian|work=The Guardian|date=7 June 2017|access-date=7 June 2017}}</ref><ref name="NYT-20190910">{{cite news |last=Zimmer |first=Carl |author-link=Carl Zimmer |title=Scientists Find the Skull of Humanity's Ancestor — on a Computer – By comparing fossils and CT scans, researchers say they have reconstructed the skull of the last common forebear of modern humans. |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/10/science/human-ancestor-skull-computer.html |date=10 September 2019 |work=[[The New York Times]] |access-date=10 September 2019 }}</ref><ref name="NAT-20190910">{{cite journal |last1=Mounier |first1=Aurélien |last2=Lahr |first2=Marta |title=Deciphering African late middle Pleistocene hominin diversity and the origin of our species |journal=[[Nature Communications]] |volume=10 |issue=1 |page=3406 |doi=10.1038/s41467-019-11213-w |pmid=31506422 |pmc=6736881 |year=2019 |bibcode=2019NatCo..10.3406M }}</ref> There is some evidence for the beginning of modern behavior among early African ''H. sapiens'' around that period.<ref name="SahlePLOS1">{{Cite journal |last1=Sahle |first1=Y. |last2=Hutchings |first2=W. K. |last3=Braun |first3=D. R. |last4=Sealy |first4=J. C. |last5=Morgan |first5=L. E. |last6=Negash |first6=A. |last7=Atnafu |first7=B. |editor1-last=Petraglia |editor1-first=Michael D |title=Earliest Stone-Tipped Projectiles from the Ethiopian Rift Date to >279,000 Years Ago |doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0078092 |journal=PLOS ONE |volume=8 |issue=11 |pages=e78092 |year=2013 |pmid= 24236011 |pmc=3827237 |bibcode=2013PLoSO...878092S |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref name="NPR-593591796">{{cite news |last=Chatterjee |first=Rhitu |author-link=Rhitu Chatterjee |title=Scientists Are Amazed By Stone Age Tools They Dug Up In Kenya |url=https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2018/03/15/593591796/scientists-are-amazed-by-stone-age-tools-they-dug-up-in-kenya |date=15 March 2018 |work=[[NPR]] |access-date=15 March 2018 }}</ref><ref name="The Atlantic-555674">{{cite news |last=Yong |first=Ed |author-link=Ed Yong |title=A Cultural Leap at the Dawn of Humanity – New finds from Kenya suggest that humans used long-distance trade networks, sophisticated tools, and symbolic pigments right from the dawn of our species. |url=https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/03/a-deeper-origin-of-complex-human-cultures/555674/ |date=15 March 2018 |work=[[The Atlantic]] |access-date=15 March 2018 }}</ref><ref name="Brooks">{{Cite journal |title=Long-distance stone transport and pigment use in the earliest Middle Stone Age |journal=Science |volume=360 |issue=6384 |pages=90–94 |year=2018 |doi=10.1126/science.aao2646 |pmid=29545508 |vauthors=Brooks AS, Yellen JE, Potts R, Behrensmeyer AK, Deino AL, Leslie DE, Ambrose SH, Ferguson JR, d'Errico F, Zipkin AM, Whittaker S, Post J, Veatch EG, Foecke K, Clark JB |bibcode=2018Sci...360...90B|doi-access=free }}</ref>

Before the [[Recent African origin of modern humans|Out of Africa theory]] was generally accepted, there was no consensus on where the human species evolved and, consequently, where modern human behavior arose. Now, however, African archaeology has become extremely important in discovering the origins of humanity. The first [[Cro-Magnon]] expansion into Europe around 48,000 years ago is generally accepted as already "modern",<ref name="Hoffecker 2009" /> and it is now generally believed that behavioral modernity appeared in Africa before 50,000 years ago, either significantly earlier, or possibly as a late Upper Paleolithic "revolution" soon before which prompted migration out of Africa.

A variety of evidence of abstract imagery, widened subsistence strategies, and other "modern" behaviors have been discovered in Africa, especially South, North, and East Africa. The [[Blombos Cave]] site in South Africa, for example, is famous for rectangular slabs of [[ochre]] engraved with [[geometric]] designs. Using multiple dating techniques, the site was dated to be around 77,000 and 100,000 to 75,000 years old.<ref name="Henshilwood 2002">{{cite journal|last1=Henshilwood |first1=Christopher |title=Emergence of Modern Human Behavior: Middle Stone Age Engravings from South Africa |journal=Science |date=2002 |volume=295 |issue=5558 |pages=1278–1280 |display-authors=etal |doi=10.1126/science.1067575 |pmid=11786608 |bibcode=2002Sci...295.1278H|s2cid=31169551 }}</ref><ref name="Henshilwood et al. 2009">{{cite journal |doi=10.1016/j.jhevol.2009.01.005 |pmid=19487016 |title=Engraved ochres from the Middle Stone Age levels at Blombos Cave, South Africa |journal=Journal of Human Evolution |volume=57 |issue=1 |pages=27–47 |year=2009 |last1=Henshilwood |first1=Christopher S. |last2=d'Errico |first2=Francesco |last3=Watts |first3=Ian|bibcode=2009JHumE..57...27H }}</ref> Ostrich egg shell containers engraved with geometric designs dating to 60,000 years ago were found at [[Diepkloof Rock Shelter|Diepkloof]], South Africa.<ref name="Texier">{{cite journal | last1 = Texier | first1 = PJ | last2 = Porraz | first2 = G | last3 = Parkington | first3 = J | last4 = Rigaud | first4 = JP | last5 = Poggenpoel | first5 = C | last6 = Miller | first6 = C | last7 = Tribolo | first7 = C | last8 = Cartwright | first8 = C | last9 = Coudenneau | first9 = A | last10 = Klein | first10 = R | last11 = Steele | first11 = T | last12 = Verna | first12 = C | year = 2010 | title = A Howiesons Poort tradition of engraving ostrich eggshell containers dated to 60,000 years ago at Diepkloof Rock Shelter, South Africa | journal =   Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences| volume = 107 | issue = 14| pages = 6180–6185 | doi = 10.1073/pnas.0913047107 | pmid = 20194764 | pmc = 2851956 | bibcode = 2010PNAS..107.6180T | doi-access = free }}</ref> Beads and other personal ornamentation have been found from Morocco which might be as much as 130,000 years old; as well, the Cave of Hearths in South Africa has yielded a number of beads dating from significantly prior to 50,000 years ago,<ref name="McBrearty Brooks 2000" /> and shell beads dating to about 75,000 years ago have been found at Blombos Cave, South Africa.<ref name="Henshilwood et al. 2004">{{cite journal | last1 = Henshilwood | first1 = Christopher S. | author-link = Christopher Henshilwood | display-authors = etal | year = 2004 | title = Middle Stone Age shell beads from South Africa | journal = Science | volume = 304 | issue = 5669| page = 404 | doi = 10.1126/science.1095905 | pmid = 15087540 | s2cid = 32356688 }}</ref><ref name="d'Errico et al. 2005">{{cite journal | last1 = d'Errico | first1 = Francesco | display-authors = etal | year = 2005 | title = Nassarius kraussianus shell beads from Blombos Cave: evidence for symbolic behaviour in the Middle Stone Age | journal = Journal of Human Evolution | volume = 48 | issue = 1| pages = 3–24 | doi = 10.1016/j.jhevol.2004.09.002 | pmid = 15656934 | bibcode = 2005JHumE..48....3D }}</ref><ref name="Vanhaeren et al. 2013">{{cite journal | last1 = Vanhaeren | first1 = Marian | display-authors = etal | year = 2013 | title = Thinking strings: Additional evidence for personal ornament use in the Middle Stone Age at Blombos Cave, South Africa | journal = Journal of Human Evolution | volume = 64 | issue = 6| pages = 500–517 | doi = 10.1016/j.jhevol.2013.02.001 | pmid = 23498114 | bibcode = 2013JHumE..64..500V }}</ref>

Specialized projectile weapons as well have been found at various sites in Middle Stone Age Africa, including bone and stone arrowheads at South African sites such as [[Sibudu Cave]] (along with an early bone needle also found at Sibudu) dating approximately 72,000–60,000 years ago<ref name="Backwell">{{cite journal | last1 = Backwell | first1 = L | last2 = d'Errico | first2 = F | last3 = Wadley | first3 = L | year = 2008 | title = Middle Stone Age bone tools from the Howiesons Poort layers, Sibudu Cave, South Africa | journal = Journal of Archaeological Science | volume = 35 | issue = 6| pages = 1566–1580 | doi = 10.1016/j.jas.2007.11.006 | bibcode = 2008JArSc..35.1566B }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Wadley |first1=Lyn |year=2008 |title=The Howieson's Poort industry of Sibudu Cave |journal=South African Archaeological Society Goodwin Series |volume=10}}</ref><ref name="Lombard">{{Cite journal|title=Indications of bow and stone-tipped arrow use 64,000 years ago in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa |journal=Antiquity |volume=84 |issue=325 |pages=635–648 |year=2010 |doi=10.1017/S0003598X00100134 |vauthors=Lombard M, Phillips L|s2cid=162438490 }}</ref><ref name="Lombard M">{{Cite journal|title=Quartz-tipped arrows older than 60 ka: further use-trace evidence from Sibudu, Kwa-Zulu-Natal, South Africa |journal=Journal of Archaeological Science |year=2011 |doi=10.1016/j.jas.2011.04.001 |vauthors=Lombard M |volume=38 |issue=8 |pages=1918–1930|bibcode=2011JArSc..38.1918L }}</ref><ref name="Backwell2018">{{cite journal | last1 = Backwell | first1 = L | last2 = Bradfield | first2 = J | last3 = Carlson | first3 = KJ | last4 = Jashashvili | first4 = T | last5 = Wadley | first5 = L | last6 = d'Errico | first6 = F | year = 2018 | title = The antiquity of bow-and-arrow technology: evidence from Middle Stone Age layers at Sibudu Cave | journal = Journal of Archaeological Science | volume = 92 | issue = 362| pages = 289–303 | doi = 10.15184/aqy.2018.11 | doi-access = free | hdl = 11336/81248 | hdl-access = free }}</ref> on some of which poisons may have been used,<ref name="Lombard2020">{{Cite journal|title=The tip cross-sectional areas of poisoned bone arrowheads from southern Africa |journal=Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports |volume=33 |year=2020 |doi= 10.1016/j.jasrep.2020.102477 |vauthors=Lombard M|page=102477 |bibcode=2020JArSR..33j2477L |s2cid=224889105 }}</ref> and bone harpoons at the Central African site of Katanda dating to about 90,000 years ago.<ref>{{cite journal |title=A middle stone age worked bone industry from Katanda, Upper Semliki Valley, Zaire |date=28 April 1995 |last=Yellen |first=JE |author2=AS Brooks |author3=E Cornelissen |author4=MJ Mehlman |author5=K Stewart |journal=Science |volume=268 |pages=553–556 |issue=5210 |doi=10.1126/science.7725100 |pmid=7725100|bibcode=1995Sci...268..553Y }}</ref> Evidence also exists for the systematic heat treating of [[silcrete]] stone to increase its flake-ability for the purpose of toolmaking, beginning approximately 164,000 years ago at the South African site of [[Pinnacle Point]] and becoming common there for the creation of microlithic tools at about 72,000 years ago.<ref>{{citation|last1=Brown|first1=Kyle S. |last2=Marean| first2=Curtis W. |last3=Herries |first3=Andy I.R. |last4=Jacobs |first4=Zenobia |last5=Tribolo |first5=Chantal |last6=Braun |first6=David |last7=Roberts |first7=David L. |last8=Meyer |first8=Michael C. |author9=Bernatchez, J. |date=14 August 2009 |title=Fire as an Engineering Tool of Early Modern Humans| journal=Science |volume=325 |issue=5942 |pages=859–862 |doi=10.1126/science.1175028 |pmid=19679810|bibcode=2009Sci...325..859B |hdl=11422/11102 |s2cid=43916405 |hdl-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.1038/nature11660 |pmid=23135405 |title=An early and enduring advanced technology originating 71,000 years ago in South Africa |journal=Nature |volume=491 |issue=7425 |pages=590–3 |year=2012 |last1=Brown |first1=Kyle S. |last2=Marean |first2=Curtis W. |last3=Jacobs |first3=Zenobia |last4=Schoville |first4=Benjamin J. |last5=Oestmo |first5=Simen |last6=Fisher |first6=Erich C. |last7=Bernatchez |first7=Jocelyn |last8=Karkanas |first8=Panagiotis |last9=Matthews |first9=Thalassa |bibcode=2012Natur.491..590B|s2cid=4323569 }}</ref>

In 2008, an ochre processing workshop likely for the production of paints was uncovered dating to c. 100,000 years ago at Blombos Cave, South Africa. Analysis shows that a liquefied pigment-rich mixture was produced and stored in the two abalone shells, and that ochre, bone, charcoal, grindstones, and hammer-stones also formed a composite part of the toolkits. Evidence for the complexity of the task includes procuring and combining raw materials from various sources (implying they had a mental template of the process they would follow), possibly using pyrotechnology to facilitate fat extraction from bone, using a probable recipe to produce the compound, and the use of shell containers for mixing and storage for later use.<ref name="bbc.com-15257259">{{cite news |last=Amos |first=Jonathan |author-link=Jonathan Amos |title=A Cultural Leap at the Dawn of Humanity – Ancient 'paint factory' unearthed |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-15257259 |date=13 October 2011 |work=[[BBC News]] |access-date=13 October 2011 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Vastag |first=Brian |author-link=Brian Vastag |title=South African cave yields paint from dawn of humanity |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/african-cave-yields-paint-from-dawn-of-humanity/2011/10/12/gIQApyHrhL_story.html |date=13 October 2011 |newspaper=[[The Washington Post]] |access-date=13 October 2011 }}</ref><ref name="Henshilwood et al. 2011">{{cite journal | last1 = Henshilwood | first1 = Christopher S. | display-authors = etal | year = 2011 | title = A 100,000-Year-Old Ochre-Processing Workshop at Blombos Cave, South Africa | journal = Science | volume = 334 | issue = 6053| pages = 219–222 | doi = 10.1126/science.1211535 | pmid = 21998386 | bibcode = 2011Sci...334..219H | s2cid = 40455940 }}</ref> Modern behaviors, such as the making of shell beads, bone tools and arrows, and the use of ochre pigment, are evident at a Kenyan site by 78,000–67,000 years ago.<ref>Shipton C, d'Errico F, Petraglia M, et al. (2018). 78,000-year-old record of Middle and Later Stone Age innovation in an East African tropical forest. Nature Communications</ref> Evidence of early stone-tipped projectile weapons (a characteristic tool of ''Homo sapiens''), the stone tips of javelins or throwing spears, were discovered in 2013 at the Ethiopian site of [[Gademotta]], and date to around 279,000 years ago.<ref name="SahlePLOS1"/>

Expanding subsistence strategies beyond big-game hunting and the consequential diversity in tool types has been noted as signs of behavioral modernity. A number of South African sites have shown an early reliance on aquatic resources from fish to shellfish. [[Pinnacle Point]], in particular, shows exploitation of marine resources as early as 120,000 years ago, perhaps in response to more arid conditions inland.<ref name="Marean et al 2007" /> Establishing a reliance on predictable shellfish deposits, for example, could reduce mobility and facilitate complex social systems and symbolic behavior. Blombos Cave and Site 440 in Sudan both show evidence of fishing as well. Taphonomic change in fish skeletons from Blombos Cave have been interpreted as capture of live fish, clearly an intentional human behavior.<ref name="McBrearty Brooks 2000" />

Humans in North Africa (Nazlet Sabaha, [[Egypt]]) are known to have dabbled in [[chert]] [[mining]], as early as ≈100,000 years ago, for the construction of [[stone tool]]s.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.promine.com/blog/5-oldest-mines-in-the-world-a-casual-survey |title=5 Oldest Mines in the World: A Casual Survey |access-date=2018-02-20 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190105054434/https://www.promine.com/blog/5-oldest-mines-in-the-world-a-casual-survey |archive-date=2019-01-05 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref name="Records2015">{{cite book |author=Guinness World Records |title=Guinness World Records 2016 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=f896CgAAQBAJ&pg=PA27 |date=10 September 2015 |publisher=Guinness World Records |isbn=978-1-910561-03-4 |page=27}}</ref>

Evidence was found in 2018, dating to about 320,000 years ago, at the Kenyan site of [[Olorgesailie]], of the early emergence of modern behaviors including: long-distance trade networks (involving goods such as obsidian), the use of pigments, and the possible making of projectile points. It is observed by the authors of three 2018 studies on the site that the evidence of these behaviors is approximately contemporary to the earliest known ''Homo sapiens'' fossil remains from Africa (such as at [[Jebel Irhoud]] and [[Florisbad Skull|Florisbad]]), and they suggest that complex and modern behaviors had already begun in Africa around the time of the emergence of anatomically modern ''Homo sapiens''.<ref name="NPR-593591796"/><ref name="The Atlantic-555674"/><ref name="Brooks"/>

In 2019, further evidence of early complex projectile weapons in Africa was found at Aduma, Ethiopia, dated 100,000–80,000 years ago, in the form of points considered likely to belong to darts delivered by spear throwers.<ref name="Sahle">{{Cite journal |title=Assessment of complex projectiles in the early Late Pleistocene at Aduma, Ethiopia |journal=PLOS ONE |volume=14 |issue=5 |pages=e0216716 |year=2019 |doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0216716 |pmid=31071181 |pmc=6508696 |vauthors=Sahle Y, Brooks AS|bibcode=2019PLoSO..1416716S |doi-access=free }}</ref>

Olduvai Hominid 1 wore facial piercings.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Biocultural diversity in Late Pleistocene/Early Holocene Africa: Olduvai Hominid 1 (Tanzania) biological affinity and intentional body modification. |pmid = 31944279|year = 2020|last1 = Willman|first1 = J. C.|last2 = Hernando|first2 = R.|last3 = Matu|first3 = M.|last4 = Crevecoeur|first4 = I.|journal = American Journal of Physical Anthropology|volume = 172|issue = 4|pages = 664–681|doi = 10.1002/ajpa.24007|s2cid = 210331198|url = https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02990216/file/Willman_2020_OH1_teethwearLabret.pdf}}</ref>

=== Europe ===
While traditionally described as evidence for the later Upper Paleolithic Model,<ref name="Klein 1995" /> European archaeology has shown that the issue is more complex. A variety of stone tool technologies are present at the time of human expansion into Europe and show evidence of modern behavior. Despite the problems of conflating specific tools with cultural groups, the [[Aurignacian]] tool complex, for example, is generally taken as a purely modern human signature.<ref name="Joris Street 2008">{{cite journal |last1=Joris |first1=Olaf |last2=Street |first2=Martin |title=At the end of the 14C time scaledthe Middle to Upper Paleolithic record of western Eurasia |journal=Journal of Human Evolution |date=2008 |volume=55 |issue=5 |pages=782–802 |doi=10.1016/j.jhevol.2008.04.002 |pmid=18930513}}</ref><ref name="Anikovich 2007">{{cite journal |last1=Anikovich |first1=M. |title=Early Upper Paleolithic in Eastern Europe and Implications for the Dispersal of Modern Humans |journal=Science |date=2007 |volume=315 |issue=5809 |pages=223–226 |display-authors=etal |doi=10.1126/science.1133376 |pmid=17218523 |bibcode=2007Sci...315..223A|s2cid=21428180 }}</ref> The discovery of "transitional" complexes, like "proto-Aurignacian", have been taken as evidence of human groups progressing through "steps of innovation".<ref name="Joris Street 2008"/> If, as this might suggest, human groups were already migrating into eastern Europe around 40,000 years and only afterward show evidence of behavioral modernity, then either the cognitive change must have diffused back into Africa or was already present before migration.

In light of a growing body of evidence of Neanderthal culture and tool complexes some researchers have put forth a "multiple species model" for behavioral modernity.<ref name="D'Errico 1998" /><ref name="D'Errico 2003" /><ref name="Abadia 2010">{{cite journal |last1=Abadia |first1=Oscar Moro |title=Redefining Neanderthals and Art: An Alternative Interpretation of the Multiple Species Model for the Origin of Behavioural Modernity |last2=Gonzalez Morales |first2=Manuel R. |journal=Oxford Journal of Archaeology |date=2010 |volume=29 |issue=3 |pages=229–243 |doi=10.1111/j.1468-0092.2010.00346.x}}</ref> Neanderthals were often cited as being an evolutionary dead-end, apish cousins who were less advanced than their human contemporaries. Personal ornaments were relegated as trinkets or poor imitations compared to the cave art produced by ''H. sapiens''. Despite this, European evidence has shown a variety of personal ornaments and artistic artifacts produced by Neanderthals; for example, the Neanderthal site of [[Grotte du Renne]] has produced grooved bear, wolf, and fox incisors, ochre and other symbolic artifacts.<ref name="Abadia 2010" /> Although few and controversial, circumstantial evidence of Neanderthal ritual burials has been uncovered.<ref name="D'Errico 2003" /> There are two options to describe this symbolic behavior among Neanderthals: they copied cultural traits from arriving modern humans or they had their own cultural traditions comparative with behavioral modernity. If they just copied cultural traditions, which is debated by several authors,<ref name="D'Errico 1998" /><ref name="D'Errico 2003" /> they still possessed the capacity for complex culture described by behavioral modernity. As discussed above, if Neanderthals also were "behaviorally modern" then it cannot be a species-specific derived trait.

=== Asia ===
Most debates surrounding behavioral modernity have been focused on Africa or Europe but an increasing amount of focus has been placed on East Asia. This region offers a unique opportunity to test hypotheses of multi-regionalism, replacement, and demographic effects.<ref name="Norton Jin 2009">{{cite journal |last1=Norton |first1=Christopher |last2=Jin |first2=Jennie |title=The Evolution of Modern Human Behavior in East Asia: Current Perspectives |journal=Evolutionary Anthropology |date=2009 |volume=18 |issue=6 |pages=247–260 |doi=10.1002/evan.20235|s2cid=54836302 }}</ref> Unlike Europe, where initial migration occurred around 50,000 years ago, human remains have been dated in China to around 100,000 years ago.<ref name="Liu et al. 2010">{{cite journal |last1=Liu |first1=Wu |title=Human remains from Zhirendong, South China, and modern human emergence in East Asia |journal=PNAS |date=2010 |volume=107 |issue=45 |pages=19201–19206 |display-authors=etal |doi=10.1073/pnas.1014386107 |pmid=20974952 |pmc=2984215 |bibcode=2010PNAS..10719201L|doi-access=free }}</ref> This early evidence of human expansion calls into question behavioral modernity as an impetus for migration.

Stone tool technology is particularly of interest in East Asia. Following ''[[Homo erectus]]'' migrations out of Africa, [[Acheulean]] technology never seems to appear beyond present-day India and into China. Analogously, Mode 3, or [[Levallois technique|Levallois]] technology, is not apparent in China following later hominin dispersals.<ref name="Norton Bae 2008">{{cite journal |last1=Norton |first1=Christopher |last2=Bae |first2=K. |title=The Movius Line sensu lato (Norton et al. 2006) further assessed and defined |journal=Journal of Human Evolution |date=2008 |volume=55 |issue=6 |pages=1148–1150 |doi=10.1016/j.jhevol.2008.08.003 |pmid=18809202|bibcode=2008JHumE..55.1148N }}</ref> This lack of more advanced technology has been explained by serial founder effects and low population densities out of Africa.<ref name="Lycett Norton 2010">{{cite journal |last1=Lycett |first1=Stephen |last2=Norton |first2=Christopher |title=A demographic model for Palaeolithic technological evolution: The case of East Asia and the Movius Line |journal=Quaternary International |date=2010 |volume=211 |issue=1–2 |pages=55–65 |doi=10.1016/j.quaint.2008.12.001 |bibcode=2010QuInt.211...55L}}</ref> Although tool complexes comparative to Europe are missing or fragmentary, other archaeological evidence shows behavioral modernity. For example, the peopling of the Japanese archipelago offers an opportunity to investigate the early use of watercraft. Although one site, Kanedori in Honshu, does suggest the use of watercraft as early as 84,000 years ago, there is no other evidence of hominins in Japan until 50,000 years ago.<ref name="Norton Jin 2009" />

The [[Zhoukoudian]] cave system near Beijing has been excavated since the 1930s and has yielded precious data on early human behavior in East Asia. Although disputed, there is evidence of possible human burials and interred remains in the cave dated to around 34–20,000 years ago.<ref name="Norton Jin 2009" /> These remains have associated personal ornaments in the form of beads and worked shell, suggesting symbolic behavior. Along with possible burials, numerous other symbolic objects like punctured animal teeth and beads, some dyed in red [[ochre]], have all been found at Zhoukoudian.<ref name="Norton Jin 2009" /> Although fragmentary, the archaeological record of eastern Asia shows evidence of behavioral modernity before 50,000 years ago but, like the African record, it is not fully apparent until that time.

== See also ==
{{div col|colwidth=22em}}
* [[Anatomically modern human]]
* [[Archaic humans|Archaic Homo sapiens]]
* [[Blombos Cave]]
* [[Cultural universal]]
* [[Dawn of Humanity (film)|''Dawn of Humanity'' (film)]]
* [[Evolution of human intelligence]]
* [[Female cosmetic coalitions]]
* [[FOXP2 and human evolution]]
* [[Human evolution]]
* [[List of Stone Age art]]
* [[Origin of language]]
* [[Origins of society]]
* [[Prehistoric art]]
* [[Prehistoric music]]
* [[Paleolithic religion]]
* [[Recent African origin]]
* [[Sibudu Cave]]
* [[Sociocultural evolution]]
* [[Symbolism (disambiguation)]]
* [[Symbolic culture]]
* [[Timeline of evolution]]
{{div col end}}

== References ==
{{Reflist|2}}

== External links ==
* [[Steven Mithen]] (1999), ''The Prehistory of the Mind: The Cognitive Origins of Art, Religion and Science'', Thames & Hudson, {{ISBN|978-0-500-28100-0}}.
* [https://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/02/world/artifacts-in-africa-suggest-an-earlier-modern-human.html Artifacts in Africa Suggest An Earlier Modern Human]
* [https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1528.html Tools point to African origin for human behaviour]
* [https://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/18/science/18beach.html Key Human Traits Tied to Shellfish Remains, nytimes 2007/10/18 ]
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20070103042825/http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/12/061222-python-ritual.html "Python Cave" Reveals Oldest Human Ritual, Scientists Suggest]
* [http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-evolution-timeline-interactive Human Timeline (Interactive)] – [[Smithsonian Institution|Smithsonian]], [[National Museum of Natural History]] (August 2016).

{{Prehistoric technology| state=expanded}}
{{Evolutionary psychology}}
{{Human Evolution}}
{{Digital media use and mental health}}
{{Media and human factors}}
{{portal bar|Evolutionary biology|Science}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Behavioral Modernity}}
[[Category:Anthropology]]
[[Category:Anatomically modern humans]]
[[Category:Human behavior|Modernity]]
[[Category:Upper Paleolithic]]
[[Category:Human evolution]]
[[Category:Evolutionary biology]]
[[Category:Evolutionary psychology]]