Are the "Giants" of myth, folk tales of neanderthals

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

File: 1431615336881.jpg (33.91 KB, 780x520, 3:2, 1-neanderthal.jpg)

Are the "Giants" of myth, folk tales of neanderthals Urban_Viking 05/14/15 (Thu) 14:55:36 No.5394

Neanderthals were big, they lived in generally colder places than modern humans, they sometimes bred with humans. Do you think that the mythological giants, are Neanderthals, i mean the similarities are there and Humans and neanderthals interacted with each other for a couple thousand years. To me it would make more sense that stories of a real species of different human was exaggerated and changed rather than it being completely mythical.

Off topic there are also folk stories in the islands north west of Australia, about ancient tiny people who were described as mischievous a bit like goblins, there was in fact a unique species of small human found in that area that they would have interacted with a very long time before those stories were told. The same thing could have happened with Neanderthals.

Asatruar 05/14/15 (Thu) 16:10:43 No.5396

Could be but if modern genetic science is correct then Europeans are partly Neanderthal. It has also been shown that Neanderthals had higher average intelligence than humans. This would be inconsistent with the myths depicting giants as oafish and stupid most of the time.

I think its more likely that the giants were representative of destructive forces of nature as opposed to constructive forces (vanir, dwarves, elves)

they're stupid because a hurricane or mountainslide does not think, it merely is and does.

its possible that the Neanderthals were the original inspiration of the giants and they gradually acquired mythical traits over time but I would have to see better evidence of it

raidh0!!gJsaBpcavQ 05/14/15 (Thu) 23:20:30 No.5397

Some of the gods are described as half-giant, and of course the Neanderthal admixture among Europeans is well-established. If you are looking for factual historical information in the tales of the giants, then I don't see a huge problem with this theory.

Asatruar 05/15/15 (Fri) 21:03:46 No.5406

>>5394

>Neanderthals were big

source on that? I have never heard about Neanderthals being big, which I'd assume would be BIG or at least taller than Sapiens in enough measure to be considered "giants"

>>5396

> It has also been shown that Neanderthals had higher average intelligence than human

source on that as well? they had bigger brain capacity, but that does not correlate with higher average intelligence specially because if they were indeed bigger than sapiens as OP said, it would explain it. also, it seems their eyes were bigger and adapted to some type of special sight which is why their brain was larger in capacity because it was adapted for those tasks.

although they certainly were at least on the same level as sapiens, since their cultural/religious practices, from what we know, we're on par.

on the giant thing, I'd have to agree with >>5396

they were probably representations of destructive forces. also giants appear in pretty much all cultures, even ones who wouldn't have had much contact with Neanders (although that could be cultural "trade"?)

the pygmies in australia aren't unique, there are some actual pygmie races in africa and tales of dwarves and other small humanoids are once again common throughout mankind (heck there's even dwarfism as a disease)