Neanderthals in Love: critique

I found the "Neanderthals in Love" by Steve Mithen somewhat imaginary. The theory that Neanderthals hummed in order to communicate (p. 221) is a strange phenomenon, if it actually occurred. Humming was utilized to sing to infants as well, and to sing in general. Mithen also claims that Neanderthals danced and sang in caves, using all sorts of percussive materials including bone fragments and stone in order to make noise (242). The only way to know with certainty how Neanderthals lived their culture is to be there when it happens.
The main topic for discussion that was compelling in "Neanderthals in Love" was the debate about whether Neanderthals could speak a language. According to Mithen, humming is enough if sufficient inflections and emphasis variables are included. The physiology of Neanderthals suggests that they may have been properly equipped to speak a language, since their oral and pharyngeal morphology closely resembles that of Homo sapiens (226). Auditory sensations should have been close to that of modern humans by 300000 years ago (227). The hypoglossal canal was larger than that of Homo sapiens, which may have increased speaking ability. In addition, the average brain cavity was larger than that of modern humans, suggesting a higher intelligence than Neanderthal ancestors. The brain volume to body mass ratio, or encephalization quotient, is 5.3 in Homo sapiens, while Homo neanderthalis had a ratio of 4.8. Homo heidelbergensis had an encephalization quotient of about 3.5 (p. 223). Lastly, the tool making procedures, burial of dead, and hunting of animals had to have had some form of communication. In order to coordinate such pursuits, some form of complex communication was needed.
Unfortunately, there are many arguments against the idea of speech in Neanderthals. Neanderthals had a fairly stable society, which meant that they may not have needed to develop complex methods of communication to teach the same methods of survival from parent to child. Males also developed according to Mithen from a singing and tool bearing courtship behavior to the provider, a role that did not require the ability to sing or communicate as well. Further, many modern apes have large hypoglossal canals as well as large brains, but they cannot communicate as well and are not nearly as intelligent as Homo sapiens (p. 226). In addition, Neanderthals were fairly isolated from one another, and lived in small groups. This does not allow for much spread of knowledge or communication enhancement. More importantly, Mithen states that although Neanderthals had higher encephalization quotients, they did not possess the "cognitive fluidity" (p. 233) to make intuitive connection between different aspects of life. They lacked the neural networks to bridge the gaps between culture and hunting. Therefore making a flute from a bear bone was inconceivable for a Neanderthal. Lastly, there are no symbolic artefacts to point to a written language, or any art for that matter. The lack of symbolic artifacts points to a lack of language development. I believe this would include humming, which sounds ridiculous anyway. According to these findings, the more convincing argument is the no language one.