A new study reveals compelling evidence that certain incised stone artifacts from the Levantine Middle Paleolithic, specifically from Manot, Qafzeh, and Quneitra caves, were intentionally engraved with geometric patterns. This discovery suggests that early humans in the region exhibited advanced cognitive abilities and engaged in symbolic behavior, challenging previous assumptions about the development of abstract thinking and culture among Paleolithic societies. In contrast, artifacts from Amud Cave, which feature shallow, unpatterned incisions, appear to be more functional, used as abrasive tools rather than carriers of symbolic meaning.
This groundbreaking research, led by Dr. Mae Goder-Goldberger of Hebrew University and Ben Gurion University, alongside Dr. João Marreiros of Monrepos Archaeological Research Centre and the University of Algarve, in collaboration with Prof. Erella Hovers (Hebrew University) and Dr. Eduardo Paixão (University of Algarve), has been published in Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences. The study offers significant new insights into the complexity of human behavior during the Middle Paleolithic, suggesting that the symbolic practices we associate with modern humans may have emerged far earlier than previously believed.
Challenging Traditional Views of Symbolic Behavior
For many years, scholars have debated the emergence of symbolic thought in early hominins. Traditional views held that abstract thinking and symbolic behaviors—such as the creation of art or geometric expression—were hallmarks of modern humans and developed much later in human evolution. Many archaeologists considered marks on Paleolithic artifacts as incidental or functional, created through routine tool use or natural wear. However, this new study calls into question these assumptions, presenting empirical evidence that suggests these engravings were intentional and symbolic in nature.
The researchers specifically focused on the stone artifacts from Manot Cave, Qafzeh Cave, and Quneitra, which have long been considered significant archaeological sites for understanding the behavior of early humans. The study employed advanced 3D surface analysis to examine the geometry and patterns of the incised markings, allowing the team to differentiate between intentional engravings and functional wear. Their results reveal distinct differences in the nature of the incisions across these sites.
Geometric Patterns: Evidence of Symbolic Intent
The artifacts from Manot, Qafzeh, and Quneitra caves feature deliberate engravings that are not only geometrically structured but also align with the surface topography of the stones. These engravings are highly suggestive of symbolic intent, pointing to the possibility that the early humans who created them were engaging in a form of abstract expression. These marks were not haphazard or the result of functional use; rather, they were crafted with care, possibly as cultural markers, decorative elements, or expressions of social identity.
In contrast, the Amud Cave artifacts exhibit shallow, unpatterned incisions that are consistent with functional use. These marks appear to have been made with practical purposes in mind, such as for use in abrasion or tool production, rather than with any symbolic intention. This stark difference highlights the diversity in the cognitive and cultural practices of Middle Paleolithic hominins, suggesting that while some groups were engaging in abstract thought and symbolic behavior, others were focused on purely functional tool-making.
New Methodology and Comparative Framework
The study’s methodology sets it apart from previous research by employing advanced 3D surface analysis techniques to study the physical properties of the engraved artifacts. This technology allows researchers to examine the intricate details of the incisions, revealing subtle features that might not be visible to the naked eye. According to Dr. Goder-Goldberger, “Abstract thinking is a cornerstone of human cognitive evolution. The deliberate engravings found on these artifacts highlight the capacity for symbolic expression and suggest a society with advanced conceptual abilities.”
Dr. Marreiros also emphasizes the significance of the comparative framework used in the study: “The methodology we employed not only highlights the intentional nature of these engravings but also provides for the first time a comparative framework for studying similar artifacts, enriching our understanding of Middle Paleolithic societies.”
The study represents a critical advancement in the study of Paleolithic symbolism. By examining the patterns and geometry of the engravings, the researchers were able to identify shared traits among artifacts from different sites. This suggests that the engravings were not random but instead formed part of a larger symbolic tradition that may have been shared among different groups in the Levant during the Middle Paleolithic.
Symbolic Behavior in the Middle Paleolithic
While the engraved artifacts from Qafzeh, Quneitra, and Manot caves are isolated initiatives within their respective chronological and geographic contexts, the researchers argue that the similarities in pattern structure and the intentional nature of the engravings suggest these marks were part of a broader, shared practice. The findings suggest that even at this early stage in human evolution, there was a cultural complexity that allowed for the transmission of symbolic ideas, possibly through social groups or networks of early humans.
The study also sheds light on the cognitive and cultural development of Paleolithic hominins, showing that abstract thinking—long thought to be a hallmark of modern humans—may have been emerging in our ancestors much earlier. These early symbolic practices could have served multiple functions, from facilitating communication to reinforcing social structures or marking important cultural practices.
Implications for Human Evolution
This research is groundbreaking not only for its insights into early human behavior but also for its implications regarding the timeline of symbolic thought. By identifying clear examples of intentional symbolism in artifacts dating back to the Middle Paleolithic, the study challenges the traditional view that symbolic expression was a later development tied exclusively to Homo sapiens. The evidence from Manot, Qafzeh, and Quneitra suggests that abstract thinking and symbolic expression may have been more widespread across early human species, including Neanderthals and early anatomically modern humans, than previously recognized.
These findings have the potential to reshape our understanding of human evolution, suggesting that symbolic behavior did not emerge abruptly with the arrival of modern humans but developed gradually, potentially over hundreds of thousands of years, across multiple hominin species.
Conclusion: Bridging the Gap Between Functional Use and Abstract Thought
This study marks a significant step forward in the understanding of the symbolic behavior of our ancestors. By examining incised stone artifacts from key Levantine sites, the researchers have provided empirical evidence of deliberate, abstract thinking among Middle Paleolithic societies. The findings bridge the gap between functional tool use and the emergence of abstract expression, offering crucial insights into the cognitive and cultural development of early hominins.
As we continue to study and uncover the mysteries of early human behavior, this research helps us better understand the intellectual and cultural complexity of the Middle Paleolithic period, highlighting the deep cognitive abilities of early humans long before the advent of modern humans.
Reference: Mae Goder-Goldberger et al, Incised stone artefacts from the Levantine Middle Palaeolithic and human behavioural complexity, Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences (2025). DOI: 10.1007/s12520-024-02111-4