4 ms·

> Deeper in the past people could kind of just spread out, and there wasn’t much archeological evidence for conflict between groups. There isn't archeological

> Deeper in the past people could kind of just spread out, and there wasn’t much archeological evidence for conflict between groups. There isn't archeological evidence because the violence would be done with stones and sticks, which tend to not preserve very well, as opposed to later conflicts, fought with metal weapons and armor. It's another compounding factor to the lack of physical evidence in addition to far lower population density (population bottleneck during the ice age and probably several millennia after)

throwup238 3y ago
Stone survived just fine, we've got evidence of stone tools going back over three million years. It preserves much better than iron which rusts to bits in the ground within a few thousand years The issue is the relative lack of signs of bone injury that is obviously from axes or piercing weapons (as opposed to falls and blunt force trauma). Archaic humans have had hand axes capable of very obvious damage for over a million years, spears for half a million, and they wouldn't have had anything resembling armor until about 200k years ago. There was certainly competition but if warfare was particularly common, we should have seen more evidence. We probably weren't "peaceful," though, just smart enough to realize that conflict avoidance is usually the optimal strategy. This also follows the general pattern we observe in the transition from hunter-gatherer to agriculture: The hunter-gatherers weren't really killed until the imperialism of the common era, they were absorbed or just out competed by the agriculturalists. Lots of their remnants survive ranging from the Bedouin to Namibian pastoralists to the jungle dwellers of Papua New Guinea.
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  stone tools like hand axes were not well suited for combat. For example, war clubs the dominant weapon of choice in every stone age culture I know of, despite using hand axes for work and spears for hunting.
  - throwup238 3y ago
    I don't think there's much physical evidence for the use of war clubs in the stone age except a few skulls with blunt force trauma that could have also been caused by hand axe - it's mostly based off ethnographic studies of the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample [1]. IMO any culture that participated regularly in warfare would have figured out that sharp spears with long reach are far more effective than clubs unless that combat was largely symbolic. Clubs would make sense because they're not as lethal. [1] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12110-023-09445-3 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12110-023-09445-3
    - throwuwu 3y ago
      Spears are easily parried and its really difficult to recover an attack posture afterwards since you need to quickly retreat the full length of the spear. Someone wielding a short one handed weapon has a major advantage because they can move in quickly, parry with their weapon or free hand and then make multiple strikes to an opponent who can only defend at that range and can’t attack. They’re only really effective in formation with a lot of other soldiers which is not a tactic you would expect from a group without military discipline.
ch4s3 3y ago
There are plenty of spear points and arrow heads, but very few skeletons of young men with injuries from such implements before agriculture. After a certain point the record for small scale war is strong.

throwup238 3y ago

Stone survived just fine, we've got evidence of stone tools going back over three million years. It preserves much better than iron which rusts to bits in the ground within a few thousand years The issue is the relative lack of signs of bone injury that is obviously from axes or piercing weapons (as opposed to falls and blunt force trauma). Archaic humans have had hand axes capable of very obvious damage for over a million years, spears for half a million, and they wouldn't have had anything resembling armor until about 200k years ago. There was certainly competition but if warfare was particularly common, we should have seen more evidence. We probably weren't "peaceful," though, just smart enough to realize that conflict avoidance is usually the optimal strategy. This also follows the general pattern we observe in the transition from hunter-gatherer to agriculture: The hunter-gatherers weren't really killed until the imperialism of the common era, they were absorbed or just out competed by the agriculturalists. Lots of their remnants survive ranging from the Bedouin to Namibian pastoralists to the jungle dwellers of Papua New Guinea.

s1artibartfast 3y ago
stone tools like hand axes were not well suited for combat. For example, war clubs the dominant weapon of choice in every stone age culture I know of, despite using hand axes for work and spears for hunting.
- throwup238 3y ago
  I don't think there's much physical evidence for the use of war clubs in the stone age except a few skulls with blunt force trauma that could have also been caused by hand axe - it's mostly based off ethnographic studies of the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample [1]. IMO any culture that participated regularly in warfare would have figured out that sharp spears with long reach are far more effective than clubs unless that combat was largely symbolic. Clubs would make sense because they're not as lethal. [1] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12110-023-09445-3 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12110-023-09445-3
  - throwuwu 3y ago
    Spears are easily parried and its really difficult to recover an attack posture afterwards since you need to quickly retreat the full length of the spear. Someone wielding a short one handed weapon has a major advantage because they can move in quickly, parry with their weapon or free hand and then make multiple strikes to an opponent who can only defend at that range and can’t attack. They’re only really effective in formation with a lot of other soldiers which is not a tactic you would expect from a group without military discipline.

ch4s3 3y ago

There are plenty of spear points and arrow heads, but very few skeletons of young men with injuries from such implements before agriculture. After a certain point the record for small scale war is strong.