Author Topic: Infanticide in the palaeolithic  (Read 16085 times)

0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline TylerDurden

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,016
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Raw Paleolithic Diet
Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« on: April 09, 2009, 11:22:19 pm »
We've previously discussed the less pleasant aspects of the palaeolithic diet(such as cannibalism). Here's more data re infanticide in the Palaeolithic:-

 Paleolithic and Neolithic

Decapitated skeletons of hominid children have been found with evidence of cannibalism.[6] Joseph Birdsell believes in infanticide rates of 15-50% of the total number of births in prehistoric times.[7] Williamson estimated a lower rate ranging from 15-20%.[1] Both believe that high rates of infanticide persisted until the development of agriculture.[8] Comparative anthropologists have calculated that 50% of female newborn babies were killed by their parents in the Paleolithic.[9] taken from:-

http://www.answers.com/topic/infanticide

People often say that the average lifespan of Palaeolithic peoples was very short and point to how low the birth-rate was(something like 0.001 above the replacement-rate). Well, that's hardly surprising if such huge numbers of children were killed off during that era. Given that infanticide was a key way for ancient societies to reduce population pressure when food was scarce(there being no birth-control), I begin to wonder if Palaeo humans really did have access to huge herds of animals at all times.

Interestingly, there seems to be a rationale behind female infanticide:- the idea is that the less women there are, the fewer excess births there will be, plus you get a preponderance of males competing for the few females left, thus ensuring a lot more males get killed off as well, over time.

Of course, sometimes anthropologists can take cultural relativism a little too far such as this explanation in the above link:-  " Conversely, studying societies that practice infanticide Géza Róheim reported that even infanticidal mothers in New Guinea, who ate a child, did not affect the personality development of the surviving children; that "these are good mothers who eat their own children""
"During the last campaign I knew what was happening. You know, they mocked me for my foreign policy and they laughed at my monetary policy. No more. No more.
" Ron Paul.

Offline rafonly

  • Buffalo Hunter
  • ***
  • Posts: 116
  • fpc=811
    • View Profile
Re: Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« Reply #1 on: April 10, 2009, 01:26:30 am »

cannibalism (eating members of 1's own species) results in the deterioration of the species

that's how cattle developed the mad cow disease, for ex.

re. paleo hominids, the archeological record seems to show that the neanderthal (not the cro-magnon) did practice cannibalism
further, it has been claimed that it was cannibalism precisely what caused the extinction of the neanderthals

see

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1978059/posts
http://www.anansi.ca/pop_excerpt.cfm?book=237

"time & gradient precede existence", me

Offline Raw Kyle

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,701
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« Reply #2 on: April 10, 2009, 02:38:39 am »
Cows eating cows has nothing to do with humans eating humans imo. First of all cows are ruminant non-meat eating animals and humans are mostly carnivorous. Secondly those mad cow cows were being fed sickly cows to develop the disease, cows fed on grains etc, not natural grass fed cows.

Offline goodsamaritan

  • Administrator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,830
  • Gender: Male
  • Geek Healer Truth Seeker Pro-Natal Pro-Life
    • View Profile
    • Filipino Services Inc.
Re: Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« Reply #3 on: April 10, 2009, 12:27:14 pm »
Maybe those researchers merely found skeletons from a bunch of savages.  Much the same as the savages today feeding the abortion mills. 

We are most likely descended from the more civilized, more loving, more nurturing stock of humans than those 2 examples above.  Just my simple mathematical guess.
Linux Geek, Web Developer, Email Provider, Businessman, Engineer, REAL Free Healer, Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Truther, Ripple-XRP Fan

I'm the network administrator.
My business: Website Dev & Hosting and Email Server Provider,
My blogs: Cure Manual, My Health Blog, Eczema Cure & Psoriasis Cure

Offline wodgina

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,304
  • Opportunistic Carnivore
    • View Profile
Re: Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« Reply #4 on: April 10, 2009, 04:38:01 pm »
We're all 'savages' 
“Integrity has no need of rules.”

Albert Camus

Offline TylerDurden

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,016
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Raw Paleolithic Diet
Re: Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« Reply #5 on: April 10, 2009, 05:36:18 pm »
Cows eating cows has nothing to do with humans eating humans imo. First of all cows are ruminant non-meat eating animals and humans are mostly carnivorous. Secondly those mad cow cows were being fed sickly cows to develop the disease, cows fed on grains etc, not natural grass fed cows.
I agree. BSE is unknown in countries which don't have intensive-farming/grainfeeding.It all depends on what one eats, I guess. If one is eating the putrid flesh and brains of a human raised on decades of junk-foods or cooked-foods, then I'm sure one would get some sort of illness, but otherwise it seems unlikely.

And there is now a lot of evidence indicating that cannibalism has been going on (among all hominids, including the Cro-Magnon/homo sapiens) going as far back as the Upper Paleolithic era:-

http://www.sciamdigital.com/index.cfm?fa=Products.ViewIssuePreview&ARTICLEID_CHAR=417904F8-AF44-7185-40624190DC69B7EE

"During the last campaign I knew what was happening. You know, they mocked me for my foreign policy and they laughed at my monetary policy. No more. No more.
" Ron Paul.

Offline Raw Kyle

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,701
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« Reply #6 on: April 10, 2009, 10:55:32 pm »
It's funny people consider cannibalism "savage" but "regular war" as not. You guys do realize that today we are killing more people than probably even lived in paleolithic times every year in pointless wars for fat rich men to get richer and they are wasting the bodies and not even eating them, right?

Different tribes of people have and always will fight, just like prides of lions and packs of wolves and even our relatives the apes. Not long ago I was watching one of those nature shows and it had either baboons or some kind of chimps doing a raid on the neighboring tribe and eating the ones they killed.

I also find it distasteful to eat a human, but clearly this is social conditioning, as I don't find it distasteful to kill a human if they were threatening my life. It's one in the same, kill for territory, kill for food, kill for defense, it's all survival, and if it's ok to fight and kill humans for land and resources like we do so much today I can't see for the life of me how it's somehow worse to just eat the person you just killed. To me it makes more sense.

William

  • Guest
Re: Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« Reply #7 on: April 13, 2009, 12:57:39 pm »
I agree. BSE is unknown in countries which don't have intensive-farming/grainfeeding.It all depends on what one eats, I guess. If one is eating the putrid flesh and brains of a human raised on decades of junk-foods or cooked-foods, then I'm sure one would get some sort of illness, but otherwise it seems unlikely.

And there is now a lot of evidence indicating that cannibalism has been going on (among all hominids, including the Cro-Magnon/homo sapiens) going as far back as the Upper Paleolithic era:-

http://www.sciamdigital.com/index.cfm?fa=Products.ViewIssuePreview&ARTICLEID_CHAR=417904F8-AF44-7185-40624190DC69B7EE



From that link:"Broken and scattered human bones, in some cases thousands of them, have been discovered from the prehistoric pueblos of the American Southwest to the islands of the Pacific."
This is Neolithic.

I prefer to think that paleo man was a slow breeder, lacking the hormonal changes made by plant foods; if true, then infanticide would not have been necessary.

Offline TylerDurden

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,016
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Raw Paleolithic Diet
Re: Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« Reply #8 on: April 13, 2009, 06:28:05 pm »
From that link:"Broken and scattered human bones, in some cases thousands of them, have been discovered from the prehistoric pueblos of the American Southwest to the islands of the Pacific."
This is Neolithic.

The above excerpt failed to include a rather more relevant piece describing the book, in which scientific evidence is cited from the Upper Palaeolithic and beyond showing conclusively that cavemen were cannibals:-

"New scientific evidence is now bringing to light the truth about cannibalism. It has become obvious that long before the invention of metals, before Egypt's pyramids were built, before the origins of agriculture, before the explosion of Upper Paleolithic cave art, cannibalism could be found among many different peoples-as well as among many of our ancestors"

. The author, Tim White, is a palaeoanthropologist, and one of the leading proponents of the idea that cannibalism existed all the way into the Upper Palaeolithic and beyond, something which is amply supported by the evidence he points to in the book etc. from bones a million years old etc. The fact that he also points to neolithic evidence to show that cannibalism continued past the start of agriculture, is neither here nor there.
"During the last campaign I knew what was happening. You know, they mocked me for my foreign policy and they laughed at my monetary policy. No more. No more.
" Ron Paul.

William

  • Guest
Re: Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« Reply #9 on: April 13, 2009, 11:14:03 pm »
"from bones a million years old" would mean they are not of the race of man, yes?

My point of view is that the reason that there was cannibalism at all was that the population explosion that is civilization depends on cereals, which destroy the natural environment that supports wild game, resulting in protein deficient societies such as pre-Columbian Mexico and New Guinea.
The difference in diet between city folk and hunters is vividly  shown in the movie "Apocalypto".

When swine were introduced, cannibalism stopped.

Offline TylerDurden

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,016
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Raw Paleolithic Diet
Re: Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« Reply #10 on: April 14, 2009, 01:55:24 am »
Cannibalism did not just originate in meat-poor areas. It existed in all climates, at various times. And, the evidence from the Palaeolithic re cannibalism is all the way from the Lower to the Upper Palaeolithic era, which includes modern man/Cro-Magnon.
« Last Edit: April 14, 2009, 05:48:56 pm by TylerDurden »
"During the last campaign I knew what was happening. You know, they mocked me for my foreign policy and they laughed at my monetary policy. No more. No more.
" Ron Paul.

William

  • Guest
Re: Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« Reply #11 on: April 14, 2009, 03:08:54 am »
Does not make sense.
Consider the estimated population of the whole earth was stable at ~15 million, no lack of food, the only reason to eat one's children would be that they were as self-destructive as moderns.
Of course, maybe they did become extinct, and we are descended from the sane.

Offline TylerDurden

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,016
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Raw Paleolithic Diet
Re: Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« Reply #12 on: April 14, 2009, 05:52:34 pm »
They didn't have contraception in those days so had to resort to infanticide. Just look what happens with dogs and cats. If one lets them breed any old how, the numbers of cats and dogs just explode. Despite the fact that castration/spaying is extremely common, the remainder of un-neutered cats and dogs produce so many offspring that millions of pets are abandoned every year and have to be put down. So, similiarly, the palaeolithic tribes would have been forced to cut down on their numbers via such drastic means. Also, since famines did exist in Palaeo times, given harshness of climate etc, food-supply was by no means guaranteed.
"During the last campaign I knew what was happening. You know, they mocked me for my foreign policy and they laughed at my monetary policy. No more. No more.
" Ron Paul.

Offline wodgina

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,304
  • Opportunistic Carnivore
    • View Profile
Re: Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« Reply #13 on: April 14, 2009, 07:42:28 pm »
I agree with Tyler, here in Australia the Aborigines committed infanticide regularly when there were too many people in the tribe for the land to provide for. Here there is such a fine balance due to the poor soil and say you have a couple of dry seasons things would of got pretty drastic.

A fully grown heathy man or women is worth more to a tribe the a helpless baby who would probably starve anyway.

“Integrity has no need of rules.”

Albert Camus

William

  • Guest
Re: Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« Reply #14 on: April 15, 2009, 12:05:24 am »
They didn't have contraception in those days so had to resort to infanticide. Just look what happens with dogs and cats. If one lets them breed any old how, the numbers of cats and dogs just explode. Despite the fact that castration/spaying is extremely common, the remainder of un-neutered cats and dogs produce so many offspring that millions of pets are abandoned every year and have to be put down. So, similiarly, the palaeolithic tribes would have been forced to cut down on their numbers via such drastic means. Also, since famines did exist in Palaeo times, given harshness of climate etc, food-supply was by no means guaranteed.

I don't think that we needed contraception as we know it, after all their hormones were not a mess from generations of neolithic diet.
I don't believe that paleolithic man bred as foolishly as animals; the name of our species - homo sapiens includes the word for wise.
Famines exist for animals and neolithic man; assuming that Velikovsky's cataclysmic history is true there would have been desperate times but very rare and then population would have been externally limited.

I thnk that they lived in such a different world (and planet) that it is difficult for us to imagine their lives, so we endlessly impose known (neolithic) ways on them. Wrong.

Australian aborigines were neolithic, so assuming that paleoman was like that is going way too far for me.

Offline Raw Kyle

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,701
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« Reply #15 on: April 16, 2009, 12:54:43 am »
I would avoid the tendency to over-romanticize paleolithic peoples William. Maybe you're right, but to look at humans as so vastly different than animals, especially in the paleolithic, is not what I would use as a logical starting point. Look around you, do you honestly see such a difference in behavior? People kill other people all the time, and for much sillier reasons than food shortage. How many animal species kill each other like humans? I'd venture a guess that none do at this amount.

William

  • Guest
Re: Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« Reply #16 on: April 16, 2009, 06:35:32 am »
I would avoid the tendency to over-romanticize paleolithic peoples William. Maybe you're right, but to look at humans as so vastly different than animals, especially in the paleolithic, is not what I would use as a logical starting point. Look around you, do you honestly see such a difference in behavior? People kill other people all the time, and for much sillier reasons than food shortage. How many animal species kill each other like humans? I'd venture a guess that none do at this amount.

The vast difference in behaviour that I see is that between dense populations such as "civilized" city folks and sparse populations.

There is a famous rat experiment which shows what happens from overcrowding. It looks just like the behaviour of modern city folk.

Offline PaleoPhil

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,198
  • Gender: Male
  • Mad scientist (not into blind Paleo re-enactment)
    • View Profile
Re: Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« Reply #17 on: October 05, 2009, 10:03:34 am »
Below is something I came across re: infanticide among today's hunter-gatherers. No guarantee that Paleo behavior was the same, but it seems to match the findings of Paleoanthropologists about Paleo infanticide.

Infanticide among the !Kung Bushmen
From Before the dawn: recovering the lost history of our ancestors By Nicholas Wade, April 20, 2006, p. 68:

"A family's total possessions--tools, ostrich shell canteens, children's toys, musical instruments--pack into two bags. Nothing is stored, since everything they need is obtainable from the environment. Portability imbues !Kung life so thoroughly that it affects even the spacing of children. A woman can carry one child easily along with all her possessions, but two are a burden. !Kung women tend not to have a second child until the first can walk well. Children are not weaned until the age of four and before that age are carried almost everywhere, whether on foraging trips or when moving camp. Lee calculates that !Kung women walk about 1,500 miles a year, at least half of this distance carrying substantial burdens of food, water or possessions. A !Kung mother carries her child a total of 4,900 miles before it walks by itself.

Perhaps because a woman must invest so much care and labor in raising a child, she examines her newborn carefully for signs of defects. 'If it is deformed, it is the mother's duty to smother it,' writes the demographer, Nancy Howell. Infanticide is not the same as murder, in the !Kung's view, because life begins not with birth but when the baby is taken back to camp, given a name and accepted as a Real Person. 'Before that time, infanticide is part of the birth mother's prerogatives and responsibilities, culturally prescribed for birth defects and for one of each set of twins born,' Howell says. Women give birth outside the campe and men are excluded by taboo from the birth site; the reason for the taboo is doubtless that the father's absence makes easier the mother's decision as to whether to keep the newborn."

>"When some one eats an Epi paleo Rx template and follows the rules of circadian biology they get plenty of starches when they are available three out of the four seasons." -Jack Kruse, MD
>"I recommend 20 percent of calories from carbs, depending on the size of the person" -Ron Rosedale, MD (in other words, NOT zero carbs) http://preview.tinyurl.com/6ogtan
>Finding a diet you can tolerate is not the same as fixing what's wrong. -Tim Steele
Beware of problems from chronic Very Low Carb

Offline wodgina

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,304
  • Opportunistic Carnivore
    • View Profile
Re: Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« Reply #18 on: October 05, 2009, 04:10:15 pm »
Crazy that infanticide was considered part of normal life for these bushman.
“Integrity has no need of rules.”

Albert Camus

Offline TylerDurden

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,016
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Raw Paleolithic Diet
Re: Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« Reply #19 on: October 05, 2009, 04:52:56 pm »
Crazy that infanticide was considered part of normal life for these bushman.

Not really. We in the modern world have sufficient technology to support most people with mild to moderate birth-defects. Native tribes did not have that luxury and so were forced to kill defective children(and sometimes people crippled by accidents during their lifetime) or they would be overwhelmed with the burden of care and significantly increase the mortality of healthier children. Infanticide was extremely common even in countries like Italy until well into the 19th century. That's why I'm not so against abortion as it's rather more humane to terminate a foetus than a newborn infant.
« Last Edit: October 05, 2009, 04:58:12 pm by TylerDurden »
"During the last campaign I knew what was happening. You know, they mocked me for my foreign policy and they laughed at my monetary policy. No more. No more.
" Ron Paul.

Offline TylerDurden

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,016
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Raw Paleolithic Diet
Re: Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« Reply #20 on: October 05, 2009, 05:05:35 pm »
Below is something I came across re: infanticide among today's hunter-gatherers. No guarantee that Paleo behavior was the same, but it seems to match the findings of Paleoanthropologists about Paleo infanticide.

There are at least 2 fatal flaws with this notion. For one thing, as I pointed out before, carb-consumption appears to explain why Neolithic-era tribes were more fertile than Palaeolithic-era women - the Kung eat a diet consisting of 80% vegetables, some of them raw:-

http://www.essortment.com/all/kungsanpeople_rftw.htm

Plus, infanticide is routinely practised among settled, non-migrating agrarian communities in Africa, such as the Kikuyu, so the notion of having to kill each twin just because the mother can't carry the 2nd one around, is highly dubious(quite aside from the fact that in every social group I've seen the women often get fellow female relatives to look after the children - come to think of it, a lot of mothers nowadays get the father to carry the child much of the time).

Here's a link re this, suggesting strongly also that infanticide of twins in African tribes has rather more to do with rituals and bad omens:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide#In_Africa

"During the last campaign I knew what was happening. You know, they mocked me for my foreign policy and they laughed at my monetary policy. No more. No more.
" Ron Paul.

Offline wodgina

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,304
  • Opportunistic Carnivore
    • View Profile
Re: Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« Reply #21 on: October 05, 2009, 05:59:22 pm »
I meant that it's crazy how much social conditioning has on what is considered the right thing to do. I have so many conflicting thoughts/feelings on this subject.
“Integrity has no need of rules.”

Albert Camus

Offline PaleoPhil

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,198
  • Gender: Male
  • Mad scientist (not into blind Paleo re-enactment)
    • View Profile
Re: Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« Reply #22 on: October 06, 2009, 06:51:04 am »
I pretty worn out from responding to all your counterpoints, Tyler, so I'm going to take a break from it. Just wanted to let you know so you won't think I'm ignoring you.
>"When some one eats an Epi paleo Rx template and follows the rules of circadian biology they get plenty of starches when they are available three out of the four seasons." -Jack Kruse, MD
>"I recommend 20 percent of calories from carbs, depending on the size of the person" -Ron Rosedale, MD (in other words, NOT zero carbs) http://preview.tinyurl.com/6ogtan
>Finding a diet you can tolerate is not the same as fixing what's wrong. -Tim Steele
Beware of problems from chronic Very Low Carb

Offline Raw Kyle

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,701
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Infanticide in the palaeolithic
« Reply #23 on: October 07, 2009, 08:42:29 am »
The vast difference in behaviour that I see is that between dense populations such as "civilized" city folks and sparse populations.

There is a famous rat experiment which shows what happens from overcrowding. It looks just like the behaviour of modern city folk.

I wouldn't call it a rule, just an interesting observation. Most of the intelligent and open people I meet are from urban or near urban centers, where more ideas are passed along. My experience is limited to USA for the most part, but I can say that the rural farm town I grew up in had just as much if not more proportion of antisocial people. For purposes of this post by antisocial I mean maladjusted in some way, such as strong racism, gay hating, strong patriarchal (greater occurrance of wife/daughter beating, not allowing women same privileges) tendencies etc...

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk