Bloody Battle in the Stone Age.

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2003-08-16 10:09am

Italian Mummy shows signs of having been in prolonged combat before death.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-08-16 10:34am

I remember when they first suggested he might have been killed, much of the debate resolved around weather some bit of damage was inflicted before he died or by the method by which to body was dug out of the alpine ice, which involved borrowed ice axes.

Peregrin Toker · Post by **Peregrin Toker** » 2003-08-16 12:25pm

I might need to remind you that large-scale battle didn't happen in Europe until the Late Neolithic.

This was not as much a battle as it could have been some guy going berserk with a stone-axe.

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2003-08-16 12:47pm

Simon H.Johansen wrote:I might need to remind you that large-scale battle didn't happen in Europe until the Late Neolithic.

This was not as much a battle as it could have been some guy going berserk with a stone-axe.

Or so the current theory goes, anyway--this really is an interesting discovery, isn't it? Obviously it wasn't large-scale combat, but there were clearly several guys on each side here who were working pretty hard at killing each other, I'd wager. A lone-madman with an axe theory might appeal, but the Columbine-style shootout isn't exactly something you see throughout history.

There were probably always resources worth fighting over--and thus, invariably at some point, wars, even if they were originally skirmishers between a couple-dozen people at the max on each side. It will just take time for this to be accepted by certain segments of theorists.

One fact remains: A man died a cold and lonely death, five thousand years ago, after having wounded multiple enemies--and yet his foe still had forces enough to dispatch him, and ensure that he received no succor.

Solauren · Post by **Solauren** » 2003-08-16 02:07pm

Actually, there are no RECORDS of large scale battles back then.

Doesn't mean there were not any.

Actually, I think the poor guy was probably the neolethic version of mugged

Post by **LadyTevar** » 2003-08-16 06:54pm

Solauren wrote:Actually, there are no RECORDS of large scale battles back then.

Doesn't mean there were not any.

Actually, I think the poor guy was probably the neolethic version of mugged

I think it was more a border dispute, as the article suggests. Most border skimishes even today never get that much airplay, so why would a group of hunters/border guards meeting a rival group be that much different? It's not like we humans have stopped being murderously protective of what we consider 'ours'.

Look at any gang fight, over who's on who's turf. Or, a better example, think of the world-famous Hatfield/Mccoy feud... simply because a pig was killed for being on the wrong side of the fence. The best example... think of how pissy most people get when the neighbor's dog poops in the yard.

It doesn't take much to start a territorial feud... and they rarely get noted in history books.

Demiurge · Post by **Demiurge** » 2003-08-17 05:40pm

MSNBC wrote:Italy’s 5,000-year-old mummy gets the ‘CSI’ treatment

Talk about a cold case.

*smiles at camera*

Post by **Gandalf** » 2003-08-18 12:08am

We studied Otzi for a few months in Ancient history, most of us concluded he was sort of a wanderer, as he had fingi on his bag from various regions of Italy and such.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2003-08-18 01:05am

I wouldn't be suprised if he was wounded in some skirmish. The deeper we dig and the more our archeologists search, they are consistantly finding civilization further and further back. For instance, I've heard that they have found evidence of a ancient civilization where Bahrain is today, which has been so shrouded in the fog of history that not even it's name have survived and have only dug up a few clay tablets which they believe are trade documents. The amazing thing is that they believe this civilization to have existed about 10,000 years old and they believe that the evidence points to a primitive trading empire that traded from where Chinas western boarder is to Egypt.

NapoleonGH · Post by **NapoleonGH** » 2003-08-18 01:51pm

this was a very interesting discovery, i love how they managed to piece together this dude's life from such little bits of information. Truely informative

Post by **LadyTevar** » 2003-08-19 12:54pm

NapoleonGH wrote:this was a very interesting discovery, i love how they managed to piece together this dude's life from such little bits of information. Truely informative

Once again, this proves that as our level of technology grows, the more we can learn from the remains of our ancestors. I will definately be watching when Discovery Channel premieres this special. I believe it's on next week's "the Quest"?

Post by **LadyTevar** » 2003-08-25 12:27am

Update:

Disc Channel finally ran the program, and it was extremely interesting. Especially where they were using a bow and arrows made similarly to those of the period to find out how far away the shooter was when the Iceman was hit. Several minutes later, there is a segment where a modern-day champion bowman was trying for the same shot. Even with his aluminum-composite arrows, his compound bow with all the sights and geegads, the champion was having trouble hitting the target squarely.
Guess it goes to show that Ancient Man had learned to be more accurate, because his life often depended on it.

Still, while we now know what killed Iceman, the why is unknown. The program seemed to be pushing towards a rivalry or in-village fight that turned bloody.