Re: Exploitation d¹un grand cé tacé au Palé olithique ancien (Re: "carnivore tooth marks"

On Mar 14, 9:19 am, Gerrit Hanenburg <G.Hanenb...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
"Paul Crowley" <slkwuoiutiuytciu...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Regular reliance on animal tissue as a resource requires systematic
hunting.

Or trapping, or snaring, or digging
(e.g. for pigs) or fishing, or foraging --
for eggs, termites, weevils, hedgehogs,
porcupines, turtles, tortoises, snakes,
etc., etc.

All of which you'll have to do on a regular basis if it is to make a
significant contribution to your diet.

It's much easier to regularly get food from
almost any of these activities then to rely
on successfully hunting large animals.

On the basis of pollen spectra the Schöninger spear site is
reconstructed as having had a boreal, cool temperate climate. The
vegetation was a mix of meadow and forest steppe. How many of the
items in your list do you think were available in such a habitat, in
particular in the lean season?
Until recently the ecology of humans in such environments was heavily
dependent on hunting, trapping, and fishing.





That's the significance of the throwing spears from
Schöningen, that active hunting was not a single episode event.

What do you think those spears were used for? Beating an already dead
(drowned) horse?

If you randomly dig the fields of Europe
you will soon discover enormous quantities
of discarded or expended ammunition.  Do
you think all (or even most) of it was used
for hunting?

No, but the context of the Schöninger spears (butchery site) does not
suggest they were used in intraspecific conflict.

A butchery site merely shows hominids
were living there within a few thousand
years either way.

So this is not a matter of either...or...
A weapon that can be used to kill a prey animal can also be used to
kill a conspecific competitor. It's a question of relative frequency.
At the low population densities of the Pleistocene feeding yourself
would be more urgent on a day to day basis than the occasional
conflict with conspecifics about a widely dispersed movable resource.





Besides, how
reliable are throwing spears in such conflicts? The Schöninger spears
have the ballistics of modern javelins, and unless you're 100%
effective in hitting your target from a distance you're at the mercy
of your enemy when you miss it, because once it is in the air you're
without a weapon. A reusable weapon (thrusting spear, sword, club) is
much more effective.

Many armies have used javelins, and
throwing spears.  No doubt they also
carried swords (and other weapons)
possibly slung on cords or belts over
their backs or on their waist.

I don't see javelins being reliably useful
against any prey.  You'd have to get
close enough, and the prey would soon
understand their danger, and keep the
appropriate distance.   You certainly
can't expect the prey to stand still after
you've thrown the weapon.

Until recently Australian aboriginals used javelins very succesfully
against fast prey such as kangaroos. Of course, cooperation to drive
the prey within range of the spear thrower will increase the efficieny
of the hunt greatly.
Apparently these weapons were not frequently used in intraspecific
conflicts, because the most frequent intentional injury in prehistoric
Australians is depressed cranial fracture, which indicates blunt
trauma, not penetrating (Larsen, C.S. 1997. Bioarchaeology:
Interpreting behavior from the human skeleton. Cambridge Univ. Press).


Interesting. I don't think the aborigines themselves would agree.
In areas where customary law is still partially intact - i.e. outback
Northern Territory, ritual spearing is still sometimes practiced as a
punishment - commonly a spear through the fleshy part of the upper
leg.

The 2006 film 10 Canoes, written by a tribal aborigine from Arnhem
Land, includes such a scene. The main character murders a man from
another tribe who he thinks has abducted his wife. To prevent an
intertribal war, the man and his brother are forced to stand in the
open while the other tribe's men hurl spears at them until one is
hit.
Once one is hit, whether or not he dies (and I won't spoil the
ending),
the tribes agree that justice has been served.

Worth looking up in your DVD store if you haven't seen it...

Ross Macfarlane
.

Relevant Pages