Skip to comments.Neolithic men were prepared to fight for their women.
Posted on 06/13/2010 4:47:14 PM PDT by Little Bill
Many archaeologists have argued that women have long motivated cycles of violence and blood feuds throughout history but there has really been no solid archaeological evidence to support this view.
Now a relatively new method has been used to work out the origins of the victims tossed into a mass grave of skeletons, and so distinguish one tribe from another, revealing that neighbouring tribes were prepared to kill their male rivals to secure their women some 7000 years ago. .......
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
My X forgot to secure me.
Thy were using darts now they’ve gone to a pin the tail on the donkey computer game.
Leave the gun, take the cannolis and the women.
Indeed. The direct descendant of the hominids Homo Erectus and Homo Neanderthalensis is today's MooSlime male. This unique species shows this precise attitude towards its females.
Triplewart Seadevil Fish
Helen of Troy was neolithic.
Sure, blame the women. Archaeology - another pseudo-science.
The practice of wife stealing was a aged and honored practice, kind of anticipated divorce and covered up adultery.
In before the much expected smart alecky 6000 year old earth anticreationist remark from an inbred mouth breather.
Wait until all these young Chinese men have to be lined up to be castrated...because there ain’t no Chinese women. Will they embrace homosexuality? Share the few women left? Or become very frustrated soldiers?
The “groom’s men” were to protect the bride from the “droits de seigneir” (spelled wrong, but the French can’t spell, anyway), the right of the First Night.
They’ll provide job security for an old profession at least.
Thanks Little Bill. Alas...
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google ·
· Archaeology · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists ·
Sorry about that. Sometimes when I run across an artical that conforms to my view of mans altruistic nature I don’t search as well as I should,
Hey, at least you didn’t do what I did this week, and post an article that not only had been posted before, but I’d also just seen it (same week) and pinged it to the list. [blush]
I don’t remember seeing this posted before. An oldie that bring me back to the peacefull times before the Vile Indo-Europeans destroyed Womyns domination and personkinds living in harmony with nature.
A very interesting book on that malarkey.
I am more inclined to view its subject as homicides rather than warfare, but a most interesting book. Basic premise - based on forensics - is that typically the more primitive the culture the more frequent the rate of homicides. Of further interest is that the only remains to support the argument are hard tissue, skeletal remains. Thus the numbers of soft tissue wounds and causes of death, such as punctured gut, strangulation, cut arteries etc., do not show up and thus give an artificially LOW incidence of homicides in early societies.
I wonder how abortion and infanticides would skew the results though.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.