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
2:21
there are three main types of
2:24
exocanibalism involves eating
2:27
individuals from outside one's group
2:31
endocanibalism refers to eating members
2:34
of one's own community often as part
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
2:56
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
3:21
despite this there is debate among
3:23
researchers about whether these acts
3:26
were primarily ritualistic or driven by
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
4:45
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
5:06
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
5:45
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
6:24
however researchers agree it involved
6:27
repeated events without symbolic burial
6:30
likely tied to conflicts over land and
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
6:54
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
7:05
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
7:37
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
7:53
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
8:26
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
9:28
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
10:34
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
11:10
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
12:40
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
13:23
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
14:47
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
15:07
skull cups further support this
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
15:53
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
16:09
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
17:05
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
17:33
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
18:23
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
18:52
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
19:42
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
20:04
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
20:27
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
23:19
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
24:38
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
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
26:45
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