近代采集者使用木棍和投掷棒:跨文化调查及其对史前武器研究的启示。

IF 2.2 2区 社会学 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY Human Nature-An Interdisciplinary Biosocial Perspective Pub Date : 2023-03-01 DOI:10.1007/s12110-023-09445-3
Václav Hrnčíř
{"title":"近代采集者使用木棍和投掷棒:跨文化调查及其对史前武器研究的启示。","authors":"Václav Hrnčíř","doi":"10.1007/s12110-023-09445-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There is a popular idea that archaic humans commonly used wooden clubs as their weapons. This is not based on archaeological finds, which are minimal from the Pleistocene, but rather on a few ethnographic analogies and the association of these weapons with simple technology. This article presents the first quantitative cross-cultural analysis of the use of wooden clubs and throwing sticks for hunting and violence among foragers. Using a sample of 57 recent hunting-gathering societies from the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample, it is shown that the majority used clubs for violence (86%) and/or hunting (74%). Whereas in hunting and fishing the club usually served only as a secondary tool, 33% of societies used the club as one of their main fighting weapons. The use of throwing sticks was less frequent among the societies surveyed (12% for violence, 14% for hunting). Based on these results and other evidence, it is argued that the use of clubs by early humans was highly probable, at least in the simplest form of a crude stick. The great variation in the forms and use of clubs and throwing sticks among recent hunter-gatherers, however, indicates that they are not standardized weapons and that similar variation may have existed in the past. Many such prehistoric weapons may therefore have been quite sophisticated, multifunctional, and carried strong symbolic meaning.</p>","PeriodicalId":47797,"journal":{"name":"Human Nature-An Interdisciplinary Biosocial Perspective","volume":"34 1","pages":"122-152"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10073058/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Use of Wooden Clubs and Throwing Sticks among Recent Foragers : Cross-Cultural Survey and Implications for Research on Prehistoric Weaponry.\",\"authors\":\"Václav Hrnčíř\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12110-023-09445-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>There is a popular idea that archaic humans commonly used wooden clubs as their weapons. This is not based on archaeological finds, which are minimal from the Pleistocene, but rather on a few ethnographic analogies and the association of these weapons with simple technology. This article presents the first quantitative cross-cultural analysis of the use of wooden clubs and throwing sticks for hunting and violence among foragers. Using a sample of 57 recent hunting-gathering societies from the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample, it is shown that the majority used clubs for violence (86%) and/or hunting (74%). Whereas in hunting and fishing the club usually served only as a secondary tool, 33% of societies used the club as one of their main fighting weapons. The use of throwing sticks was less frequent among the societies surveyed (12% for violence, 14% for hunting). Based on these results and other evidence, it is argued that the use of clubs by early humans was highly probable, at least in the simplest form of a crude stick. The great variation in the forms and use of clubs and throwing sticks among recent hunter-gatherers, however, indicates that they are not standardized weapons and that similar variation may have existed in the past. Many such prehistoric weapons may therefore have been quite sophisticated, multifunctional, and carried strong symbolic meaning.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47797,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Nature-An Interdisciplinary Biosocial Perspective\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"122-152\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10073058/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Nature-An Interdisciplinary Biosocial Perspective\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-023-09445-3\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Nature-An Interdisciplinary Biosocial Perspective","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-023-09445-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

有一种流行的观点认为,古人类通常使用木棍作为武器。这并不是基于考古发现,这在更新世时期是很少的,而是基于一些人种学上的类比以及这些武器与简单技术的联系。本文首次对采集者在狩猎和暴力中使用木棍和投掷棒进行了定量的跨文化分析。使用来自标准跨文化样本的57个近期狩猎采集社会的样本显示,大多数人使用俱乐部进行暴力(86%)和/或狩猎(74%)。在狩猎和捕鱼中,棍棒通常只是次要的工具,33%的社会将棍棒作为主要的战斗武器之一。在接受调查的社会中,投掷棍棒的使用频率较低(12%用于暴力,14%用于狩猎)。基于这些结果和其他证据,有人认为早期人类极有可能使用棍棒,至少是最简单的原始棍棒。然而,最近的狩猎采集者在棍棒和投掷棒的形式和使用上的巨大差异表明,它们不是标准化的武器,过去可能存在类似的变化。因此,许多这样的史前武器可能相当复杂,多功能,并具有强烈的象征意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Use of Wooden Clubs and Throwing Sticks among Recent Foragers : Cross-Cultural Survey and Implications for Research on Prehistoric Weaponry.

There is a popular idea that archaic humans commonly used wooden clubs as their weapons. This is not based on archaeological finds, which are minimal from the Pleistocene, but rather on a few ethnographic analogies and the association of these weapons with simple technology. This article presents the first quantitative cross-cultural analysis of the use of wooden clubs and throwing sticks for hunting and violence among foragers. Using a sample of 57 recent hunting-gathering societies from the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample, it is shown that the majority used clubs for violence (86%) and/or hunting (74%). Whereas in hunting and fishing the club usually served only as a secondary tool, 33% of societies used the club as one of their main fighting weapons. The use of throwing sticks was less frequent among the societies surveyed (12% for violence, 14% for hunting). Based on these results and other evidence, it is argued that the use of clubs by early humans was highly probable, at least in the simplest form of a crude stick. The great variation in the forms and use of clubs and throwing sticks among recent hunter-gatherers, however, indicates that they are not standardized weapons and that similar variation may have existed in the past. Many such prehistoric weapons may therefore have been quite sophisticated, multifunctional, and carried strong symbolic meaning.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
8.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: Human Nature is dedicated to advancing the interdisciplinary investigation of the biological, social, and environmental factors that underlie human behavior. It focuses primarily on the functional unity in which these factors are continuously and mutually interactive. These include the evolutionary, biological, and sociological processes as they interact with human social behavior; the biological and demographic consequences of human history; the cross-cultural, cross-species, and historical perspectives on human behavior; and the relevance of a biosocial perspective to scientific, social, and policy issues.
期刊最新文献
Love as a Commitment Device  : Evidence from a Cross-Cultural Study across 90 Countries. Ecological Threats and Cultural Systems : Epidemics and Natural Disasters Do Not Predict Collectivism. The Nature and Motivation of Human Cooperation from Variant Public Goods Games. The Collector Hypothesis : Who Benefits More from Art, the Artist or the Collector? Hadza Landscape Burning.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1