Up next in 10
The Deadly Prehistory of Cannibalism: From h. antecessor to h. sapiens
0 views
Jun 15, 2025
Prehistoric Cannibalism in Europe Early Evidence of Human Consumption Millions of years ago, early human ancestors, such as Australopithecus and Homo habilis, sometimes fell prey to large predators, as evidenced by fossilized bite marks. One 1.45-million-year-old shinbone from Kenya shows stone tool cuts—possibly the earliest sign of humans butchering and perhaps eating other humans. Types of Cannibalism Cannibalism—eating human flesh—has occurred for different reasons: Survival cannibalism – In times of extreme hunger or famine. Ritual/Endocannibalism – Consuming deceased group members as part of funerary customs. Exocannibalism – Eating enemies or outsiders, possibly as an act of dominance or in warfare. Oldest Known Cases Gran Dolina, Spain (~1 million years ago) – Bones of Homo antecessor shows butchering marks, suggesting repeated cannibalism, possibly related to food scarcity or conflict. Arago Cave, France (~450,000 years ago) – Human bones were cut and broken, with some body parts missing, possibly indicating ritualistic practices. Neanderthal Cannibalism: Neanderthals (130,000–40,000 years ago) practiced cannibalism at several sites: Moula-Guercy, France – Six individuals were butchered like animals. Goyet Cave, Belgium – Cut marks and marrow extraction suggest systematic processing. Cueva del Sidrón, Spain – Possibly linked to survival during harsh conditions. Modern Humans (Upper Paleolithic to Bronze Age) Evidence from later periods also points to cannibalism: Gough’s Cave, UK (~14,700 years ago) – Human skulls shaped into cups, with chew marks on bones.
View Video Transcript
0:03
millions of years ago early human
0:05
ancestors during the plyiosene and early
0:08
pleaene likely faced threats from large
0:11
predators however direct evidence like
0:14
tooth marks or other signs of carnivore
0:17
attacks on their bones is uncommon
0:20
some known examples include bite marks
0:22
on fossils of orolopythecus animensis
0:26
oralopythecus africanis and paranthropus
0:29
robustus as well as crocodile bite marks
0:32
on homohabilis fossils a 1.45
0:36
millionyear-old human tibia or shinbone
0:40
from Turkana Kenya exhibits signs of
0:43
having been cut with stone tools
0:47
these marks were found on a
0:48
wellpreserved part of the bone and are
0:51
consistent with butchering similar to
0:53
what's seen on animal bones from the
0:55
same area the bone's identity is
0:58
uncertain it may belong to Homo erectus
1:01
homohabilis or another early human
1:04
species so it's referred to simply as a
1:07
hominin the mark suggests the body was
1:11
processed for meat either due to
1:13
starvation or as part of the diet
1:16
two tooth marks likely from a large
1:18
carnivore were also found however it's
1:22
unclear whether the animal fed on the
1:24
body before or after the butchering
1:27
this is one of the earliest possible
1:29
signs of human flesh consumption though
1:32
such evidence is rare and hard to
1:34
interpret without more context
1:37
human cannibalism the act of eating the
1:40
flesh of another human has been
1:42
practiced throughout both prehistoric
1:44
and historic periods by different human
1:46
species including homo sapiens this
1:50
practice is known as anthropagy when
1:52
referring specifically to humans
1:56
cannibalism has taken place in many
1:58
different contexts social political
2:02
economic and religious across various
2:05
cultures and regions archaeological
2:08
historical and ethnographic evidence
2:11
indicates that cannibalism was a complex
2:13
behavior with a variety of purposes
2:16
including survival ritual and
2:19
nutritional reasons
2:21
there are three main types of
2:23
cannibalism
2:24
exocanibalism involves eating
2:27
individuals from outside one's group
2:29
often enemies
2:31
endocanibalism refers to eating members
2:34
of one's own community often as part
2:37
oferary rituals
2:39
survival cannibalism happens in extreme
2:42
situations like famine where eating
2:44
human flesh is necessary to stay alive
2:48
these categories help researchers
2:50
interpret archaeological findings
2:52
although the lines between them can be
2:54
blurry
2:56
in Europe evidence of prehistoric
2:58
cannibalism ranges from the early
3:00
pleaene to the Iron Age
3:04
human bones found at archaeological
3:06
sites often show signs of intense
3:08
processing such as cut marks for
3:11
deflesing broken bones for marrow
3:14
extraction and even tooth marks strong
3:17
indicators that the remains were
3:19
consumed
3:21
despite this there is debate among
3:23
researchers about whether these acts
3:26
were primarily ritualistic or driven by
3:28
nutritional needs
3:31
controversy over the historical reality
3:33
of cannibalism remains
3:36
in the 20th century scholars argued that
3:38
reports of cannibalism were exaggerated
3:41
or fabricated often used by European
3:44
colonizers to justify conquest and
3:47
slavery for example Queen Isabel of
3:50
Spain once decreed that only Native
3:52
Americans who were cannibals could be
3:54
enslaved cannibalism might have occurred
3:57
during times of famine but questions
4:00
remain whether it should be called
4:02
cannibalism at all although today
4:05
cannibalism is considered taboo and
4:08
often linked to mental illness traces of
4:10
it remain in culture and religion
4:14
fairy tales like Hansel and Gretle
4:16
depicted as a dark myth and Christian
4:19
rituals like the Eucharist symbolically
4:22
represent the consumption of human flesh
4:24
and blood through bread and wine
4:28
this shows that cannibalism while
4:30
largely rejected still holds symbolic
4:33
meaning in modern society the oldest
4:36
known case of cannibalism comes from the
4:38
TD6 level of the Grandolina site in
4:41
Sierra Deaperka
4:44
Spain
4:45
this site dating to the end of the early
4:48
pleaene contains remains of at least 11
4:51
individuals from the species Homo
4:54
anticcessor these remains include mostly
4:57
children and a few young adults the
5:00
bones were scattered throughout the cave
5:02
and mixed with animal bones and stone
5:04
tools
5:06
about 45% of the human bones showed
5:09
signs of being cut broken and bitten
5:13
indicating cannibalistic activity
5:16
these modifications suggest that the
5:19
bodies were skinned dismembered
5:21
deflesched and even had their skulls
5:24
broken to extract the brain and bones
5:26
cracked to get marrow
5:29
researchers debate the reasons behind
5:31
this cannibalism some argue it wasn't
5:34
due to starvation but was instead done
5:37
for food as part of regular behavior
5:40
termed gastronomic or cultural
5:43
cannibalism
5:45
ongoing excavations show that such acts
5:48
happened repeatedly likely as part of a
5:50
tradition among groups living in the
5:52
cave the high number of child remains
5:56
led some scholars to compare this
5:57
pattern to chimpanzee behavior where
6:00
weaker individuals are often targeted in
6:03
intergroup conflict this suggests the
6:06
cannibalism could be related to
6:08
territorial disputes or resource
6:10
competition though it's too early to
6:12
call it warfare in the modern sense the
6:16
TD6 assemblage has been interpreted in
6:19
various ways nutritional cultural or
6:23
exocalism
6:24
however researchers agree it involved
6:27
repeated events without symbolic burial
6:30
likely tied to conflicts over land and
6:33
resources
6:35
another early case of cannibalism comes
6:37
from the Argo cave in Tael France here
6:41
remains of at least 30 individuals from
6:44
the middle plea scene have been found
6:47
these remains showed signs of systematic
6:49
bone breakage and cut marks made while
6:52
butchering
6:54
only specific body parts like skulls
6:57
limbs and the pelvis were found while
7:00
bones from the torso hands and feet were
7:03
mostly missing
7:05
this selective treatment of the bodies
7:08
led some researchers to suggest that the
7:10
cannibalism may have had ritualistic
7:12
elements from about 130,000 to 40,000
7:16
years ago there is strong evidence that
7:19
Neanderthalss engaged in cannibalism at
7:22
several sites across Europe at
7:24
Moolagarci in France researchers found
7:27
remains of six individuals with cut
7:30
marks and broken bones indicating that
7:32
their bodies were butchered in the same
7:34
way as animals
7:37
these human bones were mixed with animal
7:39
remains and tools suggesting that
7:42
Neanderthalss removed flesh and marrow
7:44
for consumption human and animal bones
7:47
from Goyat cave in Belgium offer
7:50
important insights into Neanderl
7:52
behavior
7:53
researchers identified at least five
7:56
individuals four adults or adolescents
7:59
and one child long bones like tibas and
8:03
femurss were the best preserved
8:06
radioarbon dating placed these
8:08
individuals between 44,000 and 45,500
8:13
years ago many of the bones showed cut
8:16
marks marrow extraction damage and signs
8:19
of being used as tools indicating they
8:22
were processed similarly to animal
8:24
carcasses
8:26
this strongly suggests cannibalism
8:29
likely for survival or ritual purposes
8:32
comparable patterns were seen in horse
8:34
and reindeer bones from the cave though
8:37
Neanderl bones had more percussion marks
8:40
due to their density there were no signs
8:42
of burning and the preservation of DNA
8:45
makes extensive cooking unlikely
8:48
this is the first confirmed evidence of
8:50
Neanderthal cannibalism in Northern
8:52
Europe as no modern humans were present
8:55
at the time other Neanderls likely
8:58
carried out the processing whether the
9:00
use of bones as tools had symbolic
9:03
meaning remains unclear
9:06
although the remains are from the same
9:08
era as certain stone tools poor
9:10
excavation records prevent linking them
9:13
to a specific culture other nearby
9:16
Neanderl sites show different treatment
9:18
of the dead highlighting the behavioral
9:21
diversity among late Neanderl groups
9:24
ranging from possible burials to
9:26
cannibalism
9:28
despite their genetic similarities
9:31
in Spain at Qua Delidron the remains of
9:34
at least 13 Neanderthalss were found
9:37
with similar signs of human processing
9:40
cut marks and smashed bones
9:43
unlike Moola Gerie this site had very
9:46
few animal bones making it unusual the
9:50
evidence suggests survival cannibalism
9:53
likely during a time of food shortage
9:55
though detailed studies are still needed
9:57
to confirm this kpina in Croatia
10:00
presents a more debated case over 800
10:04
Neanderthal bones were found and while
10:06
some researchers believe the bones were
10:09
cleaned for burial others argue the cut
10:11
marks and broken bones show clear
10:14
evidence of cannibalism
10:16
some even found possible human tooth
10:18
marks adding to the idea that the bodies
10:21
were eaten other sites like Pradellas
10:24
and Bokeeta de Zafaraya also show signs
10:27
of cannibalism cut marks and fractures
10:30
on bones but provide little additional
10:33
context
10:34
at Kom Grenal there's disagreement about
10:37
whether the cut marks came fromary
10:40
practices or cannibalism though many
10:42
argue that due to similarities with
10:45
animal remains cannibalism is more
10:47
likely neanderthal cannibalism appears
10:51
to have been practiced for various
10:52
reasons most likely for nutrition but
10:56
possibly also for cultural or
10:58
ritualistic purposes however without
11:01
more evidence especially symbolic
11:04
artifacts or burial structures it is
11:06
difficult to determine their exact
11:08
motivations
11:10
from the upper Paleolithic to the Bronze
11:13
Age there is evidence that anatomically
11:15
modern humans in Europe practiced
11:17
cannibalism although the reasons and
11:20
nature of these acts are not always
11:22
clear human remains from this period
11:25
especially before the Magdalenian era
11:28
are often very fragmented and unusual in
11:31
France it's estimated that 40% of
11:34
Magdaleneian human remains show signs of
11:37
being cut or butchered while only 5%
11:40
were found in formal burials these signs
11:44
include slicing and scraping marks that
11:46
suggest the bodies were defleed possibly
11:49
as part of funeral rituals at Santa in
11:53
Spain human bite marks on ribs suggest
11:56
that at least some body parts were eaten
11:59
though it's not clear if this was done
12:01
in a ritual or simply for food another
12:04
site Llakar Cave in France has nine
12:08
skulls with cut marks and intentional
12:10
breaks suggesting they were made into
12:12
skull cups this points toward ritual def
12:16
fleshing though the full meaning is
12:18
still debated especially since new
12:21
animal bones found at the site may
12:23
change previous interpretations
12:26
guff's cave in Britain is another key
12:28
example dated to around 14,700
12:33
years ago it contains human remains with
12:36
clear signs of both eating and ritual
12:38
treatment
12:40
skulls were carefully shaped into cups
12:42
and tooth marks were found on bones
12:45
showing they were chewed
12:48
researchers believe this is a strong
12:50
case of ritual cannibalism meaning the
12:53
bodies were both eaten and treated in a
12:56
meaningful or symbolic way the
12:59
messylithic site of Grata in France also
13:03
shows clear evidence of cannibalism the
13:06
bones of at least eight people were
13:08
found with many cut marks and broken
13:11
bones similar to how animal bones were
13:14
processed for food over 40% of the human
13:18
bones showed signs of cutting breaking
13:21
and even scalping
13:23
the research suggests this was
13:25
cannibalism but does not commit to
13:28
whether it was for survival ritual or
13:30
possibly to harm outsiders
13:34
the Brillinhoola site in Germany
13:36
includes human bones with a high number
13:38
of cut marks particularly on the
13:41
footbones although one interpretation
13:44
proposed these were from secondary
13:46
burials later studies found human bite
13:49
marks and signs of marrow extraction
13:52
these findings support the idea that the
13:55
individuals were consumed likely through
13:58
cannibalistic practices
14:00
in the Neolithic period the Font Breua
14:03
site in France revealed remains from 13
14:06
people processed like animals notably
14:09
skulls hands and feet were missing from
14:13
some bone piles possibly indicating war
14:16
trophies or ritual use similarly at
14:19
Herxheim in Germany the remains of over
14:22
1,000 people showed signs of cutting
14:25
bone breaking cooking and even human
14:29
tooth marks some skulls were made into
14:31
cups while some scholars suggested
14:34
complex funeral rituals others concluded
14:37
it was exocannibalism during wartime
14:40
supported by evidence like strontium
14:42
isotopes showing distant origins of some
14:45
individuals
14:47
additional neolithic examples from Spain
14:50
such as the quva de malal muo and quva
14:53
de kariguella show clear parallels with
14:56
earlier sites human remains were found
14:59
mixed with animals bearing cut marks and
15:02
deliberate bone breakage again pointing
15:05
to cannibalism
15:07
skull cups further support this
15:09
interpretation
15:11
during the Bronze Age Qua delmiridor in
15:14
Spain provides evidence of what was
15:16
originally interpreted as brain
15:18
extraction for food but this may have
15:21
also had a ritual aspect many bones show
15:25
signs of boiling cut marks and human
15:28
bites strongly suggesting that
15:30
cannibalism occurred other proposed
15:33
Bronze Age cases from Central Europe
15:36
lack detailed analysis making firm
15:38
conclusions difficult
15:41
by the Iron Age cannibalism appears much
15:44
less common a few UK sites show human
15:47
bones with cut marks and green bone
15:50
breakage but no thorough studies have
15:52
been done
15:53
in later history cannibalism became a
15:56
social taboo associated with barbarism
16:00
most modern European cases of
16:02
cannibalism relate to extreme necessity
16:04
or mental illness rather than cultural
16:07
practice
16:09
defining cannibalism in prehistoric
16:11
Europe is complex especially when trying
16:14
to identify it in archaeological
16:16
contexts or understand its causes
16:19
some scholars attempt to distinguish
16:21
between anthropogy and cannibalism
16:25
anthropophagy refers to occasional acts
16:28
of eating human flesh possibly by
16:30
individuals while cannibalism is seen as
16:34
a cultural or social practice that may
16:36
involve group participation
16:39
however many researchers argue that
16:42
these terms are essentially synonymous
16:44
in archaeology and should be treated as
16:46
such the simplest definition which most
16:50
agree on is the consumption of human
16:52
tissues like flesh marrow blood etc by
16:58
other humans though pinpointing the
17:00
motivations behind this behavior is far
17:03
more difficult
17:05
historically scholars have categorized
17:08
cannibalism into several types
17:10
gastronomic cannibalism for food value
17:14
ritual cannibalism for spiritual
17:16
purposes and medicinal cannibalism using
17:20
human tissue to treat illness
17:23
survival cannibalism involves eating
17:26
humans in extreme hunger and aggressive
17:28
cannibalism is revenged driven or
17:31
antisocial acts
17:33
dietary cannibalism which she considered
17:36
the easiest to identify archaeologically
17:39
as it's focused purely on nutrition
17:42
cannibalism is not a single uniform
17:45
practice but a complex behavior
17:47
influenced by social religious political
17:51
and economic factors
17:54
it can be grouped into two main types
17:56
exceptional cannibalism driven by
17:59
immediate needs like survival and
18:02
socially instituted cannibalism which is
18:04
embedded in cultural practices such as
18:07
rituals warfare or beliefs about death
18:11
there are many subtypes of cannibalism
18:14
including ritual medicinal self
18:16
cannibalism legal symbolic and even
18:21
gourmet cannibalism
18:23
these categories often based on
18:26
ethnographic or historical data reflect
18:28
a wide range of motivations from
18:31
honoring the dead to humiliating enemies
18:35
however such classifications are
18:37
difficult to apply to prehistoric cases
18:40
where motives can't be directly observed
18:43
ethnographic studies show that
18:45
cannibalism often relates to a group's
18:48
worldview spirituality and social
18:51
customs
18:52
for example in some societies eating
18:56
human flesh may have been part of
18:57
managing life and death or expressing
19:00
dominance over enemies
19:03
these acts weren't always considered
19:05
barbaric but were integrated into social
19:08
and religious life in archaeology it's
19:11
challenging to determine why cannibalism
19:14
occurred because many of these complex
19:16
cultural meanings leave no physical
19:18
trace analogies from ethnographic
19:21
studies can help but they must be used
19:24
carefully as prehistoric societies might
19:27
not have had the same symbolic systems
19:31
terms like nutritional or gastronomic
19:35
cannibalism are often used to describe
19:38
cases where the primary goal seems to be
19:40
food
19:42
however these labels can be misleading
19:45
eating human flesh always involves some
19:48
nutritional value but that doesn't rule
19:51
out symbolic or ritual aspects even
19:54
so-called nutritional cannibalism might
19:57
follow social rules or customs blurring
20:00
the line between practical and ritual
20:02
behavior
20:04
examples from prehistoric Europe such as
20:07
the Grandolina site and Herxheim suggest
20:10
cannibalism linked to intergroup
20:12
violence while Grandolina might show
20:15
survival-based or violent cannibalism
20:18
Herxheim displays signs of more
20:20
structured possibly ritualized practices
20:24
that reflect cultural and symbolic
20:26
meanings
20:27
the identification of cannibalism in
20:30
prehistoric European contexts relies
20:32
heavily on taffanomic analysis the study
20:36
of processes affecting organisms after
20:38
death particularly bone modifications
20:42
archaeologists distinguish cannibalism
20:45
from other cultural practices likeerary
20:48
rituals or mutilation by identifying
20:51
specific anthropogenic changes such as
20:54
cut marks bone breakage for marrow
20:57
extraction human tooth impressions
21:00
cooking evidence and spatial
21:02
associations with animal remains
21:04
processed in similar ways while these
21:07
signs can sometimes overlap with those
21:10
resulting from ritualistic or mortuary
21:12
practices the consistency and pattern of
21:15
modifications provide strong indicators
21:18
of cannibalistic behavior
21:20
there has been considerable debate
21:22
within the academic community about
21:24
interpreting such evidence some argue
21:27
that mortuary practices can leave
21:30
similar marks to those attributed to
21:31
cannibalism citing ethnographic
21:34
parallels like defleshing rituals others
21:38
counter that these claims ignore
21:40
critical contextual distinctions and
21:42
fail to account for parallels in the
21:44
treatment of human and animal remains
21:48
when human bones are processed
21:50
identically to food animals defleshed
21:53
broken from marrow extraction and even
21:55
cooked the evidence points more
21:58
convincingly to nutritional cannibalism
22:01
still the interpretation remains complex
22:05
sites like Brillinhula and Font Brigua
22:09
illustrate this tension some scholars
22:11
have dismissed cannibalism at
22:13
Brillinhula based on the presence of cut
22:15
marks while others argue that the
22:18
intensity and nature of the
22:19
modifications indicate consumption
22:23
font brigua is frequently cited as a
22:25
robust case for prehistoric cannibalism
22:28
due to its extensive evidence of
22:30
butchering however even this
22:33
interpretation has been questioned
22:35
highlighting the subjectivity and
22:37
evolving nature of taffanomic
22:39
interpretations to refine identification
22:43
researchers have developed
22:44
methodological frameworks focusing on
22:46
the type frequency and anatomical
22:50
location of bone modifications
22:53
studies compare human remains to those
22:55
of animals processed at the same site
22:58
human tooth marks although shallow and
23:01
sometimes hard to differentiate from
23:03
those of other carnivores are considered
23:06
strong evidence when found alongside cut
23:08
marks and permortem bone fractures
23:11
their presence in sites such as Guff's
23:14
Cave and Elmir strengthens arguments for
23:17
cannibalism
23:19
ultimately a holistic approach is
23:21
necessary one that examines the entire
23:24
archaeological context compares human
23:27
and fondal assemblages and carefully
23:30
considers the spatial and taffanomic
23:32
evidence while some assemblages still
23:35
yield ambiguous interpretations due to
23:38
small sample sizes or poor preservation
23:41
many European sites spanning from the
23:43
lower Paleolithic to the Bronze Age
23:46
share enough taffenomic characteristics
23:48
to support the occurrence of cannibalism
23:51
these include systematic butchering
23:54
evidence of marrow extraction burning
23:58
and sometimes human tooth impressions
24:01
all of which collectively differentiate
24:03
cannibalism from other cultural
24:05
treatments of the dead evidence for
24:08
prehistoric cannibalism in Europe has
24:10
grown yet it remains relatively scarce
24:13
limiting broad generalizations
24:16
across 18 archaeological assemblages
24:19
ranging from the early pleaene to the
24:21
bronze age signs of human cannibalism
24:24
have been documented
24:27
the increasing number of such findings
24:29
suggests cannibalism was practiced
24:31
intermittently over long periods
24:34
especially intensifying after the upper
24:36
paleolithic
24:38
most cannibalized assemblages share
24:41
distinctive taffanomic features such as
24:43
a high frequency of anthropogenic marks
24:46
often over 20% which is higher than
24:50
those found in North American contexts
24:53
contrary to the view that such cut marks
24:55
indicate mortuary practices rather than
24:58
cannibalism these marks more accurately
25:01
reflect full butchering sequences not
25:03
typically seen inerary contexts the
25:07
processing includes defleshing
25:09
dismemberment evisceration bone breakage
25:13
burning or boiling and in many cases the
25:17
presence of human tooth marks
25:20
these practices go beyond what is seen
25:22
in ritual or secondary burial and point
25:25
to actual consumption
25:27
the pattern of butchering breaking and
25:30
thermal processing mirrors sequences
25:32
recorded in other global contexts like
25:35
the American Southwest common features
25:38
include long bone and skull breakage for
25:41
marrow and brain extraction
25:43
disarticulated skeletons and the
25:45
occasional anatomical association of
25:47
segments like hands or feet
25:51
human tooth marks bone crushing and
25:53
percussion marks are widely observed
25:56
although these require more experimental
25:59
validation
26:00
tool use from human bones though rare
26:03
has been documented in specific periods
26:05
such as the Magdalenian
26:07
for the more debated assemblages the
26:10
presence of human tooth marks and
26:12
consistent processing methods
26:14
strengthens the argument for cannibalism
26:17
these assemblages should be revisited
26:19
with modern techniques including DNA
26:22
isotopic and chronological analyses to
26:26
develop new interpretations and insights
26:30
a holistic analytical framework
26:32
including demographic data tool
26:35
associations and strategraphy can help
26:38
clarify whether cannibalism was a rare
26:40
event or a routine institutionalized
26:43
behavior
26:45
finally the motivation behind
26:47
cannibalism remains elusive traditional
26:50
labels like nutritional or ritual may
26:54
oversimplify a complex behavior that
26:57
could have occurred in contexts of
26:59
violence survival or even affection
27:02
ethnographic parallels help interpret
27:05
these findings but must be applied with
27:07
caution ultimately only through
27:10
integrated multidisciplinary approaches
27:13
can we hope to understand the frequency
27:16
causes and cultural meanings of
27:18
cannibalism in prehistoric Europe
27:38
[Music]