Prehistoric warfare refers towar that occurred between societies withoutrecorded history.
The existence—and the definition—of war in humanity'sstate of nature has been a controversial topic in thehistory of ideas at least sinceThomas Hobbes inLeviathan (1651) argued a"war of all against all", a view directly challenged byJean-Jacques Rousseau in aDiscourse on Inequality (1755) andThe Social Contract (1762). The debate overhuman nature continues, spanning contemporaryanthropology,archaeology,ethnography,history,political science,psychology,primatology, andphilosophy in such divergent books asAzar Gat'sWar in Human Civilization andRaymond C. Kelly'sWarless Societies and the Origin of War.[1][2] For the purposes of this article, "prehistoric war" will be broadly defined as a state of organized lethal aggression between autonomouspreliterate communities.[3][4]
.jpg)
Some scientists argue that humans have a predisposition for violence.[5]Chimpanzees, thegreat apes genetically closest to humans,[6] are known towage wars over territories and resources.[5]
According to cultural anthropologist and ethnographerRaymond C. Kelly, population density among the earliesthunter-gatherer societies ofHomo erectus was probably low enough to avoid armed conflict. The development of the throwing-spear and ambush hunting techniques required cooperation, which made potential violence between hunting parties very costly. The need to prevent competition for resources by maintenance of low population densities may have accelerated themigration out of Africa ofH. erectus some 1.8 million years ago as a natural consequence of conflict avoidance.
Hypotheses which suggest that genocidal violencemay have caused the extinction of theNeanderthals have been offered by several authors,[7] includingJared Diamond[8] andRonald Wright.[9] The hypothesis that early humans violently replaced Neanderthals was first proposed by French paleontologistMarcellin Boule (the first person to publish an analysis of a Neanderthal) in 1912.[10] However, several scholars have formed alternative theories as to why the Neanderthals died out, and there is no clear consensus as to what caused their extinction within the current scientific community.[11]
Raymond C. Kelly believes that this period of "Paleolithic warlessness" persisted until well after the appearance ofHomo sapiens some 315,000 years ago, ending only at the occurrence of economic and social shifts associated withsedentism, when new conditions incentivized organized raiding of settlements.[12][13]
None of the manycave paintings of theUpper Paleolithic depicts people attacking other people explicitly,[14][15] but there are depictions of human beings pierced with arrowsboth of theAurignacian-Périgordian (roughly 30,000 years old) and the earlyMagdalenian (c. 17,000 years old), possibly representing "spontaneous confrontations over game resources" in which hostile trespassers were killed; however, other interpretations, includingcapital punishment,human sacrifice, assassination or systemic warfare cannot be ruled out.[16]
It has also been suggested that lack of evidence of Paleolithic warfare is due to differences in archaeology resulting in less evidence being likely to survive to be analysed compared to other eras. Since Paleolithic humans lived in small, mobile bands, with low population densities and less durable structures, while also existing further back in history, this results in a lower probability of finding clear evidence as well as that evidence not decaying by the modern day.[17] Furthermore, humans only began to bury their dead 150,000 years ago and not all cultures did so (some preferring to remove them by cremation or exposure), limiting remains that can be found. The absence of fortifications could also be due to the fact that fortifications would be inefficient to construct for a society that is primarily nomadic and that only spends a short period of time in one place.[18] Kissel et al. argue that while the general scarcity of evidence from the period suggests warfare may not have been common, it does not support the hypothesis that war was absent.[19]
The most ancientarchaeological record of what could have been a prehistoric massacre is at the site ofJebel Sahaba, committed against a population associated with theQadan culture of far northernSudan. The cemetery contains a large number of skeletons that are approximately 13,000 to 14,000 years old, with 24 out of 59 skeletons presentingarrowheads embedded in their skeletons, which indicates that they might have been the casualties of warfare.[20][21] It has been noted that the violence, if dated correctly, likely occurred in the wake of a localecological crisis.[22] Initially, Jebel Seheba was believed to be the site of a singular battle. However re-examination of the remains has superseded this thesis. The co-occurrence of healed and unhealed lesions among 41 individuals was found to strongly support sporadic and recurrent violence between the social groups of theNile valley.[23]
At the site ofNataruk in Turkana, Kenya, numerous 10,000-year-old human remains were found with possible evidence of major traumatic injuries, including obsidian bladelets embedded in the skeletons, that should have been lethal.[24] According to the original study, published in January 2016, the region was a "fertile lakeshore landscape sustaining a substantial population of hunter-gatherers" where pottery had been found, suggesting storage of food andsedentism.[25][26][27] The initial report concluded that the bodies at Nataruk were not interred, but were preserved in the positions the individuals had died at the edge of a lagoon. However, evidence of blunt-force cranial trauma and lack of interment have been called into question, casting doubt upon the assertion that the site represents early intragroup violence.[28]
The oldest rock art depicting acts of violence between hunter-gatherers in Northern Australia has been tentatively dated to 10,000 years ago.[29]
The earliest, limited evidence for war inMesolithic Europe likewise dates to c. 10,000 years ago, and episodes of warfare appear to remain "localized and temporarily restricted" during the Late Mesolithic to Early Neolithic period in Europe.[30]Iberian cave art of the Mesolithic shows explicit scenes of battle between groups of archers.[31] A group of three archers encircled by a group of four is found in Cova del Roure,Morella la Vella,Castellón, Valencia. A depiction of a larger battle (which may, however, date to the early Neolithic), in which eleven archers are attacked by seventeen running archers, is found in Les Dogue,Ares del Maestrat, Castellón, Valencia.[32] At Val del Charco del Agua Amarga,Alcañiz, Aragon, seven archers with plumes on their heads are fleeing a group of eight archers running in pursuit.[33]
Early war was influenced by the development ofbows,maces, andslings. The bow seems to have been the most important weapon in early warfare, in that it enabled attacks to be launched with far less risk to the attacker when compared to the risk involved in melee combat. While there are no cave paintings of battles between men armed with clubs, the development of the bow is concurrent with the first known depictions of organized warfare consisting of clear illustrations of two or more groups of men attacking each other. These figures are arrayed in lines and columns with a distinctly garbed leader at the front. Some paintings even portray still-recognizabletactics likeflankings andenvelopments.[34] However, it has also been argued that these paintings should be interpreted with caution due to the fact that it is not self-evident that the cultures that made them intended to depict actual events or if they were intended to be symbolic or otherwise possess a different meaning.[35]
Systemic warfare appears to have been a direct consequence of thesedentism as it developed in the wake of theNeolithic Revolution.An important example is the massacre ofTalheim Death Pit (nearHeilbronn,Germany), dated right on the cusp of the beginning European Neolithic, at 5500 BC.[36] Investigation of the Neolithic skeletons found in the Talheim Death pit in Germany suggests that prehistoric men from neighboring tribes were prepared to brutally fight and kill each other in order tocapture and secure women. Researchers discovered that there were women among the immigrant skeletons, but within the local group of skeletons there were only men and children.[37] They concluded that the absence of women among the local skeletons meant that they were regarded as somehow special, thus they were spared execution and captured instead. The capture of women may have indeed been the primary motive for the fierce conflict between the men.[38][39]
Other speculations about the reasons for violence amongLinear Pottery Culture settlements inNeolithic Europe include vengeance, conflicts over land and resources, and kidnapping ofslaves. Some of these theories related to the lack of resources are supported by the discovery that variousfortifications bordering indigenously inhabited areas appear to have not been in use for very long. A mass burial site at Schletz was also fortified, which serves as evidence of violent conflict among tribes and means that these fortifications were built as a form of defense against aggressors. Themassacre of Schletz occurred at the same time as the massacre at Talheim and several other massacres.[40][41][42] More than 200 Neolithic people were killed during the massacre in the Linear Pottery settlement area of Schletz 7,000 years ago.[43]
More recently, a similar site was discovered at Schöneck-Kilianstädten, with the remains of the victims showing "a pattern of intentional mutilation".[44]While the presence of such massacre sites in the context of Early Neolithic Europe is undisputed, diverging definitions of "warfare proper" (i.e. planned campaigns sanctioned by society as opposed to spontaneous massacres) has led to scholarly debate on the existence of warfare in the narrow sense prior to the development of city states in 20th-century archaeology. In the summary of Heath (2017), accumulating archaeology has made it "increasingly harder" to argue for the absence of organised warfare in Neolithic Europe.[45]
Bioarchaeologists have found from the skeletal remains of more than 2,300 early farmers from 180 sites in northwestern Europe between 8,000 and 4,000 years ago that more than one in ten suffered weapon injuries.[46]
During the period of expansion of hunter-gatherer groups associated with thePitted Ware culture in southern Scandinavia, theFunnelbeaker farmers constructed a number of defensivepalisades, which may mean that the two peoples were in conflict with each other.[47] There is archaeological evidence of high levels of violence among the people of the Pitted Ware culture.[48][49]
Ötzi, who lived and died in the European Alps some 5,200 years ago, was probably killed in warfare.[50]
Warfare in pre-Columbian North America has served as an important comparandum in the archaeological study of the indirect evidence for warfare in the Neolithic. A notable example is the massacre at theCrow Creek Site inSouth Dakota (14th century).[51][52]
The onset of theChalcolithic (Copper Age) saw the introduction of copper weapons. Organised warfare between earlycity states was in existence by the mid-5th millennium BC. Excavations atMersin,Anatolia show the presence of fortifications and soldiers' quarters by 4300 BC.[53]
Excavation work undertaken in 2005 and 2006 has shown thatHamoukar was destroyed by warfare by around 3500 BC-—probably the earliest urban warfare attested so far in the archaeological record of theNear East.[54] Continued excavations in 2008 and 2010 expand on that.[55]
Archaeological evidence suggests that Proto-Indo-Iranian-speakingAbashevo society was intensely warlike. Mass graves reveal that inter-tribal battles involved hundreds of warriors of both sides. Warfare appears to have been more frequent in the late Abashevo period, and it was in this turbulent environment that theSintashta culture emerged.[56] The spread of spoke-wheeledchariots has been closely associated with earlyIndo-Iranian migrations. The earliest known chariots have been found in Sintashta culture burial sites, and the culture is considered a strong candidate for the origin of the technology, which spread throughout the Old World and played an important role in ancient warfare.[57]
Military conquests expanded city states under Egyptian control.Babylonia and laterAssyria built empires in Mesopotamia while theHittite Empire ruled much of Anatolia.Chariots appear in the 20th century BC, and become central to warfare in theAncient Near East from the 17th century BC. TheHyksos andKassite invasions mark the transition to the Late Bronze Age.Ahmose I defeated the Hyksos and re-established Egyptian control of Nubia andCanaan, territories again defended byRamesses II at theBattle of Kadesh, the greatest chariot battle in history. The raids of theSea Peoples and the renewed disintegration of Egypt in theThird Intermediate Period marks the end of the Bronze Age.[citation needed]
TheTollense valley battlefield is the oldest evidence of a large scale battle in Europe. More than 4,000 warriors from Central Europe fought in a battle on the site in the 13th century BC.[58]
Mycenaean Greeks (c. 1600 – c. 1100 BC) invested in the development ofmilitary infrastructure, while military production and logistics were supervised directly from the palatial centers.[59] The most identifiable piece of Mycenaean armor was theboar's tusk helmet.[60] In general, most features of the laterhoplite panoply of classical Greek antiquity, were already known to Mycenaean Greece.[61]
TheLate Bronze Age collapse was a time of widespreadsocietal collapse during the 12th century BC, betweenc. 1200 and 1150. It was sudden, violent, and culturally disruptive for many Bronze Age civilizations, and it brought a sharp economic decline to regional powers, notably ushering in theGreek Dark Ages. HistorianRobert Drews argues for the appearance of massedinfantry, using newly developed weapons and armour, such ascast rather thanforged spearheads andlong swords, a revolutionizing cut-and-thrust weapon, andjavelins. Such new weaponry, in the hands of large numbers of "running skirmishers", who could swarm and cut down a chariot army, would destabilize states that were based upon the use of chariots by the ruling class. That would precipitate an abrupt social collapse as raiders began to conquer, loot and burn cities.[62][63]
TheBronze Age in China traverses the protohistoric and historic periods. Evidence from graves at Mogou inLintan County, Gansu (dated approximately 2300 – 1500 BC) indicates that theQijia culture experienced high levels of interpersonal violence.[64][65] During China's Bronze Age, especially under theShang andZhou dynasties (c. 1200 – 256 BC),chariots were crucial war machines, used by elites for shock attacks and for archers on open plains, forming a core part of warfare until superseded by cavalry and infantry in theWarring States period.[66]
TheYayoi period (c. 300 BC – 300 AD) inJapan saw a significant rise inviolence and warfare, characterized by fortified villages, metal weapons (bronze, then iron), and skeletal trauma from conflict like arrow wounds, linked toagriculture and population pressure. Evidence includes mass graves, fortified settlements (likeYoshinogari), and weaponry, suggesting organized conflict and increasing social complexity leading to the rise of powerful regional chieftains and proto-states, culminating in recorded strife like theCivil War of Wa.[67]
Early Iron Age events like theDorian invasion,Greek colonisation and their interaction withPhoenician andEtruscan forces lie within the prehistoric period.Germanic warrior societies of theMigration period engaged inendemic warfare (see alsoThorsberg moor andIllerup Ådal).Anglo-Saxon warfare lies on the edge of historicity, its study relying primarily on archaeology with the help of only fragmentary written accounts.
There are around 3,300 structures that can be classed ashillforts or similar "defended enclosures" within Britain.[69]Hillforts in Britain are known from the Bronze Age, but the great period of hillfort construction was during theBritish Iron Age, between 700 BC and theRoman conquest of Britain in 43 AD. The reason for the emergence of hillforts in Britain, and their purpose, has been a subject of debate. It has been argued that they could have been military sites constructed in response to invasion from continental Europe, sites built by invaders, or a military reaction to social tensions caused by an increasing population and consequent pressure on agriculture.[70]
In warlike cultures, war is often ritualized with a number oftaboos and practices that limit the number of casualties and the duration of the conflict. This type of situation is known asendemic warfare.[citation needed] Among tribal societies engaging in endemic warfare, conflict may escalate to actual warfare occasionally for reasons such as conflict over resources or for no readily understandable reason.
Warfare is known to every tribal society, but some societies developed a particular emphasis on the formation of awarrior culture (such as theNuer ofSouth Sudan,[71] theMāori ofNew Zealand, theDugum Dani ofPapua,[71] theYanomami (dubbed "the Fierce People") of the Amazon.)[71] The culture of inter-tribal warfare has long been present inNew Guinea.[72]
In fact, most of the essential items of the "hoplite panoply" were known to Mycenaean Greece, including the metallic helmet and the single thrusting spear
