Signs of slaughter, possibly cannibalism, were found on the bones of an ancient human relative

“I was shocked and shocked and I went, ‘No way,’” said Briana Buebner, lead author of the study and a paleoanthropologist at the National Museum of Natural History in Washington. She recalled being approached by others at the National Museums of Kenya in Nairobi where she had discovered it saying, “Come here. Come and see this. Am I crazy?”

To be certain that the cut marks were caused by cannibalism, Bubiner said, “You have to know who is doing the eating and who is eating, in which case we don’t know either.” Cannibalism requires that both the consumer and the consumer be of the same species.

About 1.5 million years ago, at least three species of hominins existed in the area where the fossil was found: erect manAnd Homo habilis And Paranthropus boisei. To determine the species in question, Bubiner said, experts would need more skeleton than an individual bone.

Cannibalism is not unusual in the animal kingdom. more than 1300 animals Species feed on their own kind, including some primates. As soon as possible Evidence of cannibalism among hominins dating back 800,000 years, and discovered at the archaeological site of Atapuerca in northern Spain.

The closer the practice reach to Homo sapiensthe more complex and disturbing the questions you raise.

“This behavior connects us to our animal nature and reminds us that we are just one of the millions of organisms that have been around throughout evolution,” said Antonio Rodríguez Hidalgo, a postdoctoral researcher at the Catalan Institute of Paleontology and Social Evolution. He was not involved in the study, but did take part in a recent workshop on prehistoric cannibalism titled “Feast or Famine.”

“On a more troubling note,” he continued in an email, “cannibalism is in Homo sapiens It carries deeper philosophical implications. It raises questions of love versus hate, family versus enemy, war cannibalism versus funeral cannibalism, and feasting versus starvation. “

The fossilized bone Bubener examined was discovered by the famous British anthropologist Mary Leakey, but at the time the marks were not noted as possible signs of slaughter. Nor was it noted as such by subsequent researchers who have examined the left leg over the past half century.

Buebner believes the researchers who examined the bones did not notice the marks because they were not looking for signs of slaughter. In recent years, she said, it has become common to re-examine previously discovered fossils.

Greatness was only one of 199 The hominin fossils, between 1.5 and 2 million years old, that Bubener examined in July 2017, but were the only ones she could find with cut marks. She said the marks were the same color as the rest of the bones, indicating they were made before the bone became fossilized.

While Buebner detected the marks with a simple handheld magnifying glass, they were later analyzed using a more sophisticated technique. I took a long impression of the bone using the type of molding clay dentists use to take impressions of teeth and to check for bite marks when placing crowns.

She sent the impression to one of her study co-authors, Michael Bunty of Colorado State University, and he didn’t tell him anything about what was drawn from it. Over the months, Pante has used the impression to make 3D computer models of the marks, which range from 1 to 5 millimeters in length. The models were compared to a database of 898 individual dental, butcher and stomp marks generated through controlled experiments.

Bunty determined that 9 of the 11 were cut marks; The other two, the tooth marks, may have been made by a lion-like animal.

“Unfortunately, determining the type of tool or raw material from a trim mark is difficult and error-prone, so we chose not to include this comparison,” Banti said via email. He said more research would be needed before the markers could be reliably linked to a specific type of tool.

No stone tools were found with the bone, though Bubener said tools have been discovered at various dig sites, including one about 15 miles away.

Because the wound marks and tooth marks do not overlap, the story of what exactly happened is unclear. Did the hominins scavenge the remains of someone killed by a lion for the first time, or did the hominins make the initial kill and the lion scavenged?

“It seems a bit unusual for a big cat like a lion to scavenge for the remains of an animal [hominin] whose deep muscles have already been exploited,” Rodriguez Hidalgo said. “What is left for the cats to dig up? Only the marrow, but big cats are not known for their bone-breaking abilities, and the tibia appears to be intact. So, this scenario does not seem very plausible.

The fact that only one of the 199 fossil bones Buebner examined contained cut marks indicates that it was unlikely that hominins of this period ate each other as a staple of their diet. Eating other hominins was likely a response to the scarcity of other foods. The diet of hominins 1.5 million years ago included ancient antelopes, zebras, rhinos, hippos—”anything you can get your hands on,” Buebner likes to say.

James Cole, principal lecturer in archeology at the University of Brighton in England, called the new research “A really interesting and amazing find,” which demonstrates the value of going back to museums’ fossil collections.

“Some of the best discoveries have already been found, but they may not yet be fully recognized,” Cole said. “The evidence here shows that we are far from finished in our understanding of our hominin ancestors and the complex and fascinating lives they led.”