344
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] tetris11@feddit.uk 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Does that mean that many men died, and only few procreated?

Actively bludgeoned by another tribe and then thrown in a pit. These are young men, I should add

why wouldn’t there be women skeletons?

They are not killed, but captured and carried away as spoils of war to the conquering tribe

[-] Honytawk@feddit.nl 6 points 1 day ago

They are not killed, but captured and carried away as spoils of war to the conquering tribe

So why aren't there women skeletons at those conquering tribes? They had to die somewhere.

[-] arrow74@lemmy.zip 12 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I believe you misread, they said a high number of males with evidence of trauma. Basically a very large percentage of male skeletons showed damage. The original comment didn't say there were no female skeletons.

Also depending on the dig site mass graves of men killed in combat are common. Those would obviously lack women.

[-] tetris11@feddit.uk 7 points 1 day ago

So why aren’t there women skeletons at those conquering tribes? They had to die somewhere.

There probably are, but we don't stumble across them as easily as we do the mass grave dig sites I think

this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2025
344 points (100.0% liked)

Greentext

6907 readers
529 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS