
Experiment Proves Neolithic Weapon Was Effective - curtis
https://gizmodo.com/morbid-experiment-proves-this-neolithic-weapon-was-an-e-1821288449
======
aruggirello
Could some archaeologist shed some light on this? I'm not arguing against the
weapon theory, but... It was found near the Thames, it was made of wood, it
didn't show any traces of blood or anything that would suggest a bone impact,
it has the distinct shape of a paddle, it even has a pommel to prevent you
from losing it when it's wet, but in the entire article I couldn't find a
single reason _why_ it couldn't be just a paddle - not that you couldn't use
it as a weapon for the occasional weekend massacre...

~~~
Someone
_”When it was in good shape, the Thames Beater measured about two feet in
length”_

For me, that alone makes it unlikely it is a paddle. Google also gives me
[https://bendingbranches.com/sizing/canoe-
paddle](https://bendingbranches.com/sizing/canoe-paddle). The smallest paddle
It suggests is a _three_ feet paddle, and that is if your nose is 20 inches
above your seat.

This also looks too heavy for a paddle. Looking at the pommel, I doubt that’s
because they couldn’t do better at the time.

So, I doubt it is a paddle. A child’s cricket bat is more likely, given where
it was found :-)

~~~
sandworm101
Smaller people. Smaller boats. And how do we know we are looking at a finished
product? This could be by someone still trying to work out what size/shape he
wants. Or maybe this is the backup paddle kept for when you really really need
one and don't care so much about its size.

~~~
Someone
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neolithic_Revolution#Social_ch...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neolithic_Revolution#Social_change):
_”Average height went down from 5 '10" (178 cm) for men and 5'6" (168 cm) for
women to 5'5" (165 cm) and 5'1" (155 cm), respectively, and it took until the
twentieth century for average human height to come back to the pre-Neolithic
Revolution levels.”_

Smaller people, but nowhere near what’s needed to make such a short paddle
usable.

And yes, it could be a badly made paddle, but I think that’s very unlikely.
Just think about how you use a paddle; you hold it with one hand at the pommel
and the other about halfway down the shaft. In this case, halfway down is
about a foot between your hands. If you want that to be body-sized, you need a
body that’s quite a bit less than a foot wide between the shoulders.

Also, to have this ‘blade’ enter the water, the hand on the pommel can’t be
much more than a foot above the water shoulder height. That hand starts each
stroke at about shoulder height.

I also guess (but can’t tell from the photos) experts can see the product was
finished from its smoothness. If you cut wood, you start by cutting it into a
rough shape, and only then care about finer details. You don’t make a smooth
looking but oversized object and remove millimeters at a time.

------
sandworm101
Weapon yes. But for attacking humans? I am not convinced.

(1) It is small. (2) It was found in a _river_. (3) It was used by persons in
a very different time than ours, doing very different jobs.

It looks to me like something for a fisherman or hunter. It's a little big to
be a fish club. It is too small for use as a weapon. But it is perfect for
someone trapping furry mammals and bashing in their heads, which is what you
do when you want to preserve the pelt. It looks like a seal club. My money
would be on otter.

------
zeveb
I'm sure that this was fun for all involved, but it's an experiment in much
the same sense that 'is sunlight warmer than shade?' or 'are men attracted to
pretty women?' is an experiment. After all, the club is roughly the same
proportions as a belaying pin
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belaying_pin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belaying_pin))
or policeman's truncheon
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baton_(law_enforcement)#/media...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baton_\(law_enforcement\)#/media/File:Edinburgh_police_truncheons_\(19thC\).JPG)).
'Can a stout baton smash a skull?' is … a bit of an answered question.

Like I said, fun for all involved, but hardly ground-breaking.

~~~
GuB-42
I think the interesting part is that it produces the same kind of wound as
what was discovered on skulls.

It reinforces the hypothesis that these things were effectively used as
weapon.

------
Toast_25
"Science says getting hit with a stick hurts, stay tuned folks!"

------
giardini
Could it be a kitchen implement, perhaps for tenderising meat or pounding
bread, for example? Perhaps it served dual purpose(the 35th-century BC tire
tool):

Droog: "Honey, we're going to beat up some hominids camping down by the river,
I'll see you in a few days."

Droog's wife: "I don't want you hurt, Dear. Take my bread hammer with you.
Give 'em a good knock on the head with that. That'll teach 'em!"

Or possibly a work-in-progress, e.g., a half-finished spoon or scoop that has
this shape merely b/c it wasn't completed? e.g.,

[https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0676/2007/files/Mary_Spurt...](https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0676/2007/files/Mary_Spurtle_Baking_Spatula_Maple_2_grande.jpg?767766393881931079)

from

[https://www.poldersoldworldmarket.com/blogs/news/18970399-ch...](https://www.poldersoldworldmarket.com/blogs/news/18970399-choosing-
a-wood-type-for-your-kitchen-utensils-thoughts-on-maple)

------
YeGoblynQueenne
>> Instead of using an animal carcass or a human cadaver, the researchers
opted for a synthetic polyurethane “skin-skull-brain” model coated in rubber
skin. A hole was left at the bottom, through which the researchers injected a
brain-like gelatin mass. Two skin-skull-brain models of different thicknesses
were used to account for human variance. Dyer and Fibiger believed this model
more accurately represented the shape and strength of the human skull compared
to an animal carcass, and that it was more ethical than battering away at a
human donor’s corpse.

For me that ethical question is on the same level of interesting as the actual
subject of the paper. It's a matter for debate, of course, but I can tell that
I would not want to conduct an experiment that involved me beating someone's
dead body with a big stick. I can see why the authors would consider the
ethical implications thereof and I'm glad to hear that people do that as part
of their research.

~~~
jschwartzi
Personally I would be interested in the applicability of their model for
testing helmets. If you could use these to economically test bicycle helmets,
for example, then you could build a better helmet.

I'd also be curious how this compares to state of the art in helmet testing.

------
posterboy
slightly off topic: Can anyone tell what the author's avatar picture
represents? It looks like a cerebral connectome - his own? [https://i.kinja-
img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--l_92-ur...](https://i.kinja-
img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--
l_92-urN--/c_fill,fl_progressive,g_center,h_200,q_80,w_200/19g01ous5zg09jpg.jpg)

~~~
sandworm101
If you can read french:

[http://www.psychomedia.qc.ca/neuropsychologie/2010-09-22/-40...](http://www.psychomedia.qc.ca/neuropsychologie/2010-09-22/-40-millions-
pour-le-projet-connectome-de-cartographie-des-reseaux-neuronaux-du-cerveau-au-
repos)

(Found via tineye.com, a very useful website for tracking down the potential
source of images)

