3 ms·

Not very much compassion if they let them die at 6 which would be expected when their clan realized they couldn’t hold their own and left them to die. Sounds m

Not very much compassion if they let them die at 6 which would be expected when their clan realized they couldn’t hold their own and left them to die. Sounds more like these academics are putting their own feelings into their research than anything. Do you honestly believe neanderthals even knew what Down’s syndrome was? They probably just saw all of the other 6 year olds taking care of themselves and this one was just slowing them down, if anything this just confirms they take care of all children until a certain point.

kromem 2y ago
Around 1800 CE in the United States roughly 30-50% of children didn't make it past 5. But yeah, sure, a Neanderthal child dying at 6 years old was the result of neglect and not that there was extremely high child mortality prior to the very recent modern era.
- DerekL 2y ago
  Also, Down's syndrome causes all sorts of additional health problems. Maybe they let the kid starve at age 6, or the kid got sick and died anyway.
- overstay8930 2y ago
  You think they would have executed a child sooner? What kind of logic are you trying to use here?
washadjeffmad 2y ago
Prior to the past century, half of all human cultures didn't hold naming ceremonies immediately at birth. If an infant didn't survive, there were no public funerals or mourning, and the deaths were not always recorded. Even more recently, the number of a woman's births wasn't recorded, and records of infants who died were frequently "unnamed" and listed without their sex. Names were not required to be ready to submit to a state registration system immediately following birth. In a world where survival beyond a few months was a required rite of acceptance to "earn" a name, that a child possibly not equipped to live on its own was cared for for six years is indeed a testament indeed to, perhaps, something inhuman.

kromem 2y ago

Around 1800 CE in the United States roughly 30-50% of children didn't make it past 5. But yeah, sure, a Neanderthal child dying at 6 years old was the result of neglect and not that there was extremely high child mortality prior to the very recent modern era.

DerekL 2y ago
Also, Down's syndrome causes all sorts of additional health problems. Maybe they let the kid starve at age 6, or the kid got sick and died anyway.
overstay8930 2y ago
You think they would have executed a child sooner? What kind of logic are you trying to use here?

washadjeffmad 2y ago

Prior to the past century, half of all human cultures didn't hold naming ceremonies immediately at birth. If an infant didn't survive, there were no public funerals or mourning, and the deaths were not always recorded. Even more recently, the number of a woman's births wasn't recorded, and records of infants who died were frequently "unnamed" and listed without their sex. Names were not required to be ready to submit to a state registration system immediately following birth. In a world where survival beyond a few months was a required rite of acceptance to "earn" a name, that a child possibly not equipped to live on its own was cared for for six years is indeed a testament indeed to, perhaps, something inhuman.