How intelligent were Neanderthals?

TL;DR Neanderthals were highly intelligent, adaptable humans whose cognitive abilities rivaled those of early Homo sapiens and, in some ways, resemble those of today’s emerging artificial intelligences.

Exploring how intelligent Neanderthals were is more than an exercise in prehistory. It allows us to place our own species’ abilities in context and to draw parallels with the artificial systems we are building. By looking at ancient brains, modern human minds, and cutting‑edge AI together, we can see how intelligence emerges in different substrates and environments and how it shapes behavior and culture.

Neanderthal Intelligence: Evidence and Insights

Neanderthals were a successful human species that thrived in Ice Age Eurasia. They were adapted to cold climates, had strong bodies and large brains, and left behind a rich archaeological record. Understanding their intelligence means looking at both their biological hardware and their cultural software. Their cognitive world was shaped by harsh environments, yet they persisted for hundreds of thousands of years.

Brains and Physiology

Neanderthals possessed powerful brains and complex physiology that shaped how they thought, communicated, and adapted to their challenging environments.

• Large endocranial volumes similar to Homo sapiens
  Neanderthals had brains as big as, or even bigger than, modern humans', indicating significant cognitive potential and a higher metabolic cost than modern humans'.

• Brain organization emphasizing vision and body control
  Studies of skull shape and endocasts suggest more brain tissue devoted to visual processing and motor control, reflecting their large eyes and robust bodies, and possibly leaving relatively less for social cognition.

• Anatomical capacity for speech and hearing human‑like frequencies
  Reconstructions of their hyoid bone, ear bones, and vocal tract show that Neanderthals could perceive and produce sounds across a range similar to that of modern human speech, suggesting the potential for complex vocal communication.

• Energy‑hungry brains with substantial metabolic demands
  Maintaining such a large brain and powerful musculature required a high caloric intake, which influenced daily activities and survival strategies.

• Variation in development and neural architecture
  Differences in brain growth patterns and skull shapes across Neanderthal populations suggest unique neural wiring and adaptation to different environments.

Development and Cognition

Understanding Neanderthal development and cognition reveals how their brains evolved, learned, and adapted, shedding light on the depth of their intelligence.

• Different brain growth trajectories compared to modern humans.
  Fossil reconstructions of Neanderthal children show that their brains grew at different rates and followed distinct developmental paths, which may have influenced how neural circuits were organized and when cognitive skills matured.

• High visual and bodily energy demands
  Their larger eyes and powerful musculature required significant brain resources for processing visual input and controlling movement, meaning a greater proportion of their cognitive budget was dedicated to sensory and motor functions.

• Evidence of care for the sick and elderly
  Skeletons of Neanderthals with severe injuries who lived long after those injuries show that groups looked after vulnerable members, indicating empathy, planning, and social cohesion.

• Working memory and decision‑making abilities
  Experiments with tar production and toolmaking suggest Neanderthals could plan multi‑step processes and adjust their actions on the fly, pointing to strong working memory and problem‑solving skills.

Behavior and Culture

Neanderthal behavior and culture reveal a species capable of creativity, cooperation, and adaptation, traits that challenge long-held assumptions about their intelligence.

• Sophisticated stone and bone tools
  Such as the Mousterian industry, Neanderthal toolkits were diverse and carefully made, with prepared cores and controlled flaking techniques that required planning and dexterity.

• Mastery of fire, cooking, and the use of adhesives like birch tar
  Evidence from hearths and residues shows that they controlled fire for warmth and cooking, and produced tar to haft stone tools onto wooden handles.

• Organized hunting of large animals and evidence of cooperative care
  Cut marks on large animal bones and the survival of injured individuals point to coordinated hunting strategies and social support within groups.

• Possible symbolic activities, including pigments, ornaments, and cave structures
  Finds of ochre pigments, pierced shells, and abstract engravings suggest they engaged in some form of symbolic or decorative expression.

• The construction of stalagmite rings deep in caves indicates planning and cooperation.
  The ring structures at Bruniquel Cave imply advanced spatial planning, group coordination, and perhaps ritualistic behavior in the dark.

• Use of natural shelters and seasonal movement
  Archaeological evidence shows that Neanderthals selected caves and open‑air sites and moved seasonally, reflecting environmental awareness and resource management.

Taken together, these biological and cultural indicators show that Neanderthals were intelligent, adaptable hominins capable of planning, cooperation, empathy, and perhaps symbolic thought. Their different brain organization may have influenced the balance of their cognitive skills, but there is no evidence that they were dramatically less capable than early modern humans.  

Homo Sapiens Intelligence and Culture

Our own species evolved in Africa and later spread across the globe, carrying with it a unique combination of brain development, language, culture, and social organization. While our brain size is similar to Neanderthals’, differences in wiring and extended childhoods gave Homo sapiens a platform for unprecedented cognitive flexibility.

• Rapidly changing and diverse toolkits across regions
  The archaeological record shows constant innovation in stone, bone, and organic tools, reflecting experimentation and adaptation to new environments.

• Abundant symbolic art, personal adornment, and ritual objects
  Cave paintings, figurines, beads, and burial goods reveal a rich symbolic life and the ability to communicate ideas and identities.

• Complex spoken language with rich grammar and storytelling traditions
  Linguistic ability allows modern humans to share detailed information, myths, and plans, enabling large-scale cooperation.

• Large social networks and long‑distance exchange of materials and ideas
  Evidence of trade in shells, obsidian, and other materials over hundreds of kilometers points to interconnected groups and cultural diffusion.

• Accumulation of knowledge across generations, leading to exponential innovation
  Cultural transmission acts as a ratchet: once a useful idea arises, it can be taught and refined, driving rapid technological and social change.

These features underpin Homo sapiens’ ability to inhabit every continent, create complex societies, and continuously reinvent technology and culture.  

The State of Artificial Intelligence

Artificial intelligence today represents a different approach to problem‑solving. Instead of biological neurons, it uses computational models trained on vast data. Recent advances have produced systems that perform tasks ranging from conversation to image synthesis and planning.

• Advanced reasoning models integrate planning and external tool use
  Large language models like GPT‑4, Claude, and upcoming systems such as Gemini 3 can break down problems, run code, or search the web to produce coherent answers and plans.

• Multimodal models understand and generate text, images, speech, and video
  Systems like GPT‑4o with vision and models such as ImageBind process multiple sensory modalities, enabling them to describe pictures or answer questions about audio.

• Generative systems like Sora and Gen‑2 create realistic images and short videos from prompts.
  Text‑to‑image and text‑to‑video models can generate artwork or short clips from user descriptions, demonstrating creative synthesis within the constraints of their training.

• Autonomous agents can navigate software or virtual environments to accomplish goals.
  Experimental agents use language models to control browsers or operating systems, executing multi‑step tasks like booking appointments or coding, though they require oversight.

• Limitations due to a lack of embodiment and intrinsic motivation
  AI systems excel at pattern recognition and generation but lack the physical presence, internal drives, and cultural context of biological minds, which limits their understanding compared to natural cognition.

Comparative Reflections

Placing Neanderthals, Homo sapiens, and AI side by side highlights the diverse ways intelligence manifests. Each system faces different constraints and leverages different strengths.

• Biological vs artificial
  Neanderthal and human brains evolved through natural selection and are made of living tissue; AI models are engineered, run on silicon, and follow mathematical rules.

• Learning mechanisms
  Hominins learn from direct experience, imitation, and teaching, embedding knowledge in social contexts; AI learns from curated datasets and optimization algorithms, lacking experiential grounding.

• Creativity
  Humans and Neanderthals imbue creations with meaning, whether art, tools, or rituals, but AI recombines patterns to generate content without attaching intrinsic significance to its output.

• Adaptability
  Homo sapiens display rapid cultural evolution and can flexibly solve novel problems; Neanderthals adapted well but appear to have innovated more slowly; AI can generalize within its training scope and scale quickly across hardware but cannot yet set its own goals or values.

Understanding these contrasts helps clarify what is unique about natural cognition and what current AI systems can and cannot replicate.  

Neanderthals were intelligent, resourceful, and culturally capable hominins whose brains and behaviors challenge the stereotype of a primitive caveman. Homo sapiens built upon similar biological foundations, combining cognitive flexibility with social and cultural complexity to become the dominant human species. Artificial intelligence represents yet another branch on the tree of thinking systems: powerful at computation and pattern generation but fundamentally different in its lack of embodiment and culture. By comparing these forms of intelligence, we gain perspective on our own minds and the technologies we are creating, and we appreciate the myriad ways in which problem‑solving and creativity can arise in the universe.