Violence trends in the ancient Middle East between 12,000 and 400 BCE

[celtiberian-II]

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-023-01700-y.epdf?sharing_token=DlR59Q8vFCPz1Iq8TeCIS9RgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0OKyAVMuIKVUu3CqPi6YyliV65jqorO1bDGAhBUmJDIZRikRAK_fmj-g5EpHmBbZoB0IzPfBS0U_UdgsvwjJHtO3rB8XfMgzOzRmCQguNo_EZvB0EBXi7PtWtWIIVGg_N3iN9uZzTRbo21iLaMo_5Gm8tH3EO-THtWLLVfr4Av01g%3D%3D&tracking_referrer=elpais.com

Abstract:
How did interpersonal violence develop in early human societies? Given that homicide records are only available for the more recent period, much of human history remains outside our purview. In this paper, we study violence trends in the very long run by exploiting a new dataset on cranial trauma and weapon-related wounds from skeletons excavated across the Middle East, spanning the pre-Classical period (around 12,000–400 BCE). The dataset includes more than 3,500 individuals. We find evidence that interpersonal violence peaked during the Chalcolithic period (around 4,500–3,300 BCE). It then steadily declined during the Early and Middle Bronze Ages (around 3,300–1,500 BCE) and increased again between the Late Bronze and the Iron Age (1,500–400 BCE). By documenting variations in violence patterns across a vast temporal and geographical scale in an incredibly rich historical setting, we broaden perspectives on the early history of human conflict.

 

[Riverman]

Hopefully they extract some DNA from the remains.

 

[celtiberian-II]

I don't remember DNA results. Also, the violence peaked around 4000 BCE, suggesting anatolian farmers DNA, and around 2500 BCE, DNA of bronze and iron weapons people. Perhaps we agree that violence is a sapiens DNA attribute.

 

[Riverman]

I don't remember DNA results. Also, the violence peaked around 4000 BCE, suggesting anatolian farmers DNA, and around 2500 BCE, DNA of bronze and iron weapons people. Perhaps we agree that violence is a sapiens DNA attribute.

Intergroup violence is a driving force behind human evolution and was especially important for the development of male cooperative behaviour, no doubt about that. However, the wars between states and mass armies of able bodied men slaughtering each other on the battlefield doesn't create the same effects as violence between small groups of related males fighting it out pretty directly for each others resources and territory.

 

[celtiberian-II]

More violence (Neolithic):

Large-scale violence in Late Neolithic Western Europe based on expanded skeletal evidence from San Juan ante Portam Latinam - Scientific Reports

This paper explores the nature and extent of conflict in Late Neolithic Europe based on expanded skeletal evidence for violence from the San Juan ante Portam Latinam rockshelter in present-day Spain (ca. 3380–3000 cal. BC). The systematic osteological re-examination has identified 65 unhealed...

www.nature.com

Large‐scale violence in Late Neolithic Western Europe based on expanded skeletal evidence from San Juan ante Portam Latinam

This paper explores the nature and extent of conflict in Late Neolithic Europe based on expanded skeletal evidence for violence from the San Juan ante Portam Latinam rockshelter in present‐day Spain (ca. 3380–3000 cal. BC). ...

... Results suggest that many individuals, essentially men, were exposed to violence and eventually killed in battle and raids, since warriorship is mainly restricted to this demographic in many societies.