Territorial Behavior of Apex Predators

Longrich emphasizes that apex predators, including Neanderthals and modern humans, are inherently territorial. He notes that as top hunters, they would have been inclined to defend their hunting grounds, leading to conflict when populations grew. This territoriality, he argues, is deeply ingrained in our evolutionary history, drawing parallels with male chimpanzees, who often form coalitions to eliminate rival males from competing groups.

The notion of aggressive territorial behavior is not new; Richard Wrangham and Dale Peterson's 1996 book, "Demonic Males," outlines similar concepts. Wrangham's earlier studies also detailed the aggressive interactions among male chimpanzees. Jane Goodall's research in the 1970s highlighted a significant shift in chimpanzee behavior when a group she observed engaged in a four-year conflict that decimated a rival group.

While humans and chimpanzees both display the capacity for organized violence, the risks of equating ancestral behaviors with modern tendencies remain. Evolution can lead to similar traits developing independently, complicating the interpretation of shared behaviors among species.

Warfare: An Intrinsic Human Trait?

Longrich argues that the propensity for warfare is a fundamental aspect of human nature, evidenced by our extensive history of conflict documented in literature, archaeology, and historical records. He suggests that since Neanderthals exhibited many cultural traits similar to modern humans—such as using fire and creating art—they likely shared this warlike behavior as well.

However, it's crucial to consider that while Neanderthals may have shared several traits with us, not all closely related species exhibit similar aggressive behaviors. For instance, bonobos, though genetically closer to humans than chimpanzees, do not engage in the same types of organized aggression.

Archaeological Evidence of Conflict

Longrich points to archaeological findings that suggest Neanderthal life was harsh, filled with violence and danger. He refers to their prowess in hunting large game and the use of weapons for protection. He asserts that it is hard to believe they would have hesitated to wield these weapons if their families or territories were threatened.

He references a study by Judith Beier published in 2018 that reveals comparable rates of cranial trauma among Neanderthals and early modern humans, indicating a history of violent encounters. However, it is crucial to note that the causes of these injuries remain speculative.

Longrich discusses the concept of parry fractures—injuries resulting from defensive actions during confrontations—highlighting another study by Thomas Berger and Erik Trinkhaus that examined trauma frequencies in Neanderthal remains. Their findings suggest that the patterns of injury in Neanderthals bore a resemblance to those seen in modern rodeo athletes, implying frequent interactions with large, aggressive animals.

The Neanderthal Defense

Longrich posits that Neanderthals successfully maintained their territories for tens of thousands of years, stalling modern humans' expansion from Africa. He questions why it took so long for humans to migrate out of Africa, suggesting that the presence of thriving Neanderthal populations in Europe and Asia was a significant factor.

He speculates that human population growth eventually necessitated expansion into new territories, and that aggression may have been an effective evolutionary strategy. However, one must consider whether modern humans were truly forced to invade environments where they were ill-suited, or if they simply needed time to adapt to new conditions.

Longrich portrays a scenario where early modern humans struggled against the physical prowess of Neanderthals, likening it to a junior high volleyball team competing against a professional football team. He suggests that humans would have taken a long time to match the Neanderthals' strength.

The Triumph of Modern Humans

While Longrich acknowledges the uncertainty surrounding how modern humans ultimately triumphed over Neanderthals, he proposes that advancements in weaponry, such as bows or spear-throwers, along with improved hunting strategies, may have played a role. He notes that the 150,000 years it took for humans to settle Neanderthal territories suggests a lengthy series of conflicts.

In contemporary culture, warfare and combat are often glorified, whether through sports or literature. Yet, the assertion that Neanderthals were as warlike as humans remains unproven. The prevailing theory may simply be that modern humans took time to adapt to the broader territories occupied by Neanderthals, and once they did, they became the more adaptable species.

Ultimately, the complexity of behavior cannot be reduced to simple genetic inheritance. In species as intricate as humans and Neanderthals, the interplay of genetics, environment, and learning shapes behaviors, making it overly simplistic to attribute a shared warlike instinct to both groups.

Thank you for reading, please check out this related article:

Dr. Anthony Fauci — The Truth Whisperer

How to be a purveyor of facts and truth in the ultimate den of iniquity

The Apeiron Blog — Big Questions, Made Simple.

We know that Philosophy can seem complicated at times. To make things simple, we compile together the best articles, news, reading lists — and other free resources to guide you on your journey. To continue with us, follow us on Medium and sign up to our free mailing list.