The article claims something I found surprising -- that the written word was not common near Germany until about 1000 AD.
That's true for nearly all of nonRoman Europe.
Slaughter at the bridge: Uncovering a colossal Bronze Age battle (2016)
21–30 of 53 posts
#/media/File:European_Output_of_Manuscripts_500%E2%80%931500.png){kind=link}
Re: Slaughter at the bridge: Uncovering a colossal Bronze Age battle (2016)
#22> Before the 1990s, “for a long time we didn’t really believe in war in prehistory,” DAI’s Hansen says. The grave goods were explained as prestige objects or symbols of power rather than actual weapons. “Most people thought ancient society was peaceful, and that Bronze Age males were concerned with trading and so on,” Is that really true (that "we" didn't believe in war in prehistory)? It seems like a case of taking…
I would say that the ability to declare war is one of the things that distinguishes us as humans. Even chimpanzees declare war, and for the same reasons we do.
Re: Slaughter at the bridge: Uncovering a colossal Bronze Age battle (2016)
#23The article claims something I found surprising -- that the written word was not common near Germany until about 1000 AD.
Some writing was around 1700 years ago - https://archive.archaeology.org/1207/trenches/frienstedt_ger...
Re: Slaughter at the bridge: Uncovering a colossal Bronze Age battle (2016)
#24> Before the 1990s, “for a long time we didn’t really believe in war in prehistory,” DAI’s Hansen says. The grave goods were explained as prestige objects or symbols of power rather than actual weapons. “Most people thought ancient society was peaceful, and that Bronze Age males were concerned with trading and so on,” Is that really true (that "we" didn't believe in war in prehistory)? It seems like a case of taking…
I would say that the ability to declare war is one of the things that distinguishes us as humans. Even chimpanzees declare war, and for the same reasons we do. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gombe_Chimpanzee_War
Your second sentence contradicts your first sentence
Re: Slaughter at the bridge: Uncovering a colossal Bronze Age battle (2016)
#25Cmon, a guy with a sword as the first graphic? This is the Bronze Age - a club is a better weapon at that point...
Re: Slaughter at the bridge: Uncovering a colossal Bronze Age battle (2016)
#26This article was impossible not to read all the way through. I really hope to be able to write in such a compelling way at some point in my life. Admittedly, the subject matter of an epic battle is probably intrinsically more interesting than what I'll typically write about in my career, but still, the author tells such a vivid story by diving into minute details only to zoom back out to a broader context.
Re: Slaughter at the bridge: Uncovering a colossal Bronze Age battle (2016)
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would say that the ability to declare war is one of the things that distinguishes us as humans. Even chimpanzees declare war, and for the same reasons we do. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gombe_Chimpanzee_War
Your second sentence contradicts your first sentence
It's a fringe viewpoint but some knowledgeable people have argued that Pan troglodytes is better called Homo troglodytes. Perhaps GP is among them.
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2003/05/chimps-be...
Re: Slaughter at the bridge: Uncovering a colossal Bronze Age battle (2016)
#28> Before the 1990s, “for a long time we didn’t really believe in war in prehistory,” DAI’s Hansen says. The grave goods were explained as prestige objects or symbols of power rather than actual weapons. “Most people thought ancient society was peaceful, and that Bronze Age males were concerned with trading and so on,” Is that really true (that "we" didn't believe in war in prehistory)? It seems like a case of taking…
I mean we have evidence chimpanzees engage in tribal warfare. This is an absurd thing for supposed scientific minds to assume.
Re: Slaughter at the bridge: Uncovering a colossal Bronze Age battle (2016)
#29The article claims something I found surprising -- that the written word was not common near Germany until about 1000 AD.
They weren't called the Dark Ages for nothin'.
Dark Ages are traditionally 500 AD.
The period of ~1000 BC was solidly Bronze age, before the classical era or antiquity (~500 BC), before the Roman Empire, before the fall of the Roman Empire leading to the Dark Ages.
Re: Slaughter at the bridge: Uncovering a colossal Bronze Age battle (2016)
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
It may be more the level of organization. Warfare was common but thought to be more on the family/clan scale.
I don't know about Germany, but the UK is full of ancient fortifications - from earthworks that would enclose a few huts to huge ruined stone fortresses. Almost all of these get very little attention.
I thought most of these fortifications are thought to be bronze age, not neolithic.