Among the various materials recovered from archaeological excavations in Brazil, zooarchaeological remains have been the focus of studies on biodiversity, sustainability and relations between humans and nonhumans in the past, from the Pleistocene to the Holocene. In this chapter we present samples of primate cranial bones recovered in archaeological excavations at the Furna do Estrago site, a granitic rock shelter located in the city of Brejo da Madre de Deus, state of Pernambuco, in the Northeast region of Brazil. One sample with anthropic modifications (cutting, perforation, polishing), has been identified as Sapajus libidinosus; another sample with marks similar to the previous one has morphological characteristics that point more broadly to (nonhuman) Primates. These findings allow a reflection on biocultural aspects of the relations between humans and nonhumans, particularly the primates of the New World.

Sucking lice are highly host-specific ectoparasites, particularly on primates with most lice species occurring only on a single species of host. Lice are found on prosimians, New World monkeys, Old World monkeys, and apes. The genus Pediculus is found naturally on humans (Homo sapiens), bonobos and chimpanzees (Pan), howler monkeys (Alouatta), spider monkeys (Ateles), and capuchin monkeys (Cebus). This chapter concentrates mainly on the presence of Pediculus spp. in howler monkeys to provide information on the potential louse host switch between humans and Neotropical primates. Although studies on lice in New World monkeys are very scarce and outdated, after a thorough review we found P. mjobergi reports for three species of howlers: Alouatta caraya, Alouatta guariba, and Alouatta belzebul. Genetic and paleontological evidence suggest that an interchange of genetic material between humans and howler lice occurred during encounters for example for subsistence or pets, probably when modern humans moved out of Africa and entered the Americas, and that P. mjobergi, may be an evolutionary lineage of P. humanus.

The scarcity of attestations to the presence of monkeys in Mesopotamia in general, and during the third millennium BCE in particular, is due to the fact that they were not native to Mesopotamia but brought from the Indus Valley (Harappan culture) or western-central Asia. These monkeys have been identified as the rhesus macaque of northern India or western-central Asia, although other monkeys from the India subcontient might have been known during the third millennium BCE. The first references to monkeys in Mesopotamia during the third millennium BCE are found in artistic representations from the Early Dynastic period (c. 2900–2340 BCE) while the earliest mentions in the written sources are documented in the Ur III period (c. 2100–2000 BCE). In both sources, art and texts, monkeys are depicted as having a ludic character and were kept mainly as pets for entertainment. The monkey was therefore used in the written sources to ridicule the enemies that attacked Sumer, who in the third millennium BCE came fundamentally from the eastern mountains (Zagros), initiating a long tradition of the word “monkey” as a humorous or derogative qualification in the history that has survived to the present day.

Chapter 12 applies what we have learned from prehistory to explain why religions exist and how they emerged and persisted into the present day even while their precepts are clearly contrary to all that we have learned from science. Looking at the present human challenges of warfare and terrorism from an evolutionary standpoint helps readers to better understand and deal with the problems of our modern globalized world.

South Africa is richly endowed with rock art, with three specific rock art traditions having been identified. This chapter is based on one of those rock art traditions, most specifically, the Bushmen rock art. There are many motifs made by Bushmen, ranging from animals, human figures, to schematic images. For the purpose of this chapter, I focus on the representation of primates in the rock art made by these peoples. Chacma baboons (Papio ursinus), as the other primates represented in the rock art, are not found in large quantities. Even in locations where they are relatively well represented, their numbers are still much lower than other animals that were incorporated into rock art imagery. Furthermore, I address three other aspects. First, to provide evidence that shows that some of the baboon features were incorporated into human figures to produce what are known as therianthropic images, that is, half-human and half-animal images. Second, to explore how the representation and significance of baboons have been understood by scholars over the years. Third, to examine their geographical distribution in southern African rock art.

While various primates may have originally roamed in the formally lush prehistoric landscape of Egypt, by the Old Kingdom period, baboons and other monkeys were not native to Egypt proper and only available through foreign import from further south. Yet monkeys remained a recurrent feature in the iconography of this and later periods. A motivation of great religious significance was likely behind the baboon’s continual importation. Of a more secular nature, however, are reliefs from both royal and non-royal tombs where they are inserted into traditionally human scenes, exhibiting their own natural behavior, or imitating human actions, often rather humorously. This study examines the type of primate behaviors observed by the Egyptians and recorded on the walls of their tombs for eternity.

Archaeoprimatology – a term originally coined by one of the editors – explores the interface between humans and nonhuman primates (hereafter referred to as ‘primates’) in antiquity. Hence, archaeoprimatology embraces, both theoretically and methodologically, the disciplines of archaeology and primatology. Archaeoprimatological research is still relatively limited despite its significant implications that range from the art history realm of past iconographic identification of primates to a better grasp of current primate conservation issues. Archaeoprimatology is a discipline that offers multiple perspectives to understand the roots of our perception and apprehension of our own taxonomic group, the order Primates. The edited volume in your hands –the first fully devoted to this discipline – is thus intended to serve as an effort to promote and expand archaeoprimatological studies.

Chapter 2 explains the multidisciplinary nature of prehistoric archeology, providing an overview of many of the disciplines and explaining their basic applications in the field. It describes how archeological data is amassed and interpreted in ever-more efficient ways thanks to constantly evolving modern technologies.

Depictions of nonhuman primates on religious architecture of the Indian subcontinent concern mainly rhesus monkeys in the northern half, and bonnet macaques and langurs in the southern half of the region. The earliest representations of monkeys are those of the Indus Valley civilization (c. 2600 BCE to 1900 BCE) of Pakistan and northwestern India, in the form of small earthenware figures or toys. Especially macaques figure widely in narratives in various roles and functions, on Buddhist as well as Hindu religious architecture. In narrative stone reliefs, monkeys can be a symbol of exemplary compassionate behavior, as in the Story of the Great Monkey King (e.g. at the Buddhist relic shrines at Bharhut, Sanchi and Nagarjunakonda). Monkeys can also be portrayed as witty or clever, as in the Story of the Monkey and the Crocodile (Buddhist and Hindu), or as extremely foolish, as in the Story of the Gardener and the Monkeys (Buddhist), or symbolize the relativity of beauty, as in the Story of the Flying Buddha (Buddhist). They can also merely be used for decoration or indicating a forest setting. Monkeys also figure regularly in erotic sculptures on Hindu temples, where they stand for the unbound desires. Langurs are easily recognized in religious architecture by their long limbs, extremely long tail, and prominent and undulating eyebrows. The vast majority of langur sculptures concerns the monkey god Hanuman, hence the sacredness of this monkey in India. Most langur sculptures are narrative bas-reliefs on Hindu temples of peninsular India, depicting an episode of the epic Ramayana in which Hanuman leads the monkey army and assists Prince Rama and his brother Lakshmana to rescue Rama’s abducted wife Sita. Independent statues or steles of Hanuman as the main character are commonplace throughout India, but especially in the south. Here, Hanuman is generally depicted either as a fierce warrior about to attack, or as a devout, peaceful character in adoration of Rama.

Although the North Coast of Peru and the Amazon basin are separated by hundreds of kilometers and a massive cordillera, they were never worlds completely apart. Imagery of monkeys, one of the most conspicuous inhabitants of the South American tropical forest, provides evidence of interaction among those regions. This chapter examines the presence and meaning of monkeys in the Lambayeque and Chimú cultures, two Late pre-Hispanic societies that developed on the North Coast between 900 CE and 1450 CE. The focus is in particular on figurative depictions of monkeys carried by humans, bearing litters, and holding fruits. A peculiar indigenous early Colonial depiction has also been identified wherein a monkey is portrayed pulling the ear of a roaring feline. A review of zooarchaeological and visual data permits an exploration of the symbolism of monkeys for the Late pre-Hispanic and early Colonial indigenous populations of the northern Peruvian coast. This interpretative exercise leads us to recognize the monkey as both a living sign of dependent relationships and hierarchies and a captive being subject to the construction of meanings based on its corporality, otherness and behavior.