Experiment Proves Neolithic Weapon Was Effective | Hacker News Reader

Experiment Proves Neolithic Weapon Was Effective

gizmodo.com

28 pointscurtis21 comments

Could some archaeologist shed some light on this? I'm not arguing against the weapon theory, but... It was found near the Thames, it was made of wood, it didn't show any traces of blood or anything that would suggest a bone impact, it has the distinct shape of a paddle, it even has a pommel to prevent you from losing it when it's wet, but in the entire article I couldn't find a single reason why it couldn't be just a paddle - not that you couldn't use it as a weapon for the occasional weekend massacre...

”When it was in good shape, the Thames Beater measured about two feet in length”

For me, that alone makes it unlikely it is a paddle. Google also gives me https://bendingbranches.com/sizing/canoe-paddle. The smallest paddle It suggests is a three feet paddle, and that is if your nose is 20 inches above your seat.

This also looks too heavy for a paddle. Looking at the pommel, I doubt that’s because they couldn’t do better at the time.

So, I doubt it is a paddle. A child’s cricket bat is more likely, given where it was found :-)

For a canoe you're sitting relatively high in the water, check out the Coracle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coracle

For bonus points, its also known to have been in common use in the British Isles.

They could have just been using this as a basic rudder?

Smaller people. Smaller boats. And how do we know we are looking at a finished product? This could be by someone still trying to work out what size/shape he wants. Or maybe this is the backup paddle kept for when you really really need one and don't care so much about its size.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neolithic_Revolution#Social_ch...: ”Average height went down from 5'10" (178 cm) for men and 5'6" (168 cm) for women to 5'5" (165 cm) and 5'1" (155 cm), respectively, and it took until the twentieth century for average human height to come back to the pre-Neolithic Revolution levels.”

Smaller people, but nowhere near what’s needed to make such a short paddle usable.

And yes, it could be a badly made paddle, but I think that’s very unlikely. Just think about how you use a paddle; you hold it with one hand at the pommel and the other about halfway down the shaft. In this case, halfway down is about a foot between your hands. If you want that to be body-sized, you need a body that’s quite a bit less than a foot wide between the shoulders.

Also, to have this ‘blade’ enter the water, the hand on the pommel can’t be much more than a foot above the water shoulder height. That hand starts each stroke at about shoulder height.

I also guess (but can’t tell from the photos) experts can see the product was finished from its smoothness. If you cut wood, you start by cutting it into a rough shape, and only then care about finer details. You don’t make a smooth looking but oversized object and remove millimeters at a time.

A cricket bat like the piltdown man's?

It has a rather striking similarity to Maori weapons which we have extensive documentation for:

https://www.armymuseum.co.nz/blog/maori-weapons.html

The idea is you want extra weight at the end of a club for increased momentum without increasing overall weight as much, but you want to avoid extra air resistance. Resulting in a large flat end that tapers to a handle. The base of the handle then flares out for a pommel and/or includes a hole for a string (think Wii controllers).

That said, it also somewhat resembles a cooking implement, but the specific shape may make that less likely.

I’m not an archeologist, and you raise an interesting question, but from what I can find, the Neolithic paddles that we know about have much more efficient shapes. As a recreational kayaker and paddler for 35 years, I can certainly attest that you would optimize the weight of a paddle as much as possible. Kayak paddles used by indigenous peoples in the Arctic are traditionally made using a Stone Age toolkit (these societies had no significant access to metal until relatively recently) and have highly optimized forms

Well, the theory kind of goes that it is a paddle- the kind a neolithic person would not want to find themselves up the proverbial creek without.

But you didn't mean that.

(look, it's almost Christmas. I can crack a joke, surely?)

Weapon yes. But for attacking humans? I am not convinced.

(1) It is small. (2) It was found in a river. (3) It was used by persons in a very different time than ours, doing very different jobs.

It looks to me like something for a fisherman or hunter. It's a little big to be a fish club. It is too small for use as a weapon. But it is perfect for someone trapping furry mammals and bashing in their heads, which is what you do when you want to preserve the pelt. It looks like a seal club. My money would be on otter.

I'm sure that this was fun for all involved, but it's an experiment in much the same sense that 'is sunlight warmer than shade?' or 'are men attracted to pretty women?' is an experiment. After all, the club is roughly the same proportions as a belaying pin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belaying_pin) or policeman's truncheon (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baton_(law_enforcement)#/media...). 'Can a stout baton smash a skull?' is … a bit of an answered question.

Like I said, fun for all involved, but hardly ground-breaking.

I think the interesting part is that it produces the same kind of wound as what was discovered on skulls.

It reinforces the hypothesis that these things were effectively used as weapon.

"Science says getting hit with a stick hurts, stay tuned folks!"

Could it be a kitchen implement, perhaps for tenderising meat or pounding bread, for example? Perhaps it served dual purpose(the 35th-century BC tire tool):

Droog: "Honey, we're going to beat up some hominids camping down by the river, I'll see you in a few days."

Droog's wife: "I don't want you hurt, Dear. Take my bread hammer with you. Give 'em a good knock on the head with that. That'll teach 'em!"

Or possibly a work-in-progress, e.g., a half-finished spoon or scoop that has this shape merely b/c it wasn't completed? e.g.,

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0676/2007/files/Mary_Spurt...

from

https://www.poldersoldworldmarket.com/blogs/news/18970399-ch...

>> Instead of using an animal carcass or a human cadaver, the researchers opted for a synthetic polyurethane “skin-skull-brain” model coated in rubber skin. A hole was left at the bottom, through which the researchers injected a brain-like gelatin mass. Two skin-skull-brain models of different thicknesses were used to account for human variance. Dyer and Fibiger believed this model more accurately represented the shape and strength of the human skull compared to an animal carcass, and that it was more ethical than battering away at a human donor’s corpse.

For me that ethical question is on the same level of interesting as the actual subject of the paper. It's a matter for debate, of course, but I can tell that I would not want to conduct an experiment that involved me beating someone's dead body with a big stick. I can see why the authors would consider the ethical implications thereof and I'm glad to hear that people do that as part of their research.

Personally I would be interested in the applicability of their model for testing helmets. If you could use these to economically test bicycle helmets, for example, then you could build a better helmet.

I'd also be curious how this compares to state of the art in helmet testing.

Honestly, if it weren't for cryonics I'd rate this an awesome idea for my own remains. But getting my head vitrified is even better -- too bad.

On the flip side, if my body were donated to science (as is my wish) I wouldn't particularly care whether they did this sort of thing to it.

The ethical considerations may have also been an afterthought considering the cost of using a human cadaver.

slightly off topic: Can anyone tell what the author's avatar picture represents? It looks like a cerebral connectome - his own? https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--l_92-ur...

If you can read french:

http://www.psychomedia.qc.ca/neuropsychologie/2010-09-22/-40...

(Found via tineye.com, a very useful website for tracking down the potential source of images)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com