Earliest known human massacre
The_Jackal
Members Posts: 3,628 ✭✭✭✭✭
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2016/01/21/remains-earliest-known-massacre-victims-uncovered-in-kenya.html
Scientists say they have uncovered the remains of the earliest known massacre victims, dating from approximately 10,000 years ago.
Archaeologists believe the victims were members of an extended family group of hunter-gatherers who were slaughtered by a rival group.
According to the scientists' report in the journal Nature, parts of 27 skeletons were discovered near Lake Turkana in northern Kenya. Ten of the twelve relatively complete skeletons showed signs of a violent death, including smashed skulls and faces, broken ribs and evidence of arrow wounds.
Partial remains of 15 other skeletons were also found and are believed to belong to victims of the same attack. The group included the skeletons of at least eight women and six children. A fetal skeleton was also found in the abdomen of one of the female skeletons.
"The ... massacre may have resulted from an attempt to seize resources – territory, women, children, food stored in pots – whose value was similar to those of later food-producing agricultural societies, among whom violent attacks on settlements became part of life," said lead study author Dr. Marta Mirazón Lahr of the University of Cambridge.
The find offers compelling evidence in the scientific debate about whether human aggression was passed on to us from our primate ancestors or emerged after the development of agriculture and settled, hierarchical human societies. The earliest known so-called "war grave" before the latest discovery was found in Germany and dated to approximately 5000 B.C.
"I’ve no doubt it is in our biology to be aggressive and lethal, just as it is to be deeply caring and loving,” study author Robert Foley of the University of Cambridge told the Daily Telegraph. "A lot of what we understand about human evolutionary biology suggests these are two sides of the same coin."
@Ajackson17 I think there was something we were talking about a few weeks ago about hunter gathers but can't remember.
Scientists say they have uncovered the remains of the earliest known massacre victims, dating from approximately 10,000 years ago.
Archaeologists believe the victims were members of an extended family group of hunter-gatherers who were slaughtered by a rival group.
According to the scientists' report in the journal Nature, parts of 27 skeletons were discovered near Lake Turkana in northern Kenya. Ten of the twelve relatively complete skeletons showed signs of a violent death, including smashed skulls and faces, broken ribs and evidence of arrow wounds.
Partial remains of 15 other skeletons were also found and are believed to belong to victims of the same attack. The group included the skeletons of at least eight women and six children. A fetal skeleton was also found in the abdomen of one of the female skeletons.
"The ... massacre may have resulted from an attempt to seize resources – territory, women, children, food stored in pots – whose value was similar to those of later food-producing agricultural societies, among whom violent attacks on settlements became part of life," said lead study author Dr. Marta Mirazón Lahr of the University of Cambridge.
The find offers compelling evidence in the scientific debate about whether human aggression was passed on to us from our primate ancestors or emerged after the development of agriculture and settled, hierarchical human societies. The earliest known so-called "war grave" before the latest discovery was found in Germany and dated to approximately 5000 B.C.
"I’ve no doubt it is in our biology to be aggressive and lethal, just as it is to be deeply caring and loving,” study author Robert Foley of the University of Cambridge told the Daily Telegraph. "A lot of what we understand about human evolutionary biology suggests these are two sides of the same coin."
@Ajackson17 I think there was something we were talking about a few weeks ago about hunter gathers but can't remember.
Comments
-
The_Jackal wrote: »http://www.foxnews.com/science/2016/01/21/remains-earliest-known-massacre-victims-uncovered-in-kenya.html
Scientists say they have uncovered the remains of the earliest known massacre victims, dating from approximately 10,000 years ago.
Archaeologists believe the victims were members of an extended family group of hunter-gatherers who were slaughtered by a rival group.
According to the scientists' report in the journal Nature, parts of 27 skeletons were discovered near Lake Turkana in northern Kenya. Ten of the twelve relatively complete skeletons showed signs of a violent death, including smashed skulls and faces, broken ribs and evidence of arrow wounds.
Partial remains of 15 other skeletons were also found and are believed to belong to victims of the same attack. The group included the skeletons of at least eight women and six children. A fetal skeleton was also found in the abdomen of one of the female skeletons.
"The ... massacre may have resulted from an attempt to seize resources – territory, women, children, food stored in pots – whose value was similar to those of later food-producing agricultural societies, among whom violent attacks on settlements became part of life," said lead study author Dr. Marta Mirazón Lahr of the University of Cambridge.
The find offers compelling evidence in the scientific debate about whether human aggression was passed on to us from our primate ancestors or emerged after the development of agriculture and settled, hierarchical human societies. The earliest known so-called "war grave" before the latest discovery was found in Germany and dated to approximately 5000 B.C.
"I’ve no doubt it is in our biology to be aggressive and lethal, just as it is to be deeply caring and loving,” study author Robert Foley of the University of Cambridge told the Daily Telegraph. "A lot of what we understand about human evolutionary biology suggests these are two sides of the same coin."
@Ajackson17 I think there was something we were talking about a few weeks ago about hunter gathers but can't remember.
It's the neaderthal last stance before their complete disappearance from civilization and their spawn the europeans, middle easterns, and asians rise. -
lots of Neanderthals in Kenya?Ajackson17 wrote: »It's the neaderthal last stance before their complete disappearance from civilization and their spawn the europeans, middle easterns, and asians rise.
-
lots of Neanderthals in Kenya?Ajackson17 wrote: »It's the neaderthal last stance before their complete disappearance from civilization and their spawn the europeans, middle easterns, and asians rise.
They came to africa for one last stance. -
okay, now i kind of hope this was the caseAjackson17 wrote: »They came to africa for one last stance.
-
Imean they clearly caucasian..I mean we would be described as looters instead of Hunter Gatherers
Good job Brownie -
okay, now i kind of hope this was the caseAjackson17 wrote: »They came to africa for one last stance.
just pulling on you lol, but this article shows that earlier before this there was a fight between two groups now known as Egypt.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/archaeology/saharan-remains-may-be-evidence-of-first-race-war-13000-years-ago-9603632.html
This was 13,000 years ago and could be the same group. -
playmaker88 wrote: »Imean they clearly caucasian..I mean we would be described as looters instead of Hunter Gatherers
Good job Brownie
Early human ancestors couldn't even be assigned a race as we know race to be -
The_Jackal wrote: »playmaker88 wrote: »Imean they clearly caucasian..I mean we would be described as looters instead of Hunter Gatherers
Good job Brownie
Early human ancestors couldn't even be assigned a race as we know race to be
Phenotype, yeah that is definitely true. Haplogroups yeah they can since the youngest was mutated around 10,000 BCE and I believed it was in the Americas. -
The_Jackal wrote: »playmaker88 wrote: »Imean they clearly caucasian..I mean we would be described as looters instead of Hunter Gatherers
Good job Brownie
Early human ancestors couldn't even be assigned a race as we know race to be
-
Ajackson17 wrote: »The_Jackal wrote: »playmaker88 wrote: »Imean they clearly caucasian..I mean we would be described as looters instead of Hunter Gatherers
Good job Brownie
Early human ancestors couldn't even be assigned a race as we know race to be
Phenotype, yeah that is definitely true. Haplogroups yeah they can since the youngest was mutated around 10,000 BCE and I believed it was in the Americas.
Haven't seen any studies stating that for Haplogroups -
Here is some haplogroups and locations
http://www.scs.illinois.edu/~mcdonald/WorldHaplogroupsMaps.pdf
It shows when these haplogroups first developed over time.
http://ase.tufts.edu/chemistry/hhmi/documents/Detailed_Haplogroup_Activity.pdf -
Ajackson17 wrote: »Here is some haplogroups and locations
http://www.scs.illinois.edu/~mcdonald/WorldHaplogroupsMaps.pdf
It shows when these haplogroups first developed over time.
http://ase.tufts.edu/chemistry/hhmi/documents/Detailed_Haplogroup_Activity.pdf
Very interesting -
kingblaze84 wrote: »Ajackson17 wrote: »Here is some haplogroups and locations
http://www.scs.illinois.edu/~mcdonald/WorldHaplogroupsMaps.pdf
It shows when these haplogroups first developed over time.
http://ase.tufts.edu/chemistry/hhmi/documents/Detailed_Haplogroup_Activity.pdf
Very interesting
Yes, it is and clearly shows the ages of each haplogroup and mutation, the japanese have the Haplogroup D and as we all as the Andaman and Tibetian monks haplogroups. Their phenotypes are clearly different but shows a common ancestor.
