• Persistent predators at Schoningen

    From Pandora@21:1/5 to All on Sat Oct 5 13:17:48 2024
    Persistent predators: Zooarchaeological evidence for specialized horse
    hunting at Schöningen 13II-4

    Open access:
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2024.103590

    Highlights

    *The Schöningen “Spear Horizon” likely accumulated over a short period
    of time.

    *Middle Pleistocene hominins potentially occupied the Schöningen
    lakeshore year-round.

    *Schöningen hunters were highly selective in prey choice and prey target groups.

    *Carcass exploitation at Schöningen focused on situational needs.

    Abstract

    The Schöningen 13II-4 site is a marvel of Paleolithic archaeology. With
    the extraordinary preservation of complete wooden spears and butchered
    large mammal bones dating from the Middle Pleistocene, Schöningen
    maintains a prominent position in the halls of human origins worldwide.
    Here, we present the first analysis of the complete large mammal faunal assemblage from Schöningen 13II-4, drawing on multiple lines of zooarchaeological and taphonomic evidence to expose the full spectrum of hominin activities at the site—before, during, and after the hunt. Horse (Equus mosbachensis) remains dominate the assemblage and suggest a
    recurrent ambush hunting strategy along the margins of the Schöningen paleo-lake. In this regard, Schöningen 13II-4 provides the first
    undisputed evidence for hunting of a single prey species that can be
    studied from an in situ, open-air context. The Schöningen hominins
    likely relied on cooperative hunting strategy to target horse family
    groups, to the near exclusion of bachelor herds. Horse kills occurred
    during all seasons, implying a year-round presence of hominins on the Schöningen landscape. All portions of prey skeletons are represented in
    the assemblage, many complete and in semiarticulation, with little
    transport of skeletal parts away from the site. Butchery marks are
    abundant, and adult carcasses were processed more thoroughly than were juveniles. Numerous complete, unmodified bones indicated that lean meat
    and marrow were not always so highly prized, especially in events
    involving multiple kills when fat and animal hides may have received
    greater attention. The behaviors displayed at Schöningen continue to
    challenge our perceptions and models of past hominin lifeways, further cementing Schöningen's standing as the archetype for understanding
    hunting adaptations during the European Middle Pleistocene.

    Well, that doesn't sound like diving for shellfish.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mario Petrinovic@21:1/5 to Pandora on Sun Oct 6 15:31:20 2024
    On 5.10.2024. 13:17, Pandora wrote:
    Persistent predators: Zooarchaeological evidence for specialized horse hunting at Schöningen 13II-4

    Open access:
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2024.103590

    Highlights

    *The Schöningen “Spear Horizon” likely accumulated over a short period of time.

    *Middle Pleistocene hominins potentially occupied the Schöningen
    lakeshore year-round.

    *Schöningen hunters were highly selective in prey choice and prey target groups.

    *Carcass exploitation at Schöningen focused on situational needs.

    Abstract

    The Schöningen 13II-4 site is a marvel of Paleolithic archaeology. With
    the extraordinary preservation of complete wooden spears and butchered
    large mammal bones dating from the Middle Pleistocene, Schöningen
    maintains a prominent position in the halls of human origins worldwide.
    Here, we present the first analysis of the complete large mammal faunal assemblage from Schöningen 13II-4, drawing on multiple lines of zooarchaeological and taphonomic evidence to expose the full spectrum of hominin activities at the site—before, during, and after the hunt. Horse (Equus mosbachensis) remains dominate the assemblage and suggest a
    recurrent ambush hunting strategy along the margins of the Schöningen paleo-lake. In this regard, Schöningen 13II-4 provides the first
    undisputed evidence for hunting of a single prey species that can be
    studied from an in situ, open-air context. The Schöningen hominins
    likely relied on cooperative hunting strategy to target horse family
    groups, to the near exclusion of bachelor herds. Horse kills occurred
    during all seasons, implying a year-round presence of hominins on the Schöningen landscape. All portions of prey skeletons are represented in
    the assemblage, many complete and in semiarticulation, with little
    transport of skeletal parts away from the site. Butchery marks are
    abundant, and adult carcasses were processed more thoroughly than were juveniles. Numerous complete, unmodified bones indicated that lean meat
    and marrow were not always so highly prized, especially in events
    involving multiple kills when fat and animal hides may have received
    greater attention. The behaviors displayed at Schöningen continue to challenge our perceptions and models of past hominin lifeways, further cementing Schöningen's standing as the archetype for understanding
    hunting adaptations during the European Middle Pleistocene.

    Well, that doesn't sound like diving for shellfish.

    Hm, how you think people started to eat meat? Eating bone marrow? I
    (and this document) wouldn't say so. Shouldn't a shellfish, salty
    shellfish, would be much better match?
    They say that they hunted horses by ambush. 80 % of lion prey are
    zebras, also hunted by the way of ambush.
    If they were there all year round, why would they move? This implies
    sedentary lifestyle.
    If they preferred fat, wouldn't pigs be a better choice? Of course,
    here we are talking about plains, hence horses, no pigs, but if they
    preferred fat, this would mean that their original food would actually
    be pigs, and here they are hunting horses because there are no pigs on
    plains. And piglets can be easily eaten burnt by setting their nest on fire.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mario Petrinovic@21:1/5 to JTEM on Sun Oct 6 18:52:56 2024
    On 6.10.2024. 18:25, JTEM wrote:
     erik simpson wrote:
    Verhaegen never figured out how to read this NG.

    Oh, don't worry. You'll just take offense and then make
    yourself certain that this means your right, even if
    you have no idea about what, and that Aquatic Ape is wrong
    else you couldn't feel these emotions now could you?

    Aquatic Ape cannot be wrong since we have subcutaneous fat. It is so
    plain and simple, you cannot not notice that people who don't notice
    this are plain and simply stupid.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mario Petrinovic@21:1/5 to JTEM on Sun Oct 6 19:05:52 2024
    On 6.10.2024. 18:32, JTEM wrote:
     Mario Petrinovic wrote:
    Horse (Equus mosbachensis) remains dominate the assemblage and
    suggest a recurrent ambush hunting strategy along the margins of the
    Schöningen paleo-lake.

    I like the ambush hunting but, aren't we talking about throwing
    spears?

    I have long argued that throwing spears vanished from the
    archaeological record BECAUSE they took to ambush hunting...

    People ambush hunt today. If you look you can even find videos
    of them doing it, though not for the squeamish as we are speaking
    of videos of hunting.

    I always assumed that they'd just find a watering hole and/or
    game trail, sit up high in an overhanging tree limb and then
    stab down on the first animal that wanders by. But I have seen
    videos wear hunters, modern hunters, lurk in the underbrush &
    stab at an animal from there. Effective? Yes. But not so much
    when talking about a dangerous animal. A Wild Boar, for
    example, would likely have torn their leg apart for havign
    stabbed them... and a bear either runs or kills you.

    Wild boars are the most dangerous animals. Once, a German natural
    researcher made a documentary about who is the most fearsome animal in
    Indian jungle. Tiger takes third spot. A pack of wild dogs takes the
    catch from tiger, because they are a bunch. So, wild dogs are the
    second. But wild boars are a bunch with formidable tusks, they scare a
    pack of dogs away, so they are the first.
    Of course, when humans came to Australia they met giant lizards.
    Scientists agree that humans could fight those lizards only with fire.
    With fire you can fight every animal, especially animal that has fur.
    And also, you can feed well by eating piglets which are i nests, by
    burning those nests. Piglets will remain in the nest, they will not run out.
    Here we are talking about Neanderthals. Neanderthals didn't throw
    spears, they thrust spears.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mario Petrinovic@21:1/5 to JTEM on Sun Oct 6 22:50:58 2024
    On 6.10.2024. 20:15, JTEM wrote:
    I think the belief is that we're speaking of Heidelberg Man here, and
    the spears are described as throwing spears.

    I believe that the latest research says that H.heidelbergensis is
    ancestor of Neandterthals, and not of H.sapiens. It had large brain, so
    a lot of those stupid scientists really *wanted* that he would be the
    ancestor of H.sapiens, but this was just a wishful thinking, and the
    product of wrong preconceptions, nothing more.
    Of course, things are, probably, much more complex, but we can safely
    group H.Heidelbergensis and Neanderthals together, and exclude H.sapiens
    from this grouping.
    The search of the document for the words "throw" or "thrust" gives
    only one sentence: "The final death blows likely came at close range
    with spears thrown over a short distance or with thrusting spears."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mario Petrinovic@21:1/5 to JTEM on Mon Oct 7 15:28:47 2024
    On 7.10.2024. 15:00, JTEM wrote:
     Mario Petrinovic wrote:
             The search of the document for the words "throw" or "thrust"
    gives only one sentence: "The final death blows likely came at close
    range with spears thrown over a short distance or with thrusting spears."

    It's been a while since I read up on the finds, and the newer the claims
    the more bullshit, but are they saying to have found thrusting spears?

    Well, the spears were, either thrust, or thrown over a short distance.
    Thrusting spear you can throw over short distance, throwing spears you
    can just throw (it means, long distances). I can hit somebody's head
    with a chair, by breaking it onto his head, or by throwing chair over
    short distance. Everything can be hit over short distance, they wouldn't mention short distance if they were using throwing spears, which can be
    thrown over long distance. So, the spears were definitely thrusting, and
    it is known that this is the way Neanderthals used their spears.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mario Petrinovic@21:1/5 to JTEM on Mon Oct 7 20:09:58 2024
    On 7.10.2024. 17:14, JTEM wrote:
     Mario Petrinovic wrote:
             Well, the spears were, either thrust, or thrown over a short
    distance. Thrusting spear you can throw over short distance, throwing
    spears you can just throw (it means, long distances). I can hit
    somebody's head with a chair, by breaking it onto his head, or by
    throwing chair over short distance. Everything can be hit over short
    distance, they wouldn't mention short distance if they were using
    throwing spears, which can be thrown over long distance. So, the
    spears were definitely thrusting, and it is known that this is the way
    Neanderthals used their spears.

    I'll rephrase the question:

    The claim is in no uncertain terms that throwing spears were found. My question is if they are also claiming to have found thrusting spears?

    I didn't read the whole document. In that sentence that I showed you,
    it is obvious that they found thrusting spears, because you cannot
    thrust throwing spears, but you can throw a short distance thrusting
    spears. So, those spears were, either thrust, or threw a short distance.
    Since you cannot thrust throwing spears, but you can throw a short
    distance thrusting spears, it is obvious that we are talking about
    thrusting spears.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mario Petrinovic@21:1/5 to JTEM on Mon Oct 7 22:45:42 2024
    On 7.10.2024. 22:17, JTEM wrote:
     Mario Petrinovic wrote:
             I didn't read the whole document. In that sentence that I >> showed you, it is obvious that they found thrusting spears, because
    you cannot thrust throwing spears

    Of course you can.

    The only potential differences, really, is that throwing spears
    generally had sharpened points, instead of stone points. They
    just sharpened the end of the shaft.

    But of course there's nothing stopping them from afixing stone
    points, and sharpened ends is probably better suited to spear
    fishing than taking down a horse.

    A horse is going to run quite some distance before dropping from
    a sharpened stick...

    Stone blades are knives that work back & forth as an animal runs,
    enlarging the wound.

    Thrusting spears should be more robust, hence more heavy. The lighter
    the spear, the further you can throw it. So, this one you can throw only
    short distance, it is heavy thrusting spear. Just like you said, in
    throwing spears it is important that stony point makes wound. In
    general, animals that are living north have thick fur. This isn't good
    for throwing spears, you have to thrust the spear into an animal
    (whether it has stony point, or not).

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)