Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

The Fate of Behavioral Modernity

  • Thematic Issue Article
  • Published:

Abstract

Over the past twenty years, empirical and theoretical advances have significantly reshaped the research agenda on "behavioral modernity" and its conceptualization. Major shifts involve the material signatures of the phenomenon, the general archaeological pattern, the proposed mechanisms of evolutionary change, and species attribution. In response, some researchers have called for eliminating the concept altogether. In this article, I contend that, while eliminativist arguments are gaining traction, their justification remains unsatisfactory. I consider three angles of attack: (1) the relationship between "anatomical" and "behavioral" modernity and their purported shared fate, and two explicit eliminativist positions as advanced by (2) Shea (2011) and (3) Garofoli (2016). I suggest that major concerns can be addressed through conceptual "housekeeping" and, possibly as a result, "relabeling," while contending that the ongoing debate has not yet erased a fundamental explanandum—a transition—that still warrants further investigation. This pertains to a conceptual core that has not yet been defeated. Thus, I suggest that tempering enthusiasm towards the concept’s elimination is more conducive to a nuanced discussion of archaeology’s practice and aims.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+
from 17,985円 /Month
  • Starting from 10 chapters or articles per month
  • Access and download chapters and articles from more than 300k books and 2,500 journals
  • Cancel anytime
View plans

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, books and news in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

Notes

  1. It is worth noting that, while fossil evidence for H. sapiens known at that time pointed to a shorter timeframe, McBrearty and Brooks suggest the following: "... it appears that the major adaptive shift represented by the Acheulian-MSA boundary ca. 250–300 ka corresponds with a speciation event" (McBrearty and Brooks 2000, p. 485).

  2. Shea (2011), echoing an argument from D’Errico (2003), presents an ironic thought experiment to illustrate the historically contingent priority of Paleolithic archaeology in one corner of the world (Europe): if Polynesians had been the first archaeologists, the defining traits of behavioral modernity would have likely included celestial navigation, ocean-going vessels, pelagic fishing, hunting marine mammals, horticulture, domesticated pigs and dogs, ceramics, and feather cloaks.

  3. Haueis (2022) in his article, draws a clear distinction between conceptual housekeeping, "conceptual retirement" and "conceptual abandonment" as available options for revision of polysemous concepts—a different situation from our case, focused on the diachronic variation of a concept—along with guiding principles for pursuing each course of action. In particular, conceptual retirement and abandonment can be understood as milder and stronger forms of eliminativism, respectively. Here, I refer to eliminativism more generally and refer the reader to the richer machinery presented there, which would require more space than can be afforded in this article.

  4. Kuhn describes the interval between 120 and 60 kya as a combination of a peak—the culmination of a long-term trend—and a threshold—a phase shift in material culture and technology (Kuhn 2020, pp. 298–304). In this article, I use the concept of "transition" with respect to behavioral modernity to encompass both of these aspects. The term "threshold effect" has been used with comparable meaning (Meneganzin and Currie 2022).

  5. This point seems again to be shared by Scerri and Will (2023) themselves, who note, in relation to the trait list summarized in their Table 1: "This body of work mostly derives from actualistic studies (sensu Binford, 1981) and involves ethnographic research on extant or recent hunter-gatherer societies but also experimental archaeology to establish archaeological correlates for behavioral and cultural complexity observed in the.

    Present" (2023, p. 3).

  6. On "behavioral variability", Metin Eren’s comment is particularly telling: "Why would this concept not be affected by all the same suspects that also plague behavioral modernity? To measure variability, some sort of units of input will have to be counted; once again it will be the researcher who decides which units are important enough to be included. This sounds suspiciously like the dreaded trait list so maligned by Shea" (in Shea 2011, p. 19).

  7. Garofoli (2016) argues that "behavioral modernity" fails both as a natural and as a functional kind. While much philosophical analysis of scientific concepts has indeed been partly metaphysical, it is unclear to me who in the debate has considered "behavioral modernity" to be a natural kind, thus requiring a discussion on whether behavioral modernity exists or otherwise. Therefore, I will limit my discussion to the second point.

  8. To capture the multiplicity of population trajectories, some have suggested referring to "modernities" (in the plural). In my view, this is best understood as an articulation of the concept at a finer level of analysis—the idea that behavioral modernity can be instantiated by a wide variety of local dynamics—rather than as a challenge to it.

  9. As such, I do not advocate for introducing a new term here. My point is to clarify that this is only a viable option if successful housekeeping is achieved. The reverse can only produce vacuous or confusing labels.

References

  • Ames, C. J., Riel-Salvatore, J., & Collins, B. R. (2013). Why we need an alternative approach to the study of modern human behaviour. Canadian Journal of Archaeology/Journal Canadien d'Archéologie, 21–47.

  • Athreya S, Ackermann RR (2019) Colonialism and narratives of human origins in Asia and Africa. Interrogating human origins. Routledge, London, pp 72–95

    Chapter Google Scholar

  • Bergström A, Stringer C, Hajdinjak M, Scerri EM, Skoglund P (2021) Origins of modern human ancestry. Nature 590(7845):229–237

    Article Google Scholar

  • Binford L (1977) General introduction. In: Binford L (ed) For theory building in archaeology. Academic, New York, pp 1–16

    Google Scholar

  • Binford, L.R., 1981. Bones. Ancient myths and modern men. Academic Press, Boston

  • Binford LR (1985) Human ancestors: changing views of their behavior. J Anthropol Archaeol 4:292–327

    Article Google Scholar

  • Blessing MA (2023) Technological complexity as an indicator of behavioural modernity: a case study on middle Palaeolithic birch tar production and South African microlithic technology (Doctoral dissertation, Universität Tübingen)

  • Blessing MA (2025) Behavioural modernity is dead: long live behavioural modernity. Behav Brain Sci 48:e5

    Article Google Scholar

  • Brigandt I (2010) The epistemic goal of a concept: accounting for the rationality of semantic change and variation. Synthese 177:19–40

    Article Google Scholar

  • Colagè I, d’Errico F (2018) Culture: the driving force of human cognition. Top Cogn Sci 12(2):654–672

    Article Google Scholar

  • Colagè I, d’Errico F (2025) An empirically-based scenario for the evolution of cultural transmission in the human lineage during the last 3.3 million years. PLoS One 20(6):e0325059

    Article Google Scholar

  • Colaço D (2020) Recharacterizing scientific phenomena. Eur J Philos Sci 10:1–19

    Google Scholar

  • Collard M, Buchanan B, O’Brien MJ, Scholnick J (2013) Risk, mobility or population size? Drivers of technological richness among contact-period western North American hunter–gatherers. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 368(1630):20120412

    Article Google Scholar

  • Collard M, Vaesen K, Cosgrove R, Roebroeks W (2016) The empirical case against the ‘demographic turn’in Palaeolithic archaeology. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 371(1698):20150242

    Article Google Scholar

  • Conard NJ (2008) A critical view of the evidence for a Southern African origin of behavioural modernity. S Afr Archaeol Soc Goodwin Ser 10:175–179

    Google Scholar

  • Conard NJ (2011) Comment on Shea 2011: homo sapiens is as homo sapiens was: behavioral variability versus behavioral modernity in paleolithic archaeology. Curr Anthropol 52(1):17–18

    Google Scholar

  • Currie A (2018) Rock, and ruin: an optimist’s guide to the historical sciences. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Book Google Scholar

  • Currie, A., & Killin, A. (2019). From things to thinking: Cognitive archaeology. Mind & Language, 34(2), 263-279.

  • Currie A, Killin A, Lequin M, Meneganzin A, Pain R (2024) Past materials, past minds: the philosophy of cognitive paleoanthropology. Philos Compass 19(6):e13001

    Article Google Scholar

  • Currie A, Meneganzin A (2022) Hawkes’ ladder, underdetermination & the mind’s capacities. In: Wynn T, Overmann K, Coolidge (eds) Oxford handbook of cognitive archaeology. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar

  • d’Errico F (2003) The invisible frontier. A multiple species model for the origin of behavioral modernity. Evol Anthropol Issues News Rev 12(4):188–202

    Article Google Scholar

  • d’Errico F, Banks WE (2013) Identifying mechanisms behind middle paleolithic and middle stone age cultural trajectories. Curr Anthropol 54(S8):S371–S387

    Article Google Scholar

  • D’Errico F, Meneganzin A, Colagè I (2025) Scaffolding minds: human collective intelligence through space, body and material symbols. SocArXiv Preprint. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/ujg32_v1

    Article Google Scholar

  • d’Errico F, Stringer CB (2011) Evolution, revolution or saltation scenario for the emergence of modern cultures? Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 366(1567):1060–1069

    Article Google Scholar

  • Diamond J (1992) The third chimpanzee. Harper Collins, New York

    Google Scholar

  • Dresow M (2021) Explaining the apocalypse: the end-Permian mass extinction and the dynamics of explanation in geohistory. Synthese 199(3):10441–10474

    Article Google Scholar

  • Foley RA (2016) Mosaic evolution and the pattern of transitions in the hominin lineage. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 371(1698):20150244

    Article Google Scholar

  • Galway-Witham J, Cole J, Stringer C (2019) Aspects of human physical and behavioural evolution during the last 1 million years. J Quat Sci 34(6):355–378

    Article Google Scholar

  • Garofoli D (2016) Cognitive archaeology without behavioral modernity: an eliminativist attempt. Quatern Int 405:125–135

    Article Google Scholar

  • Griffiths, P., & Stotz, K. (2013). Genetics and philosophy: An introduction. Cambridge University Press.

  • Haueis P (2022) Revising scientific concepts with multiple meanings: beyond pluralism and eliminativism. Preprint. https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/21213/

  • Haueis P, Novick R (Forthcoming) Conceptual patchworks and conceptual housekeeping. In: Bloch-Mullins C, Arabatzis T (eds) Concepts, induction, and the growth of scientific knowledge. University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh

  • Henn BM, Steele TE, Weaver TD (2018) Clarifying distinct models of modern human origins in Africa. Curr Opin Genet Dev 53:148–156

    Article Google Scholar

  • Henrich J (2004) Demography and cultural evolution: why adaptive cultural processes produced maladaptive losses in Tasmania. Am Antiq 69:197–218

    Article Google Scholar

  • Henshilwood C, d’Errico F, Vanhaeren M, Van Niekerk K, Jacobs Z (2004) Middle stone age shell beads from South Africa. Science 304(5669):404–404

    Article Google Scholar

  • Henshilwood CS, d’Errico F, Yates R, Jacobs Z, Tribolo C, Duller GA et al (2002) Emergence of modern human behavior: middle stone age engravings from South Africa. Science 295(5558):1278–1280

    Article Google Scholar

  • Henshilwood CS, Marean CW (2003) The origin of modern human behavior: critique of the models and their test implications. Curr Anthropol 44(5):627–651

    Article Google Scholar

  • Hublin JJ, Ben-Ncer A, Bailey SE, Freidline SE, Neubauer S, Skinner MM, et al. (2017) New fossils from Jebel Irhoud, Morocco and the Pan African origin of homo sapiens. Nature 546:289–292

  • Jeffares B (2008) Testing times: regularities in the historical sciences. Stud Hist Philos Sci C Stud Hist Philos Biol Biomed Sci 39(4):469–475

    Article Google Scholar

  • Killin A, Pain R (2023) Cognitive archaeology and the minimum necessary competence problem. Biol Theory 18(4):269–283

    Article Google Scholar

  • Kissel, M., & Fuentes, A. (2018). ‘Behavioral modernity’as a process, not an event, in the human niche. Time and Mind, 11(2), 163-183.

  • Kissel M, Fuentes A (2021) The ripples of modernity: how we can extend paleoanthropology with the extended evolutionary synthesis. Evol Anthropol Issues News Rev 30(1):84–98

    Article Google Scholar

  • Klein RG (1989) The human career. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar

  • Klein RG (2000) Archaeology and the evolution of human behavior. Evol Anthropol 9:17–36

    Article Google Scholar

  • Klein RG (2019) Population structure and the evolution of homo sapiens in Africa. Evol Anthropol Issues News Rev 28(4):179–188

    Article Google Scholar

  • Kronfeldner M (2021) Digging the channels of inheritance: on how to distinguish between cultural and biological inheritance. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 376(1828):20200042

    Article Google Scholar

  • Kuhn SL (2020) The evolution of paleolithic technologies. Routledge, Abingdon, Oxon, New York, NY

    Book Google Scholar

  • Majkić A (2021) Behavioral modernity, evolutionary synergies, and the symbolic species. In: Gontier N, Lock A, Sinha C (eds) The Oxford handbook of human symbolic evolution. Oxford University Press, Oxford

  • Mallick, S., Li, H., Lipson, M., Mathieson, I., Gymrek, M., Racimo, F., ... & Reich, D. (2016). The Simons genome diversity project: 300 genomes from 142 diverse populations. Nature, 538(7624), 201-206.

  • McBrearty S (2013) Advances in the study of the origin of humanness. J Anthropol Res 69(1):7–31

    Article Google Scholar

  • McBrearty, S., & Brooks, A. S. (2000). The revolution that wasn't: a new interpretation of the origin of modern human behavior. Journal of human evolution, 39(5), 453-563.

  • McDougall I, Brown FH, Fleagle JG (2005) Stratigraphic placement and age of modern humans from Kibish, Ethiopia. Nature 433:733–736

    Article Google Scholar

  • Mellars P (2005) The impossible coincidence. A single-species model for the origins of modern human behavior in Europe. Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues News Reviews14 (1):12–27

    Article Google Scholar

  • Mellars PA, Stringer CB (eds) (1989) The human revolution: behavioral and biological perspectives on the origins of modern humans. Edinburgh University, Edinburgh

    Google Scholar

  • Meneganzin A, Currie A (2022) Behavioural modernity, investigative disintegration & rubicon expectation. Synthese 200(1):47

    Article Google Scholar

  • Meneganzin A, Killin A (2024) Beyond reasonable doubt: reconsidering neanderthal aesthetic capacity. Phenomenology Cogn Sci, 1–33

  • Meneganzin A, Pievani T, Manzi G (2022) Pan-Africanism vs. single‐origin of homo sapiens: putting the debate in the light of evolutionary biology. Evol Anthropol Issues News Rev 31(4):199–212

    Article Google Scholar

  • Meneganzin A, Ramsey G, DiFrisco J (2024) What is a trait? Lessons from the human chin. J Exp Zool B Mol Dev Evol 342(2):65–75

    Article Google Scholar

  • Meneganzin A, Stringer C (2024) Homo sapiens, Neanderthals and speciation complexity in palaeoanthropology. Evol J Linn Soc. 3(1), kzae033. https://doi.org/10.1093/evolinnean/kzae033

    Article Google Scholar

  • Mithen SJ (1996) The prehistory of the mind: a search for the origins of art, religion, and science. Thames and Hudson, London

    Google Scholar

  • Noble W, Davidson I (1996) Human evolution, language and mind: a psychological and archaeological inquiry. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar

  • Nowell A (2010) Defining behavioral modernity in the context of neandertal and anatomically modern human populations. Annu Rev Anthropol 39(1):437–452

    Article Google Scholar

  • Nowell A (2023) Rethinking neandertals. Annu Rev Anthropol 52(1):151–170

    Article Google Scholar

  • Parravicini A, Pievani T (2019) Mosaic evolution in hominin phylogeny: meanings, implications, and explanations. J Anthropol Sci 97:45–68

    Google Scholar

  • Pfeiffer JE (1982) The creative explosion: an inquiry into the origins of art and religion. Harper and Row, New York

    Google Scholar

  • Planer RJ, Pain R (2024) Expanding the causal menu: an interventionist perspective on explaining human behavioral evolution. Evolutionary Human Sciences 6:e39

    Article Google Scholar

  • Porr M (2010) Identifying behavioural modernity: lessons from Sahul. Bull Indo-Pac Prehist Assoc 30:28–34

    Google Scholar

  • Powell A, Shennan S&, Thomas M (2009) Late pleistocene demography and appearance of modern human behavior. Science 324:1298–1301

    Article Google Scholar

  • Ragsdale AP, Weaver TD, Atkinson EG, Hoal EG, Möller M, Henn BM, Gravel S (2023) A weakly structured stem for human origins in Africa. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06055-y

    Article Google Scholar

  • Renfrew C (1996) The sapient behaviour paradox: how to test for potential? In: Mellars P, Gibson K (eds) Modelling the early human mind. McDonald Institute, University of Cambridge, pp 11–15

  • Renfrew C (2008) Neuroscience, evolution and the sapient paradox: the factuality of value and of the sacred. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 363(1499):2041–2047

    Article Google Scholar

  • Richerson P, Robert B, Bettinger R (2009) Cultural innovations and demographic change. Hum Biol 81:211–235

    Article Google Scholar

  • Roberts P (2016) 'We have never been behaviourally modern’: the implications of material engagement theory and metaplasticity for understanding the late pleistocene record of human behaviour. Quatern Int 405:8–20

    Article Google Scholar

  • Roberts P (2023) Metaplasticity, not modernity: uniting the search for human minds, materials, and environments. In: Wynn T, Overmann K, Coolidge (eds) Oxford handbook of cognitive archaeology. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar

  • Scerri EM, Thomas MG, Manica A, Gunz P, Stock JT, Stringer C et al (2018) Did our species evolve in subdivided populations across Africa, and why does it matter? Trends Ecol Evol 33(8):582–594

    Article Google Scholar

  • Scerri EM, Will M (2023) The revolution that still isn’t: the origins of behavioral complexity in Homo sapiens. J Hum Evol 179:103358

    Article Google Scholar

  • Shea, J. J. (2011). Homo sapiens is as Homo sapiens was: behavioral variability versus "behavioral modernity" in Paleolithic archaeology. Current anthropology, 52(1), 1-35.

  • Shennan S (2001) Demography and cultural innovation: a model and its implications for the emergence of modern human culture. Camb Archaeol J 11:5–16

    Article Google Scholar

  • Sterelny, K. (2011). From hominins to humans: how sapiens became behaviourally modern. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 366(1566), 809-822.

  • Stibbard-Hawkes, D. N. (2024). Reconsidering the link between past material culture and cognition in light of contemporary hunter–gatherer material use. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 48, e1.

  • Stringer C (2016) The origin and evolution of Homo sapiens. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 371(1698):20150237

    Article Google Scholar

  • Stringer C, Crété L (2022) Mapping interactions of H. neanderthalensis and homo sapiens from the fossil and genetic records. PaleoAnthropology, 2022(2).

  • Tattersall I (1995) The fossil trail: how we know what we think we know about human evolution. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar

  • Thomassen B (2012) Anthropology and its many modernities: when concepts matter. J Roy Anthropol Inst 18(1):160–178

    Article Google Scholar

  • Wadley L (2001) What is cultural modernity? A general view and a South African perspective from Rose cottage cave. Camb Archaeol J 11(2):201

    Article Google Scholar

  • White TD, Asfaw B, DeGusta D et al (2003) Pleistocene homo sapiens from middle Awash, Ethiopia. Nature 423:742–747

    Article Google Scholar

  • Wylie A (2017) How archaeological evidence bites back: strategies for putting old data to work in new ways. Sci Technol Hum Values 42(2):203–225

    Article Google Scholar

  • Wynn T, Coolidge F (2007) Did a small but significant enhancement in working memory capacity power the evolution of modern thinking? In: Mellars P, Boyle K, Bar-Yosef O, Stringer C (eds) Rethinking the human revolution. McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, Cambridge, pp 79–90

    Google Scholar

  • Wynn, T., Overmann, K. A., & Coolidge, F. L. (2016). The false dichotomy: a refutation of the Neandertal indistinguishability claim. Journal of Anthropological Sciences, 94, 1-22.

  • Zilhão J (2014) Neandertal–modern human contact in Western eurasia: issues of dating, taxonomy, and cultural associations. In: Akazawa T, Nishiak Y, Aoki K (eds) Dynamics of learning in neanderthals and modern humans: cultural perspectives, vol 1. Springer, Tokyo, pp 21–57

    Google Scholar

Download references

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Adrian Currie, Matthias Blessing, Alejandro Fábregas-Tejeda, Gianmaria Dani, Enza Spinapolice, Francesco d’Errico, Ivan Colagè and two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and feedback on various drafts of this manuscript. Their input has significantly improved the content of this article I am also grateful to Kim Sterelny and Tom Graham, as well as to the participants of the Philosophy of Archaeology workshop they organized (ANU, July 2024), for thought-provoking discussions on the behavioral modernity concept and research. Likewise, I extend my thanks to the participants of the Philosophy of Paleoscience workshop (Egenis, August 2024), organized by Adrian Currie, for helpful input on the materials contained in this article. Finally, I gratefully acknowledge funding from the Research Foundation-Flanders (FWO), under Grant No. G070122N and Grant No. 12A3C26N.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Philosophy, Centre for Logic and Philosophy of Science (CLPS), Leuven, KU, Belgium

    Andra Meneganzin

Authors
  1. Andra Meneganzin

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andra Meneganzin.

Ethics declarations

Competing Interests

The author declares no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

About this article

Cite this article

Meneganzin, A. The Fate of Behavioral Modernity. Biol Theory (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13752-025-00519-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13752-025-00519-2

Keywords

Profiles

  1. Andra Meneganzin View author profile

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /