Two chapters, the same questions asked of both
Put two Deep Time chapters next to each other — their evidence base, the dating methods behind them, the live debates, and the questions still open.
Neanderthals
Burial, pigment, and the genomic evidence for interbreeding with modern humans.
Open full chapter →Denisovans
A population defined largely by DNA — and what a finger bone can and cannot tell us.
Open full chapter →Skeletons, Mousterian tool assemblages, burials, pigment and shell use, and sequenced ancient genomes.
A handful of physical remains and, unusually, far more genetic than skeletal evidence — including DNA recovered from cave sediment.
| Method | What it constrains |
|---|---|
| Ancient DNA sequencingBone and tooth powder, and sediment DNA from cave floors | Establishes population relationships and admixture. Contamination control is the whole ballgame. |
| Radiocarbon with ultrafiltrationCollagen from bone near the limit of the method | Improved pretreatment pushed many 'late' dates older, revising overlap estimates with modern humans. |
| Uranium–thorium dating of carbonate crustsFlowstone over cave art and structures | Gives a minimum age for what lies beneath the crust, not the act itself. |
| Method | What it constrains |
|---|---|
| PalaeogenomicsA finger bone, teeth, and sediment-extracted DNA | Identifies a distinct population and its admixture. It cannot reconstruct anatomy. |
| PalaeoproteomicsCollagen peptide sequences from fragmentary bone | Assigns fragments to a lineage where DNA has degraded. Resolution is coarser than genomics. |
| Population genetic modellingModern genome panels | Estimates admixture timing and proportion within an assumed demographic model. |
How much symbolic behaviour is securely Neanderthal?
Several claimed cases turn on whether the dated crust really postdates the mark.
Why did they disappear as a distinct population?
Competition, climate, demography and absorption by admixture are all on the table.
Which Asian fossils are Denisovan?
Several candidate crania are argued for; assignment without molecular data stays provisional.
How many distinct Denisovan populations were there?
Genomic signals suggest deep internal structure rather than one uniform group.
- How large were their populations, and how fragmented?
- How much of the assimilation happened where and when?
- What did their language capacity actually look like?
- What was their full geographic range?
- Which archaeological assemblages did they make?
- How did high-altitude adaptation pass into modern Tibetan populations?