Reader Comments
Post a new comment on this article
Post Your Discussion Comment
Please follow our guidelines for comments and review our competing interests policy. Comments that do not conform to our guidelines will be promptly removed and the user account disabled. The following must be avoided:
- Remarks that could be interpreted as allegations of misconduct
- Unsupported assertions or statements
- Inflammatory or insulting language
Thank You!
Thank you for taking the time to flag this posting; we review flagged postings on a regular basis.
closeHere we report the earliest evidence of lethal interpersonal violence in the hominin fossil record
Posted by janliebe on 28 May 2015 at 19:26 GMT
This is jumping to conclusion.
The person might also have been sacrificed, e.g. as part of some kind of religious/social ritual
The article suggests it is more like a result of just brute individual killing. Read The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion from Sir Frazer or Crowds and Power from Elias Canetti. These studies might help to describe ancient reality much better
RE: Here we report the earliest evidence of lethal interpersonal violence in the hominin fossil record
Lewlew replied to janliebe on 29 May 2015 at 14:42 GMT
I would be inclined to doubt that Heidelbergensis had religious/social rituals.
However, I propose that in the absence of the remainder of the skeleton, that it may be possible he was injured/damaged beyond any healing ability of the tribe.
He may then have been put out of his misery because they could not care for him and he would have been a liability and/or suffered for some time before dying.
We cannot apply the standards of Shanidar's Neanderthal to earlier Heidelbergensis.
RE: RE: Here we report the earliest evidence of lethal interpersonal violence in the hominin fossil record
janderson499 replied to Lewlew on 27 Dec 2016 at 12:07 GMT
Either case would be in my humble opinion interpersonal violence. The difference is simply motive. thus the contemporary conflict regarding "Mercy killing".