Mexican mammoth trap provides first evidence of prehistoric hunting pits(theguardian.com)
theguardian.com
Mexican mammoth trap provides first evidence of prehistoric hunting pits
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/nov/07/mammoth-trap-mexico-prehistoric-hunting-pits
63 comments
>I find humans amazing. An adult mammoth is something even the more largest predators would not attempt to hunt. And yet, here is a band of puny 2 legged mammals armed with sticks with a flint at the end, hunting and killing masses of these mighty beasts.
Humans are the only animal with the ability to communicate complex abstract future plans (e.g. "today we all shore up the pit, tomorrow you guys wait over there and we'll drive them into this pit"). And it's not like animals can outrun us either. We're quite slow in a sprint but out cooling system is optimized for a very high duty cycle so we can just keep on chasing. Imagine being hunted by Terminator or Agent Smith. That's what the water buffalo or mammoth feels like
Humans are the only animal with the ability to communicate complex abstract future plans (e.g. "today we all shore up the pit, tomorrow you guys wait over there and we'll drive them into this pit"). And it's not like animals can outrun us either. We're quite slow in a sprint but out cooling system is optimized for a very high duty cycle so we can just keep on chasing. Imagine being hunted by Terminator or Agent Smith. That's what the water buffalo or mammoth feels like
For completeness some languages do not have the concept of future or past tenses.
So even what you are taking for granted as inate in human language planning was also a social 'technology' that humans enhanced/improved on as a community.
So even what you are taking for granted as inate in human language planning was also a social 'technology' that humans enhanced/improved on as a community.
[deleted]
Whales and orcas also seem to be able to coordinate in this way.
How much of an advantage is our cooling system in colder climates?
I first read about persistence hunting in an article about a family in Siberia [0], so I'd assume that it's still feasible (if difficult).
0: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/for-40-years-this-rus...
0: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/for-40-years-this-rus...
Don't chimpanzees etc. also coordinate hunting/raiding parties?
I also recall a segment from BBC's Blue Planet, where an octopus and another fish whose name I cannot recall (grouper?), two entirely different species, communicate with each other via the color of their skin to surround and trap prey.
> Our most amazing ancestors were not kings and emperors, but rather these pre-historic hunters and gatherers who carved out a niche as alpha predators using brains, language, and primitive tech.
Of course. What profoundly intrigues me though, is trying to imagine what it must have been like to be -conscious- even before that primal epoch:
To be just on the cusp of awareness and intelligence.
To have thoughts and desires and fears and hopes and loves and hates and plans and dreams, but not knowing what to do with them, or being able to communicate them.
We spent tens of thousands of years being helpless against the environment, against hunger, disease, predators, against each other's instincts and urges.
Imagine being left behind during a hunt, broken and bleeding out.. All the individual suffering that has taken place on this planet, all the sentient thoughts that died alone and confused.
Then imagine how many other worlds out there must be going through the same development right at this very moment.
I also recall a segment from BBC's Blue Planet, where an octopus and another fish whose name I cannot recall (grouper?), two entirely different species, communicate with each other via the color of their skin to surround and trap prey.
> Our most amazing ancestors were not kings and emperors, but rather these pre-historic hunters and gatherers who carved out a niche as alpha predators using brains, language, and primitive tech.
Of course. What profoundly intrigues me though, is trying to imagine what it must have been like to be -conscious- even before that primal epoch:
To be just on the cusp of awareness and intelligence.
To have thoughts and desires and fears and hopes and loves and hates and plans and dreams, but not knowing what to do with them, or being able to communicate them.
We spent tens of thousands of years being helpless against the environment, against hunger, disease, predators, against each other's instincts and urges.
Imagine being left behind during a hunt, broken and bleeding out.. All the individual suffering that has taken place on this planet, all the sentient thoughts that died alone and confused.
Then imagine how many other worlds out there must be going through the same development right at this very moment.
Orca whales and dolphins also will hunt larger prey.
One on my favorite examples is that of the orcas in Eden Australia. The orcas would shepard baleen whales to whaling vessels in the bay, then help the whalers kill them in exchange for the tongue and lips of the prey.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killer_whales_of_Eden,_New_Sou...
One on my favorite examples is that of the orcas in Eden Australia. The orcas would shepard baleen whales to whaling vessels in the bay, then help the whalers kill them in exchange for the tongue and lips of the prey.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killer_whales_of_Eden,_New_Sou...
> Then imagine how many other worlds out there must be going through the same development right at this very moment.
I guess we could argue this point against large swaths of the Earths animal kingdoms as well. Do we know where to draw such a line?
I guess we could argue this point against large swaths of the Earths animal kingdoms as well. Do we know where to draw such a line?
> I guess we could argue this point against large swaths of the Earths animal kingdoms as well.
Yes that's what I meant to say with "being on the cusp of awareness and intelligence." Many of them are going through what we must have gone through.
Yes that's what I meant to say with "being on the cusp of awareness and intelligence." Many of them are going through what we must have gone through.
We don't know for sure that humans on our own planet are unique in having the qualities you described. Many animal species show advanced social structures and intelligence.
We are resourceful, that's for sure.
We are resourceful, that's for sure.
Certainly. Even as a causal observer it's easy to notice these things in other animals. Intelligence is not a boolean flag.
Humans are a comparatively new species disrupting the entire planet. The other animals simply weren't prepared for us. A good twitter thread about this topic: https://twitter.com/DRMegafauna/status/1084896526151942145
A lot of ancient myths about the origin of humanity involve some figure stealing fire from the gods and giving it to humans (Prometheus being perhaps the best known example). Interesting how this aligns with this story: fire being the technology that distinguishes humans from other animals.
> An adult mammoth is something even the more largest predators would not attempt to hunt.
Not to dispute your larger point, but lions hunt African elephants, which are a similar size to mammoths (many mammoths were actually smaller).
Not to dispute your larger point, but lions hunt African elephants, which are a similar size to mammoths (many mammoths were actually smaller).
And maybe the best "primitive tech" ever is fire!
They had larger brains than us.
The mammoth traps in question are from about 15,000 years ago. Neanderthals went extinct something like 40,000 years ago.
Neanderthals were more ancient to the people that made these traps than the traps are to us. (Also, I'm unaware of any evidence of Neanderthals in the Americas.)
Neanderthals were more ancient to the people that made these traps than the traps are to us. (Also, I'm unaware of any evidence of Neanderthals in the Americas.)
I think the generally this sort of comparison is based on the brain:body size ratio.
I could be mistaken, but IIRC, Neanderthals had larger brains than homo sapiens sapiens even when taking body mass in to account.
Neanderthals had larger brain cases which suggests they had larger brains, though it's not understood why their brains would be larger -- what evolutionary advantage did it confer? Why wouldn't Homo Sapiens have a similar volume of brain case?
One speculative theory is that Neanderthals, with apparently better night vision and sense of smell (based on size of ocular orbits & nasal passages), had larger optic & olfactory centers in their brains. This seems a tenuous argument, however.
If brain size is directly proportional to number of neurons and neural links, then Neanderthal brains (and the larger brains of certain other mammals) would be more complex than ours, have more capacity, more memory, or other capabilities.
It's not clear why a mammoth or other elephant-like creature would have such large brain (the African elephant's brain is about 3 times as large as a human's). Perhaps there's some redundancy in the tissue, or legacy regions that are not used today.
Elephants are remarkably intelligent, and one can assume similarly the mammoths. Elephants have a sophisticated culture and have been observed to do a dance to welcome another elephant returned from a trip. They do have excellent memory; the saying "elephants never forget" seems to be true. They remember watering holes all over the savannah including ones that no longer exist on the surface, and they know to dig down and find the subterranean water in the exact spot that they hadn't been to for years. Social interaction is also important for brain development. So who knows? Maybe there's more to pachyderm intelligence than we are currently aware.
One speculative theory is that Neanderthals, with apparently better night vision and sense of smell (based on size of ocular orbits & nasal passages), had larger optic & olfactory centers in their brains. This seems a tenuous argument, however.
If brain size is directly proportional to number of neurons and neural links, then Neanderthal brains (and the larger brains of certain other mammals) would be more complex than ours, have more capacity, more memory, or other capabilities.
It's not clear why a mammoth or other elephant-like creature would have such large brain (the African elephant's brain is about 3 times as large as a human's). Perhaps there's some redundancy in the tissue, or legacy regions that are not used today.
Elephants are remarkably intelligent, and one can assume similarly the mammoths. Elephants have a sophisticated culture and have been observed to do a dance to welcome another elephant returned from a trip. They do have excellent memory; the saying "elephants never forget" seems to be true. They remember watering holes all over the savannah including ones that no longer exist on the surface, and they know to dig down and find the subterranean water in the exact spot that they hadn't been to for years. Social interaction is also important for brain development. So who knows? Maybe there's more to pachyderm intelligence than we are currently aware.
>It's not clear why a mammoth or other elephant-like creature would have such large brain (the African elephant's brain is about 3 times as large as a human's). Perhaps there's some redundancy in the tissue, or legacy regions that are not used today.
This, at least, I can answer, using numbers from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4053853/ . The elephant brain is massive, but 97%+ of those neurons are in the cerebellum, and is likely related to their somewhat unique use of a trunk. And while their cerebral cortex is twice as massive as a humans', it only contains one-third the neurons.
This, at least, I can answer, using numbers from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4053853/ . The elephant brain is massive, but 97%+ of those neurons are in the cerebellum, and is likely related to their somewhat unique use of a trunk. And while their cerebral cortex is twice as massive as a humans', it only contains one-third the neurons.
Related interesting info:
Eating bone marrow played a key role in the evolution of the human hand
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/07/180711105725.h...
Prehistoric humans ate bone marrow like canned soup 400,000 years ago
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/10/191009142902.h...
Eating bone marrow played a key role in the evolution of the human hand
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/07/180711105725.h...
Prehistoric humans ate bone marrow like canned soup 400,000 years ago
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/10/191009142902.h...
> Eating bone marrow played a key role
This conclusion is a big leap, even as per the article you shared. "The strength required to access the high calorie content of bone marrow may have played a key role in the evolution of the human hand and explain why primates hands are not like ours, research has found."
It's just a possibility. They can't even make a strong claim about it.
This conclusion is a big leap, even as per the article you shared. "The strength required to access the high calorie content of bone marrow may have played a key role in the evolution of the human hand and explain why primates hands are not like ours, research has found."
It's just a possibility. They can't even make a strong claim about it.
> Both species later became extinct in the Americas.
It might sound odd to suggest that the extinction was caused by people. The conventional view is that there weren't many of them in North America. So how could anything have been hunted to extinction back then?
As documented in 1491 by Mann, this view of a sparsely-populated North America prior to Columbus may not be correct. As many as 10x more people might have lived there, wiped out by one European-borne plague after another. Before they went, they had developed sophisticated technologies to change the landscape and surrounding ecosystems to suit them.
Given all of this, it's much easier to imagine that the mammoths were indeed hunted to extinction by the inhabitants of North America.
It might sound odd to suggest that the extinction was caused by people. The conventional view is that there weren't many of them in North America. So how could anything have been hunted to extinction back then?
As documented in 1491 by Mann, this view of a sparsely-populated North America prior to Columbus may not be correct. As many as 10x more people might have lived there, wiped out by one European-borne plague after another. Before they went, they had developed sophisticated technologies to change the landscape and surrounding ecosystems to suit them.
Given all of this, it's much easier to imagine that the mammoths were indeed hunted to extinction by the inhabitants of North America.
Blackfoot natives used to hunt buffalo in Alberta using a similar method, dressed up as coyotes and wolves. One of the known sites has the awesome name of Head-Smashed-In Buffalo Jump: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head-Smashed-In_Buffalo_Jump
My favourite part of the given history:
> According to legend, a young Blackfoot wanted to watch the buffalo plunge off the cliff from below, but was buried underneath the falling buffalo. He was later found dead under the pile of carcasses, where he had his head smashed in.
My favourite part of the given history:
> According to legend, a young Blackfoot wanted to watch the buffalo plunge off the cliff from below, but was buried underneath the falling buffalo. He was later found dead under the pile of carcasses, where he had his head smashed in.
Confused. What evidence was found, to indicate these mammoths didn't just stumble into the pit? Was the pit man-made? Tool marks on the mammoth bones? Evidence of hunting implements?
One spear mark is pretty slim evidence, but that's all they mentioned.
One spear mark is pretty slim evidence, but that's all they mentioned.
Notably, the classic story of fur-clad prehistoric humans digging pits to trap mammoths is quite unrealistic in colder climates (where wooly mammoths lived): digging large pits in frozen soil with nothing but bones, sticks and maybe shoulder blades (as spades) is extremely hard.
I wonder what the average temperature of Mexico was during that time...
I wonder what the average temperature of Mexico was during that time...
It is hi-story.
>Parts of a jawbone and spine of a camel, and the tooth of a horse were also found at the site. Both species later became extinct in the Americas.
I didn't know that.
I didn't know that.
I just watched a PBS video about this yesterday [1]. Horses evolved in North America, walked across the land bridge to Asia, died out in North America during the ice age, were domesticated in the Eurasian Steppe, were transported back to North America by Europeans, and then became feral on the plains that they initially evolved on.
1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZoTvXvV02A
1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZoTvXvV02A
Didn’t Native Americans use horses? So they were using European horses?
Yes they were European horses, first brought by the Spanish. Once they arrived Native Americans started using horses quite quickly.
As an interesting cultural bullet. The American Cowboy tradition is heavily influenced by the Northern-Mexican Vaqueros.
What about gauchos? Argentina used to supply a lot of beef to the word such that they had been prosperous at one time.
Vaqueros, Gauchos and Llaneros(Venezuela) probably have the same origin in horse riding country side people on the Iberian Península. But I doubt the Gauchos influenced the Cowboys since they are far, far away.
Makes sense, since Mexico is where the Spanish were.
Wild European horses reached many native peoples already in the 1600s, long before they had met any actual Europeans.
kinda related, an interesting story about pronghorn evolving speed in order to outrun North American cheetahs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHP1Ac7GX_Q
Regardless of the scientific or historical significant here; imagine how amazing it would have been to be a prehistoric hunter and to kill one of these.
It's like the modern version of winning the lottery.
One of these could feed your family for the entire winter.
It's like the modern version of winning the lottery.
One of these could feed your family for the entire winter.
> One of these could feed your family for the entire winter.
Aaawwwwww, dad, mammoth meat agaaaaain?
Aaawwwwww, dad, mammoth meat agaaaaain?
"The left shoulder blades are missing."
800+ bones from 14 mammoths, but only right shoulder blades. I'm not quite sure what the chances of that being an accident are, unfortunately they didn't say how many right shoulders they found which would make the math easier.
800+ bones from 14 mammoths, but only right shoulder blades. I'm not quite sure what the chances of that being an accident are, unfortunately they didn't say how many right shoulders they found which would make the math easier.
Presumably there would have been a giant feast afterwards because the meat doesn't keep. Would have been fun to attend.
I would assume that they setup shop prior to hunting and it was a whole group/village affair to process and preserve the meat. When I grew up we would hunt and process all the deer killed together as a family. I started around 6yrs old, my duties were removing the "silver skin" with a fillet knife and doing any other menial task like manually cranking the meat grinder. Everyone had tasks, and it was a pretty great family/bonding experience with my grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins. It was the same for all the other food we would harvest and preserve. I miss those times.
Meat keeps just fine in winter as long as you don't let other animals get to it. Foraging/gathering plant based food is also much less productive in winter. If you kill it at the right time it will feed you until spring. That said I think that approach won't work well with the climate in Mexico.
Perhaps they used salt as a preservative?
I'd be interested to see ancient solutions to this.
For example, if you were to tie the mammoth down, you might be able to cut off a few legs and eat them, while bandaging up the mammoth to keep it alive for a week or so till you kill it and eat the rest.
For example, if you were to tie the mammoth down, you might be able to cut off a few legs and eat them, while bandaging up the mammoth to keep it alive for a week or so till you kill it and eat the rest.
I can't imagine trying to deal with a mammoth. Especially with only stone cutting tools.
The only thing I can think of would be luring one near a winter camp and killing it nearby, when it would be cold enough to keep or freeze.
Even if you could butcher the several tons of meat and get it dried or smoked in time, transport and storage would be huge problems.
It's enough of an ordeal to process a moose, with modern tools and machinery.
The only thing I can think of would be luring one near a winter camp and killing it nearby, when it would be cold enough to keep or freeze.
Even if you could butcher the several tons of meat and get it dried or smoked in time, transport and storage would be huge problems.
It's enough of an ordeal to process a moose, with modern tools and machinery.
> Especially with only stone cutting tools.
If they were using obsidian other than the issue of constantly having to knap new blades it should have been somewhat easy to work with.
The only reason we don't use this in modern times is that the blades break apart over the long term.
If they were using obsidian other than the issue of constantly having to knap new blades it should have been somewhat easy to work with.
The only reason we don't use this in modern times is that the blades break apart over the long term.
Nevertheless, there are ceramic blades for sale. I don't own them but I can imagine that they are more difficult to sharpen.
There’s a device called Burger on the Go which allows one to obtain six hamburgers (or twelve sliders) from a horse without killing the animal.
Do people seriously believe ancient humans hunted mammoths? I thought it's just a popular myth (some people even believe they rode dinosaurs, you know). Weren't there other animals handier to hunt?
We even hunted them to extinction, many thousands of years ago.
I believe hunting big mammals is where we had a comparative advantage over other predators, so we did well on that.
I believe hunting big mammals is where we had a comparative advantage over other predators, so we did well on that.
Perhaps this only seems inconceivable to you because you've never tasted succulent mammoth meat. Maybe they tasted great. Either way, I wager successfully taking down a mammoth was an exceedingly rewarding experience in numerous ways.
Ya, but a single mammoth could provide exponentially more meat for the same efforts of hunting multiple smaller animals.
One mammoth - 2 boars, three mammoths - 8 boars, ten mammoths - 1024 boars? That's what exponential means.
Sorry, I couldn't help myself.
Sorry, I couldn't help myself.
He said exponential returns on effort.
i.e. Hunting a rabbit = 1 unit of effort and 1 unit of meat
A boar = 4 units of effort and 16 units of meat
A mammoth = 8 units of effort and 256 units of meat
So it actually kind of makes sense here
i.e. Hunting a rabbit = 1 unit of effort and 1 unit of meat
A boar = 4 units of effort and 16 units of meat
A mammoth = 8 units of effort and 256 units of meat
So it actually kind of makes sense here
Then can we expect that if blue whale hunt requires 800 units of effort, we can feed entire observable universe with its meat?
I understand what was said, I just don't like when people use "exponential" as a synonym for "huge". There's nothing inherently exponential in meat to effort ratio.
I understand what was said, I just don't like when people use "exponential" as a synonym for "huge". There's nothing inherently exponential in meat to effort ratio.
Fair point to the poster above. The ratios may not be entirely exponential but yes, your analogy is the point I was trying to make.
[deleted]
I find humans amazing. An adult mammoth is something even the more largest predators would not attempt to hunt. And yet, here is a band of puny 2 legged mammals armed with sticks with a flint at the end, hunting and killing masses of these mighty beasts.
Our most amazing ancestors were not kings and emperors, but rather these pre-historic hunters and gatherers who carved out a niche as alpha predators using brains, language, and primitive tech.