# Slaughter at the Bridge



## Gunz (Mar 28, 2016)

Flint arrowhead embedded in an upper arm bone.









http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/03/slaughter-bridge-uncovering-colossal-bronze-age-battle


----------



## AWP (Mar 28, 2016)

Awesome find.



> “Most people thought ancient society was peaceful, and that Bronze Age males were concerned with trading and so on,” says Helle Vandkilde, an archaeologist at Aarhus University in Denmark. “Very few talked about warfare.”



I find this notion laughable. War, just like people, never changes.


----------



## metalmom (Mar 28, 2016)

Long but incredibly fascinating read. Great article and this is groundbreaking. I just still thought they were hunters-gatherers. Not warriors.Amazing historically.


----------



## Gunz (Mar 28, 2016)

Freefalling said:


> Awesome find.
> 
> 
> 
> I find this notion laughable. War, just like people, never changes.



True. These are scientists. To call the ancient world peaceful, indeed nuts.


----------



## metalmom (Mar 28, 2016)

Guess Im pretty naive when it comes to ancient history but was still very surprised. Hopefully this is taught in school eventually'


----------



## AWP (Mar 28, 2016)

Ocoka One said:


> True. These are scientists. To call the ancient world peaceful, indeed nuts.



On one hand, I get it. They are scientists and they have to go with what they can prove and in the absence of proof they must conclude it doesn't exist.

On the other, they are wildly optimistic or projecting their hopes to ignore human history and behavior elsewhere. Their conclusions/ beliefs fly in the face of everything we know about history and have for hundreds of years. We have civilizations because of man's need to defend himself and the knowledge a group is stronger than an individual. Since the dawn of time someone covets what another has and so they take it be force or guile. Someone is weak, someone is strong, someone wins, someone loses and club or AK-47 nothing changes and nothing will change.

There's a belief/ movement afoot today that argues a global economy will make it cost-prohibitive for nations to go to war. Nonsense. Greed and madness will always exist, a global economy may make it harder to go to war, but we shouldn't underestimate our fellow man. He is nasty, brutish, greedy, cowardly, vain, and willing to kill anyone for his ends and means. Though a cliche' by now, I firmly believe some are like a certain bandit in The Dark Knight Returns:



> Because some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn.



War is our destiny and war never changes.


----------



## Grunt (Mar 28, 2016)

There is a reason why we study wars from antiquity. As @Freefalling stated, war never changes. Weapons...sure, because technology sees to that. But, the premises behind wars remain the same.

Regardless of technology...there will always be someone needed to "swing the club" or "pull the trigger."


----------



## SpongeBob*24 (Mar 28, 2016)

War, Sex, Money and Beer.........that's science.....


----------



## metalmom (Mar 28, 2016)

I will take the beer and money if thats the new science lol


----------



## Gunz (Mar 28, 2016)

Freefalling said:


> On one hand, I get it. They are scientists and they have to go with what they can prove and in the absence of proof they must conclude it doesn't exist.
> 
> On the other, they are wildly optimistic or projecting their hopes to ignore human history and behavior elsewhere. Their conclusions/ beliefs fly in the face of everything we know about history and have for hundreds of years. We have civilizations because of man's need to defend himself and the knowledge a group is stronger than an individual. Since the dawn of time someone covets what another has and so they take it be force or guile. Someone is weak, someone is strong, someone wins, someone loses and club or AK-47 nothing changes and nothing will change.
> 
> ...




Overpopulation will see that it continues, resources dwindling, crowded earth. I may be a pessimist but  I think in a few hundred years people will be killing each other over potable water and living space.


----------



## R.Caerbannog (Mar 28, 2016)

I think that the viewpoints on violence during paleolithic times are going to vary depending on who you talk to. Right now I am taking North American Prehistory and it has been interesting. There was a section on migration patterns and how the spearthrowers were replaced by bow technology about 4000 years ago. The Inuit's ancestors are actually conquerors that wiped out the previous inhabitants along the coast. Heck they've even found body armor and ornamented clubs that were somehow preserved.

There are numerous other things that point to conflict being common, with smaller groups being wiped out. The skeletons here in NA that are over 4000 years old don't share the same characteristics of Native Americans as we know them. So the current tribes here are actually kind of like the second generation of people to cross the land bridge. But that in itself opens up a huge can of worms, because of cultural heritage preservation laws and how the tribes dictate what happens to human remains. A good example of this is the controversy surrounding Kennewick Man.

Some scientists perpetrate the myth that life was peachy back in the old days, while others are more objective.


----------



## R.Caerbannog (Mar 28, 2016)

Ocoka One said:


> Overpopulation will see that it continues, resources dwindling, crowded earth. I may be a pessimist but  I think in a few hundred years people will be killing each other over potable water and living space.


Things will work out, it's going to take great social upheaval to get us off this rock and spur on space exploration and colonization. Usually that how our species has operated, the strong live on and innovate. The weak die or are assimilated.


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Mar 29, 2016)

Ocoka One said:


> Flint arrowhead embedded in an upper arm bone.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That had to hurt like hell.


----------



## 8654Maine (Mar 29, 2016)

My concentration in college was evolutionary biology.  I listened to some fascinating, smart motherfuckers.

I would hear how a species would evolve to increase their survival in the Predator vs Prey arms race.

I would also hear of how a species would show certain phenotypes to advance their success in feeding, mating, and defending.

I always assumed that the "defense" would be against other species who shared that niche.

The professors would state that it was more likely that we evolved our current phenotype to defend against our fellow species.

Thus, it's not "lions, tigers, & bears" that we have to to worry about, it's the next door neighbor, Jodie, and our brothers/sisters who will filch our food, rob our belongings, kill our young and steal our mate.

It's our fellow Human who is our worst enemy.  Always has been, always will be.

A benevolent or peaceful history is about as real as unicorns farting rainbows or my wife letting me bukkake the baby sitter.

Scientist live in sterile worlds.  Reality is virulent.


----------



## Gunz (Mar 31, 2016)

8654Maine said:


> My concentration in college was evolutionary biology.  I listened to some fascinating, smart motherfuckers.
> 
> I would hear how a species would evolve to increase their survival in the Predator vs Prey arms race.
> 
> ...




Some years ago the popular theme in anthropology was that humans are successful as a species because they "shared" and "cooperated" and were not inherently violent, that we love and nurture each other. If you read Richard Leaky and some others this is the idea they're trying to sell. But it only works if you're talking about family or tribal groups. Some are united through intermarriage or alliances, but outside your group, fuck everybody else. You can look at American Indians or African tribes to plainly see that cooperation and sharing only goes so far and once you hit the cut off line, nobody gets your shit without a fight.

By the way, that's pretty cool that you have a hot babysitter.


----------

