Introduction
In
Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan,
the 17th century
English political philosopher puts forth the proposition that there
is a “natural state of man” where bellum
omnium contra omnes (“war of all
against all”) occurs.
This paper will attempt to create a
definitive look at the osteological evidence of injury or death as
the result of violence among early humans and other members of the
homininae family; providing proof that life for our early ancestors
as put by Hobbes was "solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and
short".
Additionally, a
cursory look at man’s nearest relatives the apes will be examined
for any similarities in injuries, as well as behavior patterns;
specifically in Pan troglodytes.
This
inquiry for definitive proof of violence will begin with a report on
the types of trauma found in skeletal remains, followed by an
examination of evidence found in the Paleolithic, age; where the
remains of the various Homo species
alive during this time will be examined.
Definitive
proof will come in the form of a “smoking gun” so to speak. The
smoking gun being actual projectile points found imbedded in human
remains. Debilitating wounds such as fractures and other possible
impact wounds will be noted.
Although somewhat difficult to
substantiate, an attempt will be made to find definitive proof of
interspecies aggression amongst australopithecines and other
Pleistocene hominids.
Because
of the small likelihood of finding Pleistocene evidence (most
likely due to the
use of wooden tools which do not preserve well in the geologic
record), an overview of what primatologists find in regards to ape
behavior will be examined, specifically in Pan
troglodytes, because of their
remarkable biological similarities to man and their proximal
relationship to us in the primate phylum.
Trauma Analysis
Skeletal
evidence of trauma as the result of interpersonal conflict or
intragroup conflict is rarely conclusive and must be evaluated in its
individual, populational, social, cultural, and physical content
given the harsh living conditions of our ancestors, much of the
trauma in archaeological remains will be due to environmental or
occupational misadventure or accident (Lovell 1997).
Trauma can be
defined as “an injury to living tissue
that is caused by a force or mechanism extrinsic to the body”.
Inconsistencies in descriptions and
interpretations of trauma in the literature, particularly as they
affect our understanding of the nature and extent of interpersonal
violence in antiquity, have made it difficult to compare the results
of different studies and to accept with confidence some conclusions
(Lovell 1997).
Trauma can be
divided into two main categories dislocations
(the displacement of one or more bones
or joints) and fractures (any
break in the continuity of a bone) (Lovell
1997). This article will focus on
the later category due to the likelihood of the injury being
conducive to violence over the former category.
There are several mechanisms that can result in a
fracture: direct trauma, indirect trauma, stress, as well as a
secondary affects due to pathology (Lovell 1997). What will be of
particular importance to this article will be fractures that are
results of direct trauma. When a break occurs at the point of impact,
it is referred as a direct trauma injury (Miller and Miller 1979).
Partial
or complete penetration of the bone cortex by cutting, piercing,
drilling or scraping, such as the excision of pieces of the cranial
vault bones in the practice of trephination, or the amputation of a
limb segment are classed as a direct trauma injuries (Blair 1983,
Butler 1971).
Direct
trauma can be divided into types of fractures: transverse,
penetrating, comminuted, and 3 types of “crush” fractures:
depression, compression, and pressure (Lovell 1997).
A
transverse fracture results from force applied in, and appears as, a
line perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of bone. Clinically this
injury often results from a hard kick to the shin and is often seen
among soccer players. Typically, transverse fractures are caused by a
relatively small force delivered to a small area (Lovell 1997).
Penetrating fractures typically are
caused by application of a large force to a small area. In
archaeological contexts, penetration could be caused by a projectile
point or a blow from an axe (Blair 1983, Butler 1971).
Wounds from arrow or spear points often can be
identified with certainty only if the point remains embedded in the
bone and healing would not be evident if such wounds were linked to
the death of an individual (Gill 1994, Larsen 1996, Owsley 1991).
Cases of penetrating wounds can be
expected to show subsequent infection and/or pronounced deformity in
the absence of stabilization or rest of the injured part. Some
penetrating fractures may also be comminuted, which occurs when the
bone is broken in more than two pieces, most common in long bone
diaphyses, cranium fractures as the result of blunt force trauma
(Lovell 1997).
Crush fractures most commonly occur
in cancellous bone and result from the application of a direct force
to the bone, which collapses on itself. Three types of crush
fractures are recognized: depression, compression, and pressure.
The incomplete penetration of a bone by a low
velocity projectile may result in a crush fracture Blunt trauma,
such as that produced by a bludgeon, fist, or hammer, or when an
object is dropped on the hand or foot, results in crush fractures
(Lovell 1997).
The application of
direct force through culturally mandated bone alterations is also
considered a crush fracture. The shaping of immature cranial and foot
bones by various types of binding for beautification is an example of
a crush fractures (Lovell 1997).
Cranial fractures are of importance
to paleopathology, for they are generally indicative of direct
trauma. Direct trauma to the cranium often occurs when the head is
struck by a moving object, and can be due to interpersonal violence.
However, direct trauma to the cranium also occurs if the head strikes
the ground after a fall or jump form a height or when balance is lost
after landing on the feet.
These
fractures can be described as being linear, crush, or penetrating
(Lovell 1997).
Although vault fractures are most
common, the base, maxillae, nasal bones, orbits, and/or zygomae may
be fractured alternatively or additionally, and the temporomandibular
joint may be traumatically dislocated (Lovell 1997).
Low velocity, blunt trauma to the
head may result in simple linear fractures or depressed (crush)
fractures. Crush fractures of the cranial vault are commonly seen in
archaeological human remain and are caused by low velocity direct
trauma. The kinetics involved may relate to acceleration injuries, in
which the head is struck by an object and set in motion. Appearance
of fracture lines as the result of linear fractures may aid in
identifying the point of impact and the mechanism of injury (Lovell
1997).
Penetrating
injuries of the cranium are characterized by a small area of impact
with a localized area of distortion and are usually caused by
sharp-edged weapons, projectiles or other pointed and edged objects
(Lovell 1997).
Heavy
cutting-edged weapons that are used in a chopping manner will produce
crush injuries in addition to penetration, and further injury may be
caused if the embedded weapon is removed with a twisting motion
(Lovell 1997).
The type
and size of the wound produced by a projectile depends upon the size
of the projectile, the speed at which it strikes the bone, and the
distance it travels (Lovell 1997).
As a
general rule, when the area of impact decreases; the stresses are
more localized, but greater in magnitude, and the stresses in
surrounding areas diminish (Lovell 1997).
Besides fractures of the cranium
(including the nasal, zygomatic bones, and the mandible), injuries
that are considered to have a high specificity for a clinical
diagnosis of assault are fractures of the posterior ribs, vertebral
spinous processes, and fractures of the hand or foot. Occasionally
the palmar surfaces of the manual phalanges will exhibit healed or
unhealed cut marks, originating as defensive wounds incurred as a
victim of a pointed-weapon attack (Lovell 1997).
What has been described as “parry
fractures” may occur; fractures in the ulna and radius as the
result of the individual attempting to block a crushing blow. The
evidence for such is inconclusive due to the fact that these bones
typically break during falls, or occupational hazards.
Additionally, a perimortem hyoid
fracture, and transverse fractures on, or posterior to, the superior
articular processes of the second cervical vertebrae; are considered
strongly suggestive of interpersonal violence through strangulation
(Maples 1986)
Much of the evidence found
indicating that an individual experienced violence at the hands of
another will come through the careful scrutiny of cranial remains.
The genus Homo
in the Upper Pleistocene and Upper Paleolithic
According
to Nancy Lovell of the Department of Anthropology at the University
of Alberta:
“The
physical environment has been shown to influence the frequency and
nature of trauma. For example, adverse weather conditions (e.g., snow
and ice) and irregular landscapes increase fracture risk from falls,
while reduced winter daylight hours in northern latitudes increase
fracture risk from mishaps due to limited visibility. Decreased
sunlight also may impair calcium absorption and lead to fractures
secondary to osteoporosis or rickets, and dietary inadequacies of
vitamin C or calcium may increase the risk of pathological
fractures.”
Whether
the previous statement is completely factual or not is unknown. It
has been said that Neanderthals for example suffered a higher level
of trauma, comparable in intensity and location to modern rodeo
riders (Thorpe 2003). What the above statement does do is
sufficiently cast doubt on any human remains that may have once been
considered evidence of interpersonal violence between people of the
stone-ages.
Due to
the ambiguous nature of some archaeological finds, this article will
deal strictly with definitive evidence of violence in human remains.
Artifacts
are the most compelling evidence of violence. Projectile points
embedded in bone or recovered from the abdominal cavity are
diagnostic of at least some traumatic events, and may point logically
to the cause of other injuries as well (Bennike 1985, Jurmain 1991,
Smith 1996, Walker 1989, Owsley and Jantz 1994).
Sites
and specimens that have yielded evidence of purposeful violence in
ice-age Europe include Neanderthal and Neanderthal related
sub-species
Steinheim,
Ehringsdorf, Fontéchevade, Moula-Guercy, Krapina, and Monte Cicero.
Additionally,
strong evidence of violence amongst the genus Homo
neanderthalensis can be found at
Shanidar in Iraq, Mugharet al-Skhul in what was then called
Palestine.
The most recent claim of
Neanderthal violence comes from a re-analysis of the young adult,
possibly male, from St. Césaire, France (Zollikofer 2002). A healed
skull fracture is argued to be the result of an attack.
At Shanidar in Iraqi Kurdistan
Solecki discovered six adult skeletons, and one infant skeleton of
“progressive” Neanderthals. Of these two, most likely males,
reveal signs of having been injured. Stewart writes that the signs of
violence in the Shanidar I skull:
…are
in the form of scars and indicate that this individual suffered
injuries about the face and forehead. The location of the scars on
the forepart of the head suggests injuries received in combat.
Shanidar
III had the very conclusive evidence of violence in the form of a
blade stuck between two of his ribs (Solecki 1959). The radiocarbon
date for this site is 46,000 years.
Also in the
Middle-east a specimen that was first considered a form of a
“progressive” Neanderthal but is now considered by most
anthropologists to be Homo
sapiens. This specimen was found in a
terrace just outside the Skhul cave on Mt. Caramel in Palestine,
nine adults and one child were
found.
The child appears to have a
fracture that could have resulted due to a perforation caused by a
sharp, pointed instrument. It is unclear however as to whether this
fracture of the right ear and glenoid cavity occurred ante or
postmortem (Bate & Garrod 1937).
Hunting accidents aside, Skhul IX, like the
Shanidar III skull appeared to have suffered from violence at the
hands of another. Mckown and Keith (1939) state “A wound of the
left hip joint gives unequivocal testimony to their possession of
spear-like weapons”.
The Skhul site
dates from 100,000-81,000 years ago (Stringer 1989) years ago.
Skhul
IX pelvis and injury 5
Outside
of Europe and the Middle-East there have been few sites if any of
Homo neanderthalensis
specimens that exhibit signs of death or injury as the result of
violence. Sites like Broken Hill in Africa have yielded the Kwabe
cranium of “Rhodesian Man” (H.
heilderbergensis: 125,000-300,000 years
ago); with two small holes in the left temporal region of the skull.
This hole could be from the tooth of a carnivore, or possibly a
small, piercing implement.
Steinheim
Skull 6
The
Steinheim skull is
interesting not only because or the possible signs of violence which
include an enlarging of the foreman magnum, and an extensive
mutilation point from a strong blow received before death (Blanc
1961); but because it is an anomaly of sorts, best described as
“pre-neanderthal”.
While the
vault of a human skull found in a travertine deposit in a quarry near
Ehringsdorf was assessed by Weidenreich (1928) to have “Unmistakable
dents on the frontal made partly by sharp, partly by dull stone
implements, render it probable that the individual had been killed.”
Keith (1931) goes on to say about Weidenrich and the Steinheim
specimen:
Professor
Weidenreich was surprised to find, as he made a careful examination
of the frontal bone, that there was clear evidence of five wounds all
of which had been inflected when the bone was fresh, whether before,
at, or just after death cannot now be determined. Of these five
wounds one, upon the right side of the forehead, was caused by a blow
from a blunt implement, delivered with such force that a rounded area
of bony wall was forced inwards and shivered --- enough to produce
immediate loss of consciousness. The other four wounds were such as
might have been produced by a flint implement with a sharp edge; one
blow, over the left orbit, caused a linear fracture to spread upwards
to the vault; the other three delivered over the right orbit, were
vertical in direction; a piece of bone over the right orbit had been
separated by these blows.
Stone
tools were found at the site to support the hypothesis. Interestingly
the Ehringsdorf
skull’s taxononic position is in-question like Steinheim, but
rather than being a intermediary between erectus
and sapiens,
it could be considered to be either H.
sapiens or
a post
neanderthal sub-species; it is most likely neanderthalensis
however.
At Fontéchevade Cave in southern France, the
remains of an individual represents by some, as evidence of death as
the result of violence. According to Vallois (1961):
The
Tayacian Fontéchevade skullcap (No. 2) exhibits in the occipital
region marks of a violent blow that appears to have been made before
death; its parietal region had undergone the action of fire.
Coon comments (1962), “The left
parietal contains a hole with depressed edges, suggesting death by
violence, at an age of forty to fifty years; shortly after death the
bones were charred.”
Four skulls at Krapina allegedly
depict signs of violence and a strong indication of cannibalism
(Gorjanovíc-Kramberger 1906). Vallois (1961) comments:
The
rock shelter of Krapina is classically considered as having witnessed
scenes of cannibalism; skulls jaws, and the limb bones had been
broken into such a number of fragments that accidental breakage could
not have been involved. The human bones bore marks of cutting and
some were partially burned and mixed in with animal bones that were
also burned. The opinion of Gojanovíc-Kramberger (1906) that these
are the remains of cannibals’ meals is unanimously accepted.
Klaatsch (cited
in Keith 1928) suggested that the remains “may represent captives
which Neanderthal people had made from their enemies—the
contemporary representative of the Homo
sapiens.” Although no evidence of
intraspecific killing was found (Roper 1969).
While others
have postulated due to the temporal sequence, and variety of cranial
features found at the site; Krapina actually exhibits the evolution
of Neanderthal to modern human (Poirier 1997).
The Monte
Cicero skull found lying exposed on a Mousterian Level of a cave
inaccessible for more than 50,000 years (Vallois & Boule 1957) is
described by Blanc (1961) as follows:
The
Monte Cicero skull, representing a late or typical Neanderthal of La
Chapelle-aux-Saints or Neanderthal form, about the age of forty five
at death, was lying on the floor of a cave surrounded by a circle of
stones. The skull bears two mutilations: one caused by one or more
violent blows on the right temporal region that has caused
conspicuous damage to the frontal, temporal, and the zygoma. This
mutilation points to a violent death, probably a ritual murder. The
other mutilation consists of the careful and symmetric incising of
the periphery of the foramen magnum (which has been completely
destroyed) and the subsequent artificial production of a sub circular
opening about 10-12 centimeters in diameter.
Weidenreich
(1943) was led by the evidence to state that “the skulls of
Ehringsdorf and Monte Cicero prove that the practice of man to war
against his own kin is very old”.
For modern man,
the species Homo sapiens,
sites to be examined in this article will deal primarily with
European sites for simplicity. A small number of sites outside of
Europe will be examined, while the New World will be wholly ignored.
European
sites yielding evidence of violence in modern Homo
are found from the Upper Paleolithic
include Cro-magnon, Cap Blanc, San Teodoro, Grotte des Enfantes
(Fanicullui), and the Ice-man of the Alps.
A skull
of a modern human from the Klasies River site of South Africa, dating
to about 90,000 years ago may have a skull fracture, a result of
violence (Thorpe 2003).
Another
African site of interest is Afalou-bou-Rhummel. Afalou-bou-Rhummel is
a rock shelter lying halfway up a cliff that overlooks the
Mediterranean. Its roof rises to a natural “chimney” leading to
the plateau above. Directly under this chimney hole, the remains of
over 50 individuals were found.
Debate
surrounds this site as do many others of its kind. Questions arise as
to whether this was evidence of a massacre or cannibalism.
Although
there were no signs of mortal or even crippling wounds found in large
numbers, some specimens did exhibit signs of violence. Afalou 12
shows signs of violence; possibly receiving a blow to the nose. The
nose of Afalou 12 has a dislocated nasal bone, with the most forward
projecting extremity and its frontal process of the left maxilla
broken off. These bone fragments remained, albeit in new locations,
in a depressed position.
Although
this site is not likely to be indicative of some form of warfare,
evidence of interpersonal violence remains.
The
Zhoukoudian Cave
in China also yields many finds. This cave is additionally of
interest because of its occupation by Homo
erectus, and later modern man.
The Upper Cave at Zhoukoudian has
yielded the remains of seven modern humans. Four of these seven
exhibit depressed fractures. Describing the lesions Weidenreich
(1939) notes that:
Of
seven skulls four are suitable for diagnosis as to the cause of
death. The first skull, that of an old man as mentioned above;
displays a typical round depressed fracture on the left side above
the temporal region. It must have been caused by a pointed implement.
The second skull, probably that of a woman, shows a long and wide
slit-like hole at the superior part of the left temporal region. This
hole breaks through the wall of the skull from above downward giving
the impression that it was caused by a spear-like implement piercing
through the wall from above. In addition, the entire skull is crushed
into numerous smaller and larger fragments still in their natural
connections. At least two centers are distinguishable from which
these fragments radiate, indicating that the crushing was produced by
heavy blows from club-like implements. The third skull is likewise
fractured but not broken into such numerous fragments as in the
second one. Also in this the fragments are in place in natural
arrangement, the markings of the blows being located at the frontal
region of the left side. The fourth skull consists of only the
frontal and two parietal bones Here the injuries are represented by a
large fractured and deeply depressed are corresponding to the frontal
sinus, the splinters of the outside form a protruding elevation. Both
parietal bones display a large fractured depression with a typically
splint interior table. In this instance clubs and a more pointed
weapon must have been used.
As in
other cases of cranial depressions, the possibility is there that
these injuries could have come from occupational falls, or falling
rocks from the cave’s roof above, however it seems as though
Weidenreich’s supposition is well documented.
Possibly
one of the oldest sites having evidence of violence in the form of
skeletal remains is the Sima de los Huesos site in Atapuerca Spain.
This cave site dates to as far back as possibly 250,000 years ago.
Here lies the remains of 32 human skeletons with several of the
skulls bearing healed impact fractures, with Cranium 5 bearing up to
13 such wounds (Arsuaga 1997). Whether this should be interpreted as
evidence of conflict is not yet clear, as only preliminary
information is available at present (Cervera 1998).
Atapuerca
also houses one of the earliest possible sites providing evidence of
cannibalism: the Gran Dolina cave. The Gran Dolina cave has produced
the remains of six individuals (Fernández-Jalvo 1999).
Not as
old as the Sima de los Huesos, is the Jebel Sahaba site in Sudan
(Wendorf 1968) where a cemetery containing 59 burials was located on
a knoll overlooking the Nile some 12,000 years ago; of these, 24 had
chert projectile points either embedded in the bones or found within
the grave fill. Altogether, 110 chert points were found during the
excavations, “almost all positions which indicate they had
penetrated the body either as points or barbs on projectiles or
spears” (Wendorf 1968). Slightly more males than females show
traces of violence, and several children were also apparently killed
by projectiles.
Perhaps
one of the most famous sites depicting violence amongst our ice-age
ancestors is Cro-Magnon, which in the common lexicon has come to have
a synonymous meaning for a “cave-man”.
The site called Cro-Magnon, a rock
shelter originally covered with a talus 4-6 m. thick, has produced
human remains
described by Lartet (Lartet &
Christy 1875, cited by Munro 1912) as follows:
As
for the human remains and the position they occupied in the bed, the
following are the results of my careful enquires in the matter. At
the back of the cave was found an old man’s skull, which alone was
on a level with the surface, in the cavity not filled up in the back
of the cave, and was therefore exposed to the calcareous drip from
the roof, as is shown by its having a stalagmitic coating on some
parts. The older human bones, referable to four other skeletons, were
found around the first, within a radius of about 1.50 meters. Among
these bones were found on the left side of the old man, the skeleton
of a woman, whose skull presents in front a deep wound made by a
cutting instrument, but which did not kill her at once, as the bone
has been partly repaired within; indeed our physicians think she
survived for several weeks. By the side of the woman’s skeleton was
that of an infant which had not survived at its full time of foetal
development.
Courville
describes the incised wound as being 5.0 cm long and 1.5 cm wide and
states that it was located in the left frontal region (Roper 1969).
The wound lies
obliquely and presents some eversion of its ledges, form which
radiating cracks may be seen. From its size, it is clear that the
dura and leptomeninges were penetrated and the brain wounded. The
nature of the wound suggests that it was produced by the so-called
“fist-ax”, probably hafted in this case in order to deliver so
powerful a blow.
For absolute identification of
weapons as the cause of death or injury, specimens from the Cap
Blanc, San Teodoro, and Grotto des Enfantes sites must be examined,
as well as the Ice Man .
The
limestone rock shelter known as Cap Blanc is near Laussel, northeast
of Les Eyzies in France’s Dordogne region.
The Cap Blanc lady was excavated in
1911, and incorrectly reported as being of the male sex. The body
appears to have been buried on its side in a flexed position. The
burial is of note because of the cultural context. The Cap Blanc
woman was buried below one of the finest friezes to survive the last
ice-age.
What makes the remains relevant to
this article, is that the body was found with a small ivory harpoon
point found lying just above the abdomen. It has been suggested that
this ivory point may have been responsible for the Cap Blanc ladies
death. Unfortunately, the point was not found imbedded in bone to
offer indisputable proof.
The Cap Blanc
lady and accompanying ivory harpoon-point is an interesting find for
sure, but the evidence is somewhat inconclusive. For a more concise
find providing evidence of violence in Homo
sapiens, we must look at the sites of
San Teodoro, and Grotta dei Fanciulli.
At both of these Upper Paleolithic
sites we find flint bones lodged into bones. At San Teodoro a female
skeleton was found with a flint point in her pelvis.
At the
Grotta de Fanciulli we have the disturbing find of a child with a
flint point in its backbone. Possibly dating from the Mesolithic is
the Montfort Saint-Lizier site, where a quartzite blade was embedded
in human vertebrae (Bégouen 1922). This site is poorly dated
however.
A recent
find found its way into the world spotlight, when the “Ice man”
(or “Otzi, as he sometimes called) was found. This specimen found
in the Italian Alps in 1991, dates to approximately 5,000 BC. The
body was very well preserved as well as his accompanying material
goods, including a copper axe; pushing back the date of Chalcolithic
cultures. by about 1,500 years. So well preserved was the body that
what appears to be tattoos can be seen on the preserved skin.
Important to this article, is the imbedded projectile point found in
Otzi’s body.
Lower to Early Middle Pleistocene
Hominids
Much debate abounds
when anthropologists speak of australopithecines. Controversy over
predation, tool use, as well as species and genus designation
plague the science. During the Pleistocene, hominids of several
species or even of several genera may have lived in a given area at
the same time.
Most claims of violence
are from reports made by Raymond Dart, and Robert Leakey.
Dart claims to find
evidence of violence in australopithecines and paranthropines at such
sites as Taung, Makapansgat, Sterkfontein, Kromdraai; all in South
Africa (1949, 1962).
Dart at first believed
that australopithecines were scavengers barley eking out an existence
in the harsh savanna environment (Sussman 1997). Dart (1953) reversed
his original statement and later said australopithecines were:
Confirmed
killers: carnivorous creatures that seized living quarters by
violence, battered them to death, tore apart their broken bodies,
dismembered them limb form limb, slaking their ravenous thirst with
the hot blood of victims and greedily devouring livid writhing flesh.
Dart borrowed a 17th
century quote from Calvinsit R. Baxter: “of all the beasts, the
man-east is the worst/ to others and himself the cruelest foe” to
make clear his sentiments on hominid-on-hominid violence.
Robert Ardrey,
apparently a playright and an anthropologist (1961), reported
evidence in Swartans, a South African site containing the remains of
P. robustus
(Roper 1969). The evidence Ardrey presents is questionable, a
skull with two small round perforations, about an inch apart. Ardrey
claims that “The holes could not be of animal origin, since no
carnivore has canines set so close together” (1961).
Ardrey too was not
without his lack of quotes; “It is war and the instinct for
territory that has led to the great accomplishments of Western Man.
Dreams may have inspired our love of freedom, but war and weapons
have made it ours: (1961).
Dart too believes that
depressed fractures in australopithecines skulls at Taung,
Makanpansgat, and Kromdraii show evidence of blows. Dart believes
these fractures were made by implements fashioned out of animal bones
by australopithecines; the so called Osteodontokeratic Culture. Dart
suggests that the paired depressions could have been caused by the
condyles on the distal end of the humerous from a large ungulate.
Additional evidence to
support this Osteodontokeratic Culture comes in the form of baboon
skulls. A large number of baboon skulls (80%) found at the sites of
Taung, Sterkfontein, and Makanpansgat also bear the possible marks of
condyles (Dart 1949).
Of the 12 or more of
the A. africanus specimens at Makapansgat Dart states:
There is
no evidence that the killing and sundering of australopithecine
bodies at this site could have been carried out by other than
australopithecine agency during the ordinary course of the cavern’s
existence.
Dart is claiming
intraspecific aggression. Others disagree. Mason (1961, cited in
Robinson 1963) believes that a larger-brained hominid was living in
South Africa at time as A. africanus and preyed upon him.
Coon disagreed as well:
The Taung
site consists of a dolomite plateau scored by deep
cracks…Sterkfontein was a cave which had a hole in its roof in
Australopithecine times…Taung and Sterkfontein were holes into
which animals fell, or their bones were washed. Neither was a
habitation site. Both were naturally formed refuse pits.
Coon did not believe
that the bones of the baboons, or adult antelope represented kills by
australopithecines.
Although many of Dart’s
claims are in doubt, his claim that an A. robustus was killed
by another australopithecine at the Kromdraii site is taken quite
seriously by some physical anthropologists (Roper 1969).
Found imbedded in the
A. robustus skull was a piece of rock. Schepers (1946)
concluded:
The
presence of this rock is evidence suggestive of the claims that have
been previously made that the Homunculi represented by the
Australopihecoid and the Pleseanthropoid fossils were skilled enough
to employ missiles or weapons for defensive, offensive, and predatory
purposes.
Coon (1962) counters:
A direct
bit of evidence is Scheper’s discovery of a piece of “flint-like
rock” imbedded in the skull and endocranial cast of a Kromdraai
specimen, who may have died as a result, but the victim could have
lived late enough to have been killed by a pioneering Middle
Pleistocene Homo.
Unfortunately, Schepers
took out the rock piecemeal, thereby destroying the evidence (Roper
1969).
Leakey’s claim of
evidence of violence in the Zinjanthropus child (later, type
specimen of H. habilis) found at the site of FLKNN I at
Olduvai is not without doubt either.
Coon disagrees that the
broken mandible and the depressed fracture on the left parietal with
radiating cracks was evidence of violence. Coon says that the
injuries may have been inflicted “pre or ad mortem”.
Meanwhile Montagu
(1967) said that he “could think of a score of causes” other than
a blunt instrument; responsible for the injuries.
There is also not a
substantial amount of evidence found in the remains of Homo
erectus. Sites include Ngandong (Java).
According to
Weidenreich (1945) Pithecanthropus IV, recovered form the
Djetis layer in Java, consists of a calvarium that shows evidence of
a blow cleaving the skull and breaking the basilar process of the
occipital bone from its normal position.
Another site with
specimens depicting possible evidence is he Lower Cave of
Zhoukoudian, Locality 1. Choukoutien may be termed the type site for
evidence of murder and cannibalism in the Paleolithic (Roper 1969).
At Choukoutien there
are the remains of over 40 H. erectus, 14 of which show signs
of cannibalism and violence. 4 of the 14 show depressed fractures
which could be indicative of violence.
The fossil evidence
available for violence amongst early hominids provides for more
questions than answers, the evidence being scant at best.
Pan troglodytes
With
limited and questionable evidence in regards to intraspecies violence
amongst australopithecines or interspecies or intraspecies violence
in regards to habilis;
researchers have but no choice, but to investigate our closest living
relatives, Pan Troglodytes.
Some
biologists postulate that the chimpanzees and ourselves are 95 to
98.5% genetically identical, others claim we are as close as 99%
identical.
Similarities
do not stop at the genetic level. There are behavioral similarities
between Pan troglodytes and
Homo sapiens.
One must be cautious, and conservative when making a comparative
study between the two species however.
A
generation ago it was thought that there were two laws that applied
to “animal-man”:
Man
is the only animal that makes its own tools.
Man
is the only animal to wage war, and kill his own kind.
However,
what we have found, relieving our species of some guilt, and making
the chimpanzees “guilty by association”; is that Pan
troglodytes does kill
its own and does
make its own tools.
Additionally,
the predation of chimps upon the colobus monkey was initially a
highly disputed behavior; humans were the only hunting ape, before
documentation and film-footage had proved otherwise. Although
considered docile and peaceful; forest bonobos do hunt, albeit less
than their chimpanzee cousins (Knauft 1991).
Behavior
exhibited while hunting, and killing prey has also been exhibited
while chimpanzees are engaged in inter and intragroup violence. This
has led professional observers to believe that the perpetrators of
the attacks desired to inflict debilitating wounds; in the hopes that
these wounds would in fact result in death (Goodall 1986).
In
Geoffrey W. Wrangham’s and Paul G. Peterson’s book Demonic
Males (1996) evidence is offered that
killer instincts are not unique to humans, but rather shared with our
nearest relative, the common chimpanzee.
In fact
violence among great apes both within and between specific groups is
best documented among chimpanzees (Knauft 1991).
These
weighty similarities legitimize utilizing ape-studies for theoretical
applications. Wrangham speculates that “chimpanzees are a
conservative species and an amazingly good model for the ancestor of
hominids” (1995, reprinted in Sussman 1997).
Which
causes one to ponder: If the only reasoning for calling H.
habilis “Homo”
is due to the Oldawan culture, than a
question arises:
Should troglodytes’ genus be
Homo?
Regardless of the semantics, there is
clearly a strong relationship amongst the various genus and species
of the homininae subfamily.
If Pan troglodytes hunts, makes
tools (read: weapons), and waged aggressive incursions into other
chimp-troops (disallowing the term “warfare”, instead, regulating
that term for more culturally complex societies.), than most likely
the geni of Australopithecus and possibly Paranthropus
could and would do just that. Utilizing their large brain
capacities, and their “hands-free” life-ways to manipulate bone
and wood tools; these early hominids could successfully scavenge,
engage in limited predation, and wage aggressive acts against
contemporaries.
With the afore
mentioned comments in mind, a cursorily look at Pan
troglodytes and the Pan paniscus
will be needed to gain insight into our distant past.
Firstly, in looking for comparisons of
violent behavior in man and chimp; we need to understand just how
prevalent intraspecific killing is in Pan troglodytes.
Jane Goodall described the chimpanzee
as a peaceful, non-aggressive species during the first 24 years of
study at Gombe (1950). During one year of concentrated study,
Goodall observed 284 agonistic encounters: of these 66% were due to
competition for introduced bananas, and only 34% “could be regarded
as attacks occurring in ‘normal’ aggressive contexts” (1968).
Only 10 percent of the 284 attacks were classified as ‘violent’,
and (Sussman 1997):
even attacks that
appeared punishing to me often resulted in no discernable
injury…Other attacks consisted merely of brief pounding, hitting or
rolling of the individual, after which the aggressor often touched or
embraced the other immediately (1968).
Chimpanzee aggression before 1974 was
considered no different from patterns of aggression seen in many
other primate species. In fact, Goodall explains in her 1986
monograph, The Chimpanzees of Gombe, that she uses data mainly
from after 1975 because earlier years present a “very different
picture of the Gombe chimpanzees” as being “far more peaceable
than humans” (1986).
Then, systematic confrontation and
killing between troops of free-ranging chimpanzees began to be
documented at two research sites between 1974 and 1977, and have been
of considerable professional interest (Sussman 1991, Knauft 1991).
At Gombe a
chimpanzee group had split off from the other. This separation was
followed by the systematic extermination of the five
“dissenting” adult males and 1 adult female by the original group
over a period of 5 years; with remaining females being absorbed into
the group (Knaft 1991, Goodall 1986). It s suggested that intergroup
violence amongst apes is both pronounced and highly related to
reproductive success.
To add to the horror of Goodall and
other researchers over this “troglodyte holocaust”, was
the fact that the now larger troop of chimpanzees consisting of
members of both the original, and latter group; became subject to
predation at the hands of another troop (Knauft 1991)!
Are the Gombe chimps indicative of
warfare evolving out of complex hunting patterns (Morris 1977, Ferril
1985)? This hypothesis was termed by one author as CVH, or the
chimpanzee violence hypothesis (Wrangham 1999).
The CVH proposes that selection has
favored a tendency among adult males to assess the costs and benefits
of violence, and attack rivals when probable net benefits of violence
, and to attack rivals when the probable net benefits are
sufficiently high (Wrangham 1999).
Unfortunately with chimp populations
going extinct, we may never be able to
fully study, and test this hypothesis. Given time to evolve, and
advance culturally; chimpanzees may eventually yield the secrets to
our forgotten past.
Conclusions
There are
three main areas of possible evidence of conflict--- the existence of
weapons, depictions of warfare, and skeletal remain (Thorpe 2003).
The traumatic effects of violence may be difficult to distinguish
from those of high-risk activities or occupations solely on the basis
of skeletal evidence.
Clinical
evidence indicates that most fractures are the result of daily
activity caused by occupation and may be indistinguishable from
interpersonal violence or unusual events.
Explanations
of violence must be examined within a broad context – one with
chronological and social/geographical depth and breadth; and the need
for sensitivity in its recordation and interpretation.
Differentiating
intraspecific from interspecific violence will be impossible to
establish until perhaps sites with multiple species are found.
Is the
myth of “the killer ape” true, and not a myth at all? This author
believes that there is a clear evolutionary similarity between
chimpanzee and pre-state human patterns of violence.
Or is
violence and aggression a cultural construct?
Ambiguity
aside, there is a much deeper dilemma. Does the violence of the past
doom us to repeat atrocities throughout our future?
