6 ms·

"Men and women might have had their fingers deliberately chopped off during religious rituals in prehistoric times, according to a new interpretation of palaeol

"Men and women might have had their fingers deliberately chopped off during religious rituals in prehistoric times, according to a new interpretation of palaeolithic cave art." If they were indeed missing fingers, it is more consistent with my understanding of people that was as a form on punishment, or disease, or accident. Not sure why the article jumped to religious rituals, no evidence was provided to prove that at all.

cperciva 3y ago
At a certain point, the line between religion, culture, and law becomes unclear. In a culture with ancestor-worship, where do you put "my grandfather always said that if someone steals food they should have a finger cut off"?
- silisili 3y ago
  I'd say one clear difference between religious and legal reasons may be whether or not they were chopped off willingly. Outside of that, probably just curious minds being curious. Was this person devout, or were they a thief? Perhaps just trivia at this point.
  - sidlls 3y ago
    The assumes a distinction between religion and law. Rituals don’t necessarily require consent.
  - genter 3y ago
    Most male babies that are circumcised aren't asked beforehand.
  - cperciva 3y ago
    Is consent under duress consent? If someone is told "God will strike you down if you do not accept the punishment imposed by the priest-king" and they agree to having their finger cut off, are they agreeing to their finger being cut off? They might be devout and a thief, agreeing to being punished only because they fear the divine alternative.
    - lacrimacida 3y ago
      > agreeing to being punished only because they fear the divine alternative. Or the earthly alternative: being stoned to death or some other life ending ritual. Or maybe they were stoned out of their minds and were self mutilating…
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
huytersd 3y ago
There’s a Papua New Guinea tribe that cuts off a part of their finger each time a loved one in their family dies.
- buovjaga 3y ago
  Yes, it was cited in the Guardian article: https://edgeofhumanity.com/2018/09/27/tribal-2/ https://edgeofhumanity.com/2018/09/27/tribal-2/
zdw 3y ago
Same reason that discovered human and animals figures are explained as "religious artifacts", rather than just dolls and toys made for kids. Everything found gets re-explained as having great significance, even if it was mundane. This comes up in "A Canticle for Leibowitz", if you want another interesting take on the idea.
- junofan 3y ago
  Problem is fingers are a bit more important than toys. Also there are tribes today still practicing this. Chop off the finger and eat it for good luck. Not hard to imagine the occasional psychotic shamanistic dude starting this practice from time to time. And we still practice circumcision in some Western cultures today.
- viraptor 3y ago
  Reminds me of the recurring "fertility cult items" or similar names in archaeological findings. As a code for "it's probably a dildo". (Yes, there are cult items too, but AFAIU this is at the level of a meme for archeologists on social media at this point)
- quetzthecoatl 3y ago
  nothing beats the "religious afterlife" takes. When they find some skeleton with some cooking pottery and archeologists/historians assume it's because the pre h historic culture had buried this person with cookery because he/she would need to cook in the after life - when most likely it's because the person was contaminated, and got buried/left with all his worldly possessions and everything else was burned off.
  - melagonster 3y ago
    However, the custom of burying someone together with everyday objects is still observed, and the Egyptians also practiced a similar tradition. On the other hand, epidemiology has only become widely known in the last few centuries.
  - jannyfer 3y ago
    And you theorize that people understood contamination thousands of years ago? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germ_theory_of_disease https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germ_theory_of_disease
crtified 3y ago
Another possibility (or rather, an extension on the idea of punishment) is that it's a form of irreversible social segregation. For better? as in: "we, the enlightened and courageous fingerless!", or, more likely-seeming, for worse - as in: "the shame of the fingerless shall be forever visible to all".
strken 3y ago
On the topic of accidents, it could be a common injury from flint knapping. We know that more than 30% of injuries in modern flint knappers are on the fingers[0], and it's reasonable to think it would be a common injury for historical peoples too. Presumably lots of tool use, like using a grindstone or wielding a handaxe, would also put the fingers at risk. [0] https://www.kent.edu/cas/news/despite-dangers-early-humans-risked-life-threatening-flintknapping-injuries https://www.kent.edu/cas/news/despite-dangers-early-humans-r...
Fezzik 3y ago
I’m not saying I find it compelling evidence, but they note that ‘[t]he team looked elsewhere for evidence of finger amputation in other societies and found more than 100 instances where it had been practic[c]ed. “This practice was clearly invented independently multiple times,” they state.‘ And people have done (and continue to do) some rather gruesome and barbaric things based on religious beliefs. Digit mutilation seems rather benign, really.
GolfPopper 3y ago
To touch more directly on what several others posts have mentioned (and based on my limited experience of "knew some archeologists in grad school, and have a passing interesting in the field") "ritual" is the archeologist go-to in place of both "we don't know" and many different flavors of "we're not comfortable with what this might imply". (With examples of the latter including "challenges long-standing assumptions in the field", "touches on taboo modern subjects", and "the rest of this work is good, I don't want to derail everything into a debate on something controversial".)
deafpolygon 3y ago
Gotta drum up interest for those sweet research grant monies.

cperciva 3y ago

At a certain point, the line between religion, culture, and law becomes unclear. In a culture with ancestor-worship, where do you put "my grandfather always said that if someone steals food they should have a finger cut off"?

silisili 3y ago
I'd say one clear difference between religious and legal reasons may be whether or not they were chopped off willingly. Outside of that, probably just curious minds being curious. Was this person devout, or were they a thief? Perhaps just trivia at this point.
- sidlls 3y ago
  The assumes a distinction between religion and law. Rituals don’t necessarily require consent.
- genter 3y ago
  Most male babies that are circumcised aren't asked beforehand.
- cperciva 3y ago
  Is consent under duress consent? If someone is told "God will strike you down if you do not accept the punishment imposed by the priest-king" and they agree to having their finger cut off, are they agreeing to their finger being cut off? They might be devout and a thief, agreeing to being punished only because they fear the divine alternative.
  - lacrimacida 3y ago
    > agreeing to being punished only because they fear the divine alternative. Or the earthly alternative: being stoned to death or some other life ending ritual. Or maybe they were stoned out of their minds and were self mutilating…
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

huytersd 3y ago

There’s a Papua New Guinea tribe that cuts off a part of their finger each time a loved one in their family dies.

buovjaga 3y ago
Yes, it was cited in the Guardian article: https://edgeofhumanity.com/2018/09/27/tribal-2/ https://edgeofhumanity.com/2018/09/27/tribal-2/

zdw 3y ago

Same reason that discovered human and animals figures are explained as "religious artifacts", rather than just dolls and toys made for kids. Everything found gets re-explained as having great significance, even if it was mundane. This comes up in "A Canticle for Leibowitz", if you want another interesting take on the idea.

junofan 3y ago
Problem is fingers are a bit more important than toys. Also there are tribes today still practicing this. Chop off the finger and eat it for good luck. Not hard to imagine the occasional psychotic shamanistic dude starting this practice from time to time. And we still practice circumcision in some Western cultures today.
viraptor 3y ago
Reminds me of the recurring "fertility cult items" or similar names in archaeological findings. As a code for "it's probably a dildo". (Yes, there are cult items too, but AFAIU this is at the level of a meme for archeologists on social media at this point)
quetzthecoatl 3y ago
nothing beats the "religious afterlife" takes. When they find some skeleton with some cooking pottery and archeologists/historians assume it's because the pre h historic culture had buried this person with cookery because he/she would need to cook in the after life - when most likely it's because the person was contaminated, and got buried/left with all his worldly possessions and everything else was burned off.
- melagonster 3y ago
  However, the custom of burying someone together with everyday objects is still observed, and the Egyptians also practiced a similar tradition. On the other hand, epidemiology has only become widely known in the last few centuries.
- jannyfer 3y ago
  And you theorize that people understood contamination thousands of years ago? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germ_theory_of_disease https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germ_theory_of_disease

crtified 3y ago

Another possibility (or rather, an extension on the idea of punishment) is that it's a form of irreversible social segregation. For better? as in: "we, the enlightened and courageous fingerless!", or, more likely-seeming, for worse - as in: "the shame of the fingerless shall be forever visible to all".

strken 3y ago

On the topic of accidents, it could be a common injury from flint knapping. We know that more than 30% of injuries in modern flint knappers are on the fingers[0], and it's reasonable to think it would be a common injury for historical peoples too. Presumably lots of tool use, like using a grindstone or wielding a handaxe, would also put the fingers at risk. [0] https://www.kent.edu/cas/news/despite-dangers-early-humans-risked-life-threatening-flintknapping-injuries https://www.kent.edu/cas/news/despite-dangers-early-humans-r...

Fezzik 3y ago

I’m not saying I find it compelling evidence, but they note that ‘[t]he team looked elsewhere for evidence of finger amputation in other societies and found more than 100 instances where it had been practic[c]ed. “This practice was clearly invented independently multiple times,” they state.‘ And people have done (and continue to do) some rather gruesome and barbaric things based on religious beliefs. Digit mutilation seems rather benign, really.

GolfPopper 3y ago

To touch more directly on what several others posts have mentioned (and based on my limited experience of "knew some archeologists in grad school, and have a passing interesting in the field") "ritual" is the archeologist go-to in place of both "we don't know" and many different flavors of "we're not comfortable with what this might imply". (With examples of the latter including "challenges long-standing assumptions in the field", "touches on taboo modern subjects", and "the rest of this work is good, I don't want to derail everything into a debate on something controversial".)

deafpolygon 3y ago

Gotta drum up interest for those sweet research grant monies.