Ethnicity and Language in the Ancient Mediterranean 19of identification in its broadest sense is equal to the mental construction of the Self in
contrast or relation to the Other(s). The extent to which the Others share with the indi-
vidual Self patterns of social interaction, common systems of communication, and the
motivation to act as a group enhances the elaboration of an overarching frame for group
activities: culture.
Modern humans’ adaptation to their environment is not the result of a plan laid down
by some individuals in the remote past. Rather, it results from identity as an inner force,
promoting the entire cultural enterprise. Identity is a complex mechanism that provides
an individual with the capacity to make choices in decision-making. It is not a phe-
nomenon that, once achieved, continues unchanged. Rather, identity has the character of
a dynamic process that is reactivated in everyday interactions, and it is subject to poten-
tial changes (Haarmann 1996). Human beings may adopt many social and cultural roles
during their lifetimes, and the values as well as the priorities of cultural activities change
from childhood to an older age. This dynamic property of identity—arising from the
constant accretion of mental responses to the pressures of keeping a balance with the
natural environment—is responsible for the manifold impulses that have led, through-
out the cultural history of modern humans, to the elaboration of ever new technologies
and symbolic systems, designed for a wide variety of purposes. Identity, the mental strat-
egy of distinguishing the Self from the Other, is so elementary as to function as a motor
for all kinds of interaction and cultural activities. Identity works in modern humans in
a way that it did not work in other hominid species. Individuality and self-awareness
were much less developed in archaic humans (Neanderthals). Identity enhances inten-
tionality (Lyons 1995). Intentionality is fairly weak in primates, although it is present
on a rudimentary level. A vestige of this rudimentary stage of intentionality is still dis-
cernible in modern humans, namely in the somewhat diffuse, prelinguistic intentionality
in infants.
The mechanism by which this force called identity could crystallize was language. With-
out complex language (Carstairs-McCarthy 1999), culture-construction among modern
humans would have remained an endeavorin nuce. Complex language originated out of
the dynamics of the process of identification among human beings when confronted with
the challenges of reconciling their cultural activities with the conditions of their natural
habitat. Complex language made the construction of complex culture possible. In dis-
cussions of cultural evolution, however, identity has been largely overlooked. Here, an
attempt is made to highlight its significance.
The crucial issue in culture evolution is not the mental capacity to manipulate symbols
but rather the incentive that drives one species to elaborate and use sophisticated
symbol systems, and others not. Chimpanzees do not need language in their natural
environment. Therefore, they have not activated their brain capacities for this end.
On the other hand, modern humans would not be able to construct their cultural
environment without the verbal skills they possess. Modern humans’ need for language
is intrinsically associated with the challenges of their identification process. The recent
discovery of a so-called architect gene that is responsible for cerebral asymmetry and
language (Crow 2002) may contribute to the understanding of the dynamics inherent
in the identification process. If identity is central to the culture process, then “the theory