You are on page 1of 29

A Bioarchaeological Perspective on the History of Violence

Author(s): Phillip L. Walker


Source: Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol. 30 (2001), pp. 573-596
Published by: Annual Reviews
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3069229
Accessed: 13/01/2009 16:11

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=annrevs.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Annual Reviews is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Annual Review of
Anthropology.

http://www.jstor.org
Annu. Rev. Anthropol.2001. 30:573-96
Copyright( 2001 by AnnualReviews. All rightsreserved

A BIOARCHAEOLOGICALPERSPECTIVE
ON THEHISTORYOF VIOLENCE

Phillip L. Walker
Departmentof Anthropology,Universityof California,SantaBarbara, California93106;
e-mail: walker@sscfucsb.edu

Key Words warfare,archaeology,skeletaltrauma,prehistorichomicide


* Abstract Traumatic injuriesin ancienthumanskeletalremainsarea directsource
of evidencefor testing theoriesof warfareand violence that are not subjectto the
interpretativedifficultiesposed by literarycreationssuch as historicalrecordsand
ethnographicreports.Bioarchaeologicalresearchshows that throughoutthe history
of our species, interpersonalviolence, especially among men, has been prevalent.
Cannibalismseemsto havebeenwidespread,andmasskillings,homicides,andassault
injuriesarealso well documentedin boththe Old andNew Worlds.No formof social
organization,modeof production,or environmental settingappearsto haveremained
free frominterpersonal violencefor long.

INTRODUCTION

Injuriesanddeathscausedby interpersonalviolence area majorworldwidehealth


problem. Such violence occurs in many differentsocial situations,rangingfrom
attacks by serial killers on strangersto the highly organized bombing raids of
multinationalgovernmentcoalitions.In the UnitedStates,injuriesanddeathsfrom
gang warfareandspousalabuseareviewed as healthproblemsof epidemicpropor-
tions, and violence is the leading cause of prematuredeath among young adults
(Cornwellet al 1995, Whitmanet al 1996).
What have anthropologistscontributedto our understandingof the causes and
culturalcorrelatesof violence? A survey of the anthropologicalliteratureshows
that in spite of its social and economic significance,few anthropologistshave fo-
cused on this topic (Ferguson 1997, p. 344; Krohn-Hansen1994). As Keeley
(1996) points out, the contributionof anthropologiststo our understandingof
the causes of violent conflict in earlier, nonindustrializedsocieties (an area of
great theoreticalsignificance that we are ideally positioned to explore) is minis-
cule in comparison to the vast literaturehistorians and sociologists have gen-
erated in their explorations of warfare and violence in modern industrialized
societies. This is unfortunatebecause anthropology'sbroad, cross-cultural,his-
toricalperspectivehas the potentialto yield key insights into the complex web of
0084-6570/01/1021-0573$14.00 573
574 WALKER

intricatelyrelatedbiological and socioculturalfactorsthat shape our modem vio-


lent propensities.
Among anthropologists,bioarchaeologistsareideally positionedto explorethe
causes of violence in earliersocieties. Humanremainsfrom archaeologicalsites
are a unique source of data on the environmental,economic, and social factors
thatpredisposepeople to both violent conflict andpeaceful coexistence. The con-
troversyover the effects that expansion of Westernsocieties had on patternsof
warfarein non-Westerncultures provides a good example of bioarchaeology's
relevance.Some anthropologistsbelieve that patternsof warfaredocumentedby
ethnohistoriansandethnographersin formerly"isolated"non-Westernsocieties of
the New Worldand elsewhere are a reflectionnot so much of precontactcultural
patternsas of the social disruptionand economic inequalitiescreatedby the trade
goods and diseases that inevitablyaccompanycontact with Westerners(Dunnell
1991, Ferguson 1995, Walker2001b). From this perspective,the warfarehistori-
cally documentedin moder non-Westernsocieties is little more thana reflection
of the violent competitionand insatiabledesire for the accumulationof material
wealth that taints the modernworld. Some researchersconsequentlydismiss the
ethnographicand ethnohistoricrecordsas largely irrelevantto understandingear-
lier patternsof violence and speculatethatthe warfarethatdid exist in premodern
societies was a rarelydeadly,typicallyineffective,ritualizedformof culturallyme-
diateddisputeresolutiondesigned to efficiently maintainsocial boundarieswhile
minimizingfatalities.Althoughtherearethose who stronglydisagreewith the fac-
tual basis of this neo-Rousseauianview of premodernpassivity (Keeley 1996), it
is an argumentthatresonateswith manypeople and is difficultto counterwithout
referenceto bioarchaeologicaldatafrom our distant,preindustrialpast.
Skeletal studies have the potentialto greatly expand our understandingof the
humanpotentialfor both violent and nonviolentbehavior.Historicaldocuments
andethnographicrecordsprovidea narrowview of the spectrumof humancapaci-
ties for selfless kindnessand uttercruelty.The numberof historicallydocumented
groups is minuscule in comparisonto the enormousnumberof extinct societies
for which we have no written records. When historical descriptionsof warfare
andviolence areavailable,it is difficult(some say impossible)to disentangletheir
factualbasis from the observer'sculturalbiases concerningthis highly emotion-
ally and politically charged aspect of life. Human skeletal remains, in contrast,
provide direct evidence of interpersonalviolence in both prehistoricand histori-
cally documentedsocieties that, in many respects, is immune to the interpretive
difficulties posed by literarysources (Walker 1997, 2001b). Several flint arrow
points embeddedin a person's spine are not symbolic constructs(Figure 1, see
color insert). They say something indisputableabout physical interactionsthat
occurredbetween those bones and those stones. Of course, an infinite numberof
more-or-lesslikely alternativeexplanationscould be given for such injuries(homi-
cide, burialritual,huntingaccident, scientific hoax, extraterrestrialintervention,
and so on), but the fact remains that the vertebraehave arrowpoints embedded
in them. A single piece of evidence such as this concerningpast humanbehavior
THEHISTORY
OFVIOLENCE 575

has limited evidentiaryvalue. However,when many such examplesare assembled


and viewed within their larger archaeologicaland paleoecological context, it is
possible to greatlyconstrainthe rangeof plausiblealternativebehavioralexplana-
tions. Throughsuch laboriousbioarchaeologicalresearch,we can graduallyobtain
a better,more-usefulunderstandingof the violence thatafflictsthe modem world.

DEFINITION OF VIOLENCE

Evaluatingskeletalevidence of ancientviolence is madedifficultby both the tech-


nical problems of interpretinginjuriesand some fundamentaldefinitionalissues
relatedto the distinctionbetween accidentaland intentionalinjuries.In medicine,
"injury"means the damage or wound caused by trauma,and "trauma"refers to
an accidentalor inflicted injurycaused by "harshcontact with the environment"
(Stedman 1982). Although seemingly straightforwardin their referenceto phys-
ical damage, the concepts of traumaand injuryare often extendedto encompass
psychological as well as physical injuries.
The distinctioncommonly made between accidentaland intentionaltraumatic
injuries is even more problematicbecause of the causal implication of human
malevolence.Accidentalinjuriesarethose causedby unplannedeventsthathappen
unexpectedly.The conceptof "violentinjury,"on the otherhand,often carrieswith
it, in its vernacularuse, the implicationof humanintentionality.This seemingly
clear-cutcausaldistinctioncan easily become obscured.Althoughmost people use
"violence" to imply a harmfulinteractionbetween people (i.e., "interpersonal"
violence), epidemiologists show little concern for this fundamentaldistinction
and typically include accidentaldeathsalong with homicides and suicides in their
classificatory schemes under the heading of "violent injuries"(Holinger 1987;
Lancaster1990, p. 341; Murray& Lopez 1996).
Even if we can agree that a key element of any definitionof violence is that it
refers,as in some internationalhumanrightsstatements(UnitedNations 1993), to
the behaviorof people relativeto each other in ways that are likely to cause per-
sonal harmor injury,there is room for argumentover the degree of intentionality
requiredfor an act of violence to have occurred.Forexample,it can be arguedthat
all injuries resulting from the marginalizationof one group by anotherthrough
territorialexpansion,social dominance,or economic exploitationmeet the defini-
tion of violence if the dominantgroups shows callus disregardfor the safety and
physical well-being of the people they have marginalized.
There is also the problem of culturalcontingency:The term violence means
different things in different cultures and even to members of the same culture
(Krohn-Hansen1994). Inmanysocieties, beatingchildrenandspousesto discipline
them is socially sanctionedbecause it is consideredbeneficial,not harmful,to the
recipientsof the beatings. On the other hand, it is common in the social sciences
and humanitiesto expandthe concept of violence to embrace"anyunjustor cruel
state of affairsor maltreatmentof anotherhumanbeing" (Straus1999).
576 WALKER

Because of the limited physical evidence availableto documentinterpersonal


violence in earliersocieties, therearefew opportunitiesto make subtledistinctions
such as these in bioarchaeologicalstudies.Instead,the complex arrayof behaviors
that result in accidental and intentionalinjuries is reduced to skeletal remains
or occasionally mummifiedtissues and the archaeologicalcontext within which
these humanremainsare found. Owing to these evidentiarylimitations,it is wise
to restrict use of the term violent injury in bioarchaeologyto skeletal injuries
for which there is strong circumstantialevidence of malevolentintent (e.g., the
presence of several arrowpoints embedded in the skeleton of a man in a mass
grave with otherinjuredyoung men whose skulls show cutmarksconsistentwith
scalping) and to reserve the term accidentalinjury for cases lacking such clear
evidence of malevolentintent.

INTERPRETING SKELETALINJURIES

Traumaticinjuries are some of most common pathological conditions seen in


humanskeletons.Osseous changes associatedwith traumainclude unhealedfrac-
tures,calluses from old injuries,remodelingsubsequentto joint dislocations,and
the ossifications that occur within injuredmuscles, tendons, and the connective
tissue sheath (periosteum)that encapsulatesbones. Interpretingthis evidence of
ancient traumarequires a complicated decision-makingprocess (Figure 2). Of
great significancefrom a behavioralperspectiveis distinguishingamong injuries
sufferedbefore death (antemortem),aroundthe time of death (perimortem),and
after death (postmortem)through soil movement and other site formationpro-
cesses. Antemortemand perimorteminjuriesare of considerableanthropological
interestbecause of the implicationsthey have for humanbehavior.
Antemortemfracturesare comparativelyeasy to identify because the well-
defined callus of new bone that usually forms aroundthe fracturepersists long
afterthe traumathatproducedit (Figure3, see color insert).If a fractureshows no
signs of healing, it is safe to say thatit is either a perimorteminjury,postmortem
damagecausedby site-formationprocesses, or postrecoverydamagefrom archae-
ological excavationor museumcuration.It is comparativelyeasy for a well-trained
osteologist to distinguishfracturesthatoccurredlong afterdeathfromperimortem
injuries.Fracturesin the bones of the living andrecentlydeadtend to propagateat
an acute angle to the bone's surfacein a patterncomparableto that seen in other
plastic materials(Figure 4, see color insert). After death, collagen loss makes a
bone much more brittle. As a result, breaks in old bones caused by soil move-
ment and other site-formationprocesses tend to propagateat right angles to the
bone's surface,like those seen in a brokenpiece of chalk (Villa & Mahieu 1991)
(Figure 5, see color insert). Often, postmortemfracturesin old bones also can
be identified because of a color difference between the bone's surface (usually
darker)and thatof the areaexposed by the fracture(usually lighter).This surface
WALKER C-1

--- -- ----- -

Figure 1 Vertebraewith embeddedarrowpoints from a prehistorichomicide victim from


a southernCaliforniasite (Ven-110). The trajectoriesof the arrowsindicate that someone
standingbehind her shot this woman in the back.

Figure 3 Well-healedfracturecalluses on the ribs of a moder Americanwoman who was


chronicallybeaten by her husbandand eventuallykilled by him.
C-2 WALKER

Figure 4 Perimortemfractures.(Left) Fracturein the base of the skull of a woman who


received massive cranialtraumawhen she was hit by a railroadtrain.Note oblique angle
of fracture.(Right)Perimortemfracturein the shaft of an infant's leg bone (tibia) received
during a fatal beating. The helical shape of this spiral fractureis typical of child abuse
cases.

Figure 5 Postmortemfracturein the shaft of a femurthat occurredlong afterdeath.Note


thatthe bone fracturedat right angles to the surfaceinsteadof obliquely.The parallellines
in the fracturedsurface(upperleft) are from rodentgnawing (bottominset: enlargementof
this area).The superimpositionof the tooth marksupon an old breakshows thatthe gnaw-
ing occurredlong after death.
WALKER C-3

Figure 6 Cutmarksin bones from Saunaktuk,the site of an Inuitmassacrein the Canadian


arctic.(Top)Verticallines are decapitationcutmarksin the base of the skull of a child. The
factureline at the top was made with a heavy bladed tool, which was used to chop off the
back of the child's head. This was probably done after decapitation. (Lower right)
Cutmarkson the mandible of an adult from the same site in areas of muscle attachment.
(Lower left) Scanning electron microscope image of one of the cutmarks showing a
straight-sidedgroove typical of those made by metal tools.
C-4 WALKER

Figure 7 Area of subperiostealnew bone formationon the fibula of a child who was
chronicallybeaten and eventuallykilled by her parents.Plaques of new bone such as this
form throughcalcification of blood that accumulatesin traumatizedareas underthe con-
nective tissue sheath that covers bones. The well-defined marginsand porosities indicate
that the injurywas in the process of healing at the time of death.
A perimorteminjurythat
occurredbeforedeath

Inference: Inference:
Injurywas not immediatelyfatal, Possiblyassociated with
possible implicationsforefficacy the cause of death,
of medicalpractices suggests accidentalinjury
and social supportsystems or homicidalviolence

Figure 2 Flow diagramshowing the process throughwhich skeletal remains are assessed for
578 WALKER

discoloration,which is producedthroughprolongedcontactwith the surrounding


soil, makes it possible to distinguishcutmarksmade aroundthe time of deathby
weaponsor othertools fromdamagethatoccurredlong afterdeath,such as during
archaeologicalexcavationor museumcuration(Frayer1997, White & Toth 1989).
Signs of healing, of course, are unequivocalevidence that the injuryoccurred
before death.Osseous responsesto injury,however,arenot immediate.In forensic
work on modem traumavictims, it is often possible to differentiateantemortem-
perimortemand postmortem-perimortem injuriesbecause there is little bleeding
aroundantemorteminjuriessustainedafterthe heartstopsbeating.Althoughstain-
ing from decomposedblood is sometimesseen in ancientmummifiedremains,the
absenceof such evidence in most archaeologicalsituationsmeansthatfracturesin
the bones of the living and recentlydead areessentially identicalin appearance.It
may be impossible, for instance,to decide if a perimortemcranialfractureis the
resultof a lethalblow to the head or roughtreatmentof the corpse afterdeath.Al-
thoughsuch issues sometimescannotbe resolved,the type of perimorteminjuryis
often telling. A skeletonriddledwith arrowwounds stronglysuggests malevolent
intent, even if some of the injuries were inflicted posthumouslyas a gesture of
disrespect.
Reconstructingthe behavioralimplicationsof antemortemand perimortemin-
juries is a two-stage process (Lovell 1997). First, the proximate,or most direct
cause of the injuryneeds to be considered.The mechanicalpropertiesof bone are
well known,andthese, along with clinical experienceandcommon sense, provide
a basis for reconstructingthe mechanicalcause of an injury.The diagnostic fea-
tures of fracturesproducedby blunt objects, bladed weapons, and high-velocity
projectilesarethe focus of much forensic work, andprincipalsguidingtheirinter-
pretationare well understood(Spitz 1993). After the rangeof probableproximate
causes is delimited,a second, more-difficultanalyticalphase aimedat reconstruct-
ing the culturalcontextof an injurycan begin. This searchfor the injury's"ultimate
cause"requiresdetailedconsiderationof both intrinsicbiological variables,such
as age and sex, and extrinsic factors, relating to the physical and sociocultural
context. Consideringan injuryfrom a populationperspectiveis essential. When
viewed in isolation, a person's injuriesoften are open to many differentinterpre-
tations.However,if the same injuriesare seen in many of the person'scolleagues,
a likely behavioralexplanationis often suggested.
Arcanetechnicalissues surroundingthe interpretationof injuriessuch as those
just discussed can be of greatinterpretivesignificance.For example, most people
now believe thatmisidentificationof carnivoreactivityandpostmortemdamageas
lethalperimortemblows led the famouspaleontologistRaymondDartto construct
a dismal, culturallyinfluentialimage of our early australopithecineancestorsas
vicious predators(Cartmill1993). Based on his osteological studies, Dart (1953,
p. 209) concludedthatthe earliesthumanswere
confirmedkillers:carnivorouscreaturesthatseized living quarriesby violence,
batteredthem to death, tore aparttheir broken bodies, dismemberedthem
THEHISTORY
OFVIOLENCE 579

limb from limb, slakingtheirravenousthirstwith the hot blood of victims and


greedily devouringlivid writhingflesh.
Evaluatingsuch claims within the broadestpossible frame of reference is a
key element of the bioarchaeologicalmethod. An individual'sinjuries are often
open to multiple, sometimes even paradoxicalinterpretations(e.g., violent death
and dismembermentvs. venerationof the deceased throughcareful preparation
of their cleansed bones for afterlife adventures).However, when viewed within
theirlargerarchaeologicalandpaleoecologicalcontextin conjunctionwith a large
numberof suchinstances,manypreviouslyviable alternativeexplanationsbecome
increasinglyimprobable.
This approachof progressivelydevelopingmore andmore contextualinforma-
tion so that the numberof reasonablealternativehypothesescan graduallybe re-
ducedis well illustratedby a seriesof recentstudiesof scattered,highly fragmented
collections of ancienthumanbones from the AmericanSouthwest.Althoughsuch
collections have been reportedfor many years, they were typically dismissed as
residuesfrom secondaryburialor carnivoreactivity.Morerecently,detailedbioar-
chaeological studies have been conducted that place these collections within a
broader,more-informativearchaeologicalcontext. In his meticulous analysis of
osteological materialfrom the Mancos site, White (1992) demonstrateda clear
correspondencebetween the patternof cutmarks,percussion damage, fractures,
burning,and body partrepresentationin a collection of highly fragmentedhuman
remainsand the damagepatternpresentin associatedfaunalremainsdiscardedas
refusefromculinaryactivities.Severalsimilarcollections havebeen describedthat
show the same patternof massive perimortembreakageand percussiondamage
with evidence of subsequentprocessing,cutmarks,andburningthatstronglysug-
gest consumptionof humanflesh by otherhumans(Billman et al 2000, Turner&
Turner1999).
The gustatory motivations for such harsh treatmentof the dead have been
doubted,and alternativehypotheses,including"witchdestruction,"have been of-
fered as alternatives to cannibalism (Darling 1998, Dongoske et al 2000,
Martin2000). Although the motivationsfor treatinghumancorpses like the car-
casses of game animalsare undoubtedlycomplex, the inferencethathumanflesh
was actually consumed has recently been dramaticallyreinforcedby contextual
evidence from an unexpected source. Chemical analysis of human excrement
from the Cowboy Wash in the Four Comers area of southwesternColorado,
an area where there is strong osteological evidence for cannibalismat a num-
ber of sites, has been shown to contain traces of a myoglobin, a human muscle
protein, that could have gotten there only throughthe ingestion of human flesh
(Marlaret al 2000). These studies provide an excellent example of the power of
the bioarchaeologicalapproachto understandingthe human past: Through the
progressive accumulationof evidence from disparatesources, it is possible to
graduallybring into clearerfocus what really happenedduringthe history of our
species.
580 WALKER

MODERN INTERPERSONAL VIOLENCE

There is an enormous modem traumaliteraturethat is directly relevant to un-


derstandingthe behavioral significance of the injuries seen in ancient skeletal
remains. Data on the physical manifestationsof modem interpersonalviolence
providea baseline againstwhich bioarchaeologicalevidence for ancientviolence
can be measured.Although uncriticallyprojectingwhat we know about moder
traumainto the past is potentiallymisleading,modem traumapatternsdo provide
a rich source of comparativedatathat allows ancientinjuriesto be placed within
meaningfulbehavioraland cultural-historicalcontexts.
Age and sex are importantdimensions of the moder violence pattern.Put
simply, the perpetratorsand victims of modern assaults tend to be young men.
Throughouttheir lives, men are much more likely than women to suffer from all
types of traumaticinjuries,especially those associatedwith interpersonalviolence
(Baker 1992). Males commit 84% of the assaults in which the victim reportsto
hospitalemergencyrooms (Rand& Strom 1997). Forhomicides committedin the
United Statesbetween 1976-1992, the medianage of the assailant(87% of whom
were males) was 20 years and thatof the victims (78% of whom were males) was
25 years (Fox 1994). In an exaggeratedform, owing to the selectivity of military
recruitmentpractices,the demographicprofileof moder warfaremortalityparal-
lels that seen in civilian homicides, with a predominanceof young male victims
in their early twenties: 40% of the Germansolders killed in World War I were
20-24 years old (Lancaster1990, p. 330). Recruitmentpractices also guarantee
that male warfarecasualty rates exceed those associated with civilian violence.
For example, only 9% of the hospital admissions for chest wounds in the recent
Yugoslavianconflict were women (Ilic et al 1999).
The social context of civilian violence shows significant sex differences. In
57% of attackson females, the assailantis a family memberor intimatepartner.
For males, in contrast,only 17%of the attackersare family membersor intimate
partners(Craven 1997, Rand & Strom 1997). Homicides show the same pat-
tern,with 49% of the females victims killed by relativesor intimatepartnersand
only 15%of the males (Fox 1994). Intimatepartnerviolence contributesimpor-
tantlyto these sex differences.In the United Statesduring1994, females were five
times more likely to be victimized by intimatepartnersthan were males (Craven
1997). Forhomicides in which the victim-offenderrelationshipwas known,an in-
timatekilled 31%of the murderedfemales and4%of the murderedmales (Craven
1997).
Therealso appearto be sex-dependentgenderdifferencesin homicide patterns
(see Walker& Cook 1998). This is suggestedby the fact that same-sex homicides
accountfor 6%of all intimatepartnerhomicidescommittedby men andonly 1%of
the same-sexintimatepartnerhomicidescommittedby women (Fox 1994). This is
a substantialbias towardgreaterviolence among gay males, even if one considers
the demographicsurveys that suggest the ratio of male-to-female homosexual
couples is about3:2 (Croes 1996).
THEHISTORY
OFVIOLENCE 581

Levels of interpersonalviolence have varied significantlyin modem societies.


This is of considerabletheoreticalinterest for bioarchaeologistsbecause of the
samplingproblemssimilartemporalvariationin earliersocieties wouldpose. Mod-
em accidental and intentionalinjury rates show clear daily, weekly, and annual
oscillations, and of course thereare the well-documentedoutbreaksof intense vi-
olence thateruptsporadicallyowing to widespreadwarfareandcivil unrest.In the
UnitedStates,homicidesaremorelikely to occurlate at nightandearlyin the week-
end (Baker1992, Fox 1994, Swannet al 1981), andthereis clearhomicide season-
ality,with low ratesduringthe inclementwintermonthsand a modestmidsummer
increase. Homicides also increase duringDecember and January,a phenomenon
possibly associated with social activity during the holiday season (Fox 1994).
Longer-termtrendsover a periodof decadesareespecially clearduringthe twenti-
eth centuryamong nonwhitemales in the United States. Homiciderateswere low
early in the century,beganincreasingrapidlyduringthe 1920s, andpeakedduring
the economic depressionof the early 1930s. Afterthat,they decreasedamongcivil-
iansuntilWorldWarII,whentheyincreasedbriefly.Duringthe lasthalf of the twen-
tiethcentury,homicideratesincreasedagainto reachunprecedentedlevels (nearly
doublingamong nonwhitemales) duringthe 1970s and 1980s (Holinger 1987).
Civilian data such as these neglect the importanteffects of warfare-related
deaths. There have been more than 160 wars and armed conflicts since 1945
(Summerfield 1997). Although they are often relatively small in comparison,
warfare-relatedmortalityfrom malnutritionand disease, deaths, and injuries di-
rectlyrelatedto militaryactivitycan cause dramaticshort-termincreasesin trauma
among both combatantsand civilians (Summerfield1997, Toole 1995, Toole &
Waldman1993).
Such short-termfluctuationsin violence are problematicfrom a bioarchaeo-
logical point of view. Episodes of mass killing may leave few traces in the ar-
chaeological recordbecause systematic disposal of the dead is often impossible,
and sometimeseven actively prevented,duringtimes of widespreadsocial unrest.
On the other hand, the discovery of mass graves of war dead can inflate the ev-
idence we have for violence. Seasonal cycles of violence-associatedpatternsof
economic or ceremonialactivity can also be problematicbecause of their poten-
tial to create a distortedpicture of violence in mobile groups that use different
cemeterieson a seasonal basis. Most cemeteries,however,containthe comingled
remainsof people who died in variousseasons over a periodof decades,if not cen-
turies. This is an importantimpedimentto the documentationof prehistoricvio-
lence because short-termfluctuationsare obscuredby the long time spansandlow
temporalresolutionthatcharacterizesmost archaeologicalskeletal collections.

MODERN ASSAULTINJURY PATTERNS

The injurypatternsdocumentedin the clinical literatureproviderevealinganalo-


gies thatcan help us understandthe behavioralimplicationsof similarinjuriesin
the past. Modern clinical researchis also of great relevance to the fundamental
582 WALKER

methodologicalissue of distinguishingbetween ancientaccidentalandintentional


injuries.Fortunately,the location of an injuryoften provides a clue to its cause.
For example, anthropologistscommonly refer to fracturesof the ulnar shaft as
"parryfractures"because they frequentlyoccur when an assaultvictim raises his
forearmto deflect a blow to the head. Fracturesof the distal radiusnearthe wrist,
in contrast,are much less likely to be assaultinjuries.They often occur when the
armsare thrustforwardto breakan accidentalfall. The problemwith such causal
inferencesis that the same types of skeletal injuriescan be producedby both ac-
cidental and intentionaltrauma.Parryfracturesare not always assault injuries;
sometimes accidentaltwisting of the armbreaksthe ulna (Lovell 1997). Thus we
cannot simply assume without additionalsupportingcontextualinformationthat
similarinjuriesin ancientskeletonsreflectinterpersonalviolence.
Moder civilian morbidityand mortalityreportsreveal some clear interper-
sonal violence-relatedinjurypatternsthat might be echoed in earliersocieties. A
Departmentof Justice study of the people admittedto U.S. hospital emergency
departmentsduring1994 providesa good overviewof the assaultinjuriescurrently
sufferedby people in the United States (Rand& Strom 1997). For the most part,
these assault injuries (58.4%) did not involve weapons. Nineteen percent were
inflictedwith an object, such as a rock or a stick, that an assailantheld or threw.
Moder assault victims show a distinctive distributionof skeletal injuries with
high facial traumarates (Walker1997). In a study of 539 adult English assault
victims, facial injuryaccountedfor 83% of all fractures,66% of all lacerations,
and 53% of all hematomas(Shepherdet al 1990). Of the victims, 26% sustained
at least one fracture,and nasal fractureswere the most frequentlyobservedskele-
tal injury(27%). The upperlimb was the next most common injurysite (14% of
all injuries).These injuriesmost often resultedfrom assaultsinvolving punching
(72%)andkicking (42%).Only 6% of the victims receivedknife wounds.Broken
drinkingglasses, a weapon apparentlyfavoredby inebriatedEnglish pub patrons,
produceda surprisinglylargeproportion(11%) of the injuries.
Although modem assailantsof both men and women appearto intentionally
target the face, in England at least, women are much more likely than men to
sustainfracturedfacial bones thatwould be detectablearchaeologically(Shepherd
et al 1988). In a study of 294 consecutive assault victims, 15% of whom were
women, a significantlyhigherproportionof the women (56%)thanthe men (26%)
had facial fractures(x2 = 7.8, p = 0.005). The reasons for this higher rate in
females are unclear;it could reflect either sex differencesin facial bone strength
or culturallyconditioned,gender-relateddifferences in the severity of beatings.
Whatevertheircause, such differencesshow thatthe frequencyof skeletalinjuries
seen in archaeologicalmaterialsmay sometimesbe relatedin a somewhatindirect
way to the actualfrequencyof assaults.
The question of why the face and especially the nose are targetedby mod-
em assailants is an interestingone. Archaeological data suggest that this nasal
fixation is not a genetically programmedhuman universalbut instead is highly
culturallycontingent.It seems likely thatthe ritualized,socially sanctionedfight-
ing that occurs in such sports as boxing influences the assault patternsseen in
THEHISTORY
OFVIOLENCE 583

the larger society outside of the sports arena (Walker 1997). This hypothesis
is supportedby coroner records from England that show a striking correlation
between the rise of moder boxing and an increase in the proportionof homi-
cides caused by hitting and kicking (Walker1997, p. 171). Thus offensive tech-
niques learned through viewing and participatingin violent sports may shape
in importantways the patternsof violence seen outside of this highly ritualized
context.
The majorconsequencestechnologicalchangecan havefor patternsof interper-
sonal violence are abundantlydocumentedin the moder traumaliterature.Many
people attributethe markedincreasein U.S. homicides duringthe late 1980s, es-
pecially among the young, to increasedavailabilityand use of firearms(MMWR
1996). This trendis paralleledby less-frequentuse of knives for homicides (Fox
1994). Such changes can sometimesbe abrupt.In Durban,South Africa, the ratio
of fatal stabwoundsto gunshotwoundsreversedwithinthe 5-yearperiodbetween
1987 and 1992. Between 1985 and 1995, stab wounds declined by 30% and gun-
shot wounds increased by more than 800% (Muckartet al 1995). Comparable,
technology-relatedchanges have recently been documentedin remote areas of
highlandPapuaNew Guinea,where an earlierpatternof directconfrontationwith
bushknivesand axes has been replaced,with devastatingresults,by increaseduse
of bows and arrowsand firearms(Mathew 1996).
The apparentpropensityof Britishdrinkersto use drinkingglasses as weapons
(Shepherdet al 1990, p. 76) underscoresthe role that culturalfactors can have
in determiningweapon choice and also, to some extent, the patterningof assault
injuries (Walker 1997). Another example is the apparenttendency of police to
avoid hittingthe faces of theirvictims because of the public sanctionssuch highly
visible injuries might stimulate (Aalund et al 1990). Culturalsensitivity of this
kind can also be seen among Chinese gang members,who preferknives to guns
in certain situations.When attackingother gang members,they use long knives
and make multiplelacerations,or "chops,"in the flesh of their victims insteadof
stabbingthem (Yip et al 1997). Often the intentionis to wound ratherthan kill.
The massive cranial traumaassociated with the recent adoption of the baseball
bat as a weapon of choice for certaintypes of urbanviolence is anotherexample
of a highly culturallycontingentviolence pattern(Berlet et al 1992, Groleauet al
1993, Ord & Benian 1995).
The social context of an assault clearly influences the weapon an assailant
selects. A Massachusettsstudy, for instance, shows that knives are more likely
to be used as weapons duringargumentswith acquaintancesand thatfirearmsare
morelikely to be used againststrangers(MMWR1995). My analysis(P.L. Walker,
unpublishedobservations)of U.S. homicidereports(Fox 1994) revealssignificant
differencesbetween ethnic groupsin the weapon selected for killing spouses that
cannot be readily explainedby weapon availability,given the household context
that is typical for such murders.Between 1976-1992, the weapon of choice for
Native Americanwomen who killed their spouses was a knife (46% of all such
homicides). Native Americanmen, in contrast,rarelykilled spouses with knives
(20%of all such homicides);they usuallyused firearms(40%).Among Americans
584 WALKER

of Europeanancestry,a differentpatternis seen, with firearmsthe weaponof choice


for spouse killings by both men (56%) and women (67%).
One importantlesson for bioarchaeologistsfrom the moder traumaliterature
is that most assaults cause soft-tissue injuriesthat would not be detected in an-
cient skeletalmaterial.Only 16.6%of the assaultinjuriesin the United States are
classified as "muscular/skeletal"(Rand& Strom 1997), and many of these would
not be observablein archaeologicalremains.An additional5% involve gunshots,
but a large proportionof these projectiles only wound soft tissue. According to
my calculations,in frontalview, a person's skeleton occupies about 60% of the
targetareaa body presentsto an assailant.This meansthatabouthalf of the time a
projectilerandomlyshot at a personwould not impactbone. Thus, we can safely
assume that the frequencyof injuriesdetected in ancient skeletal remainsis just
the "tipof the iceberg"in termsof the actualincidence of injuries.

ASSAULTINGTHE MYTH OF OUR PACIFISTICPAST

Consideringthe many methodologicalproblems I have described, what can we


say based on currentlyavailabledata about the prevalenceof violence in earlier
societies? First,it is fair to say thattherehas been a historicalbias towardoverre-
portingspectacularcases, such as skulls with embeddedprojectilepoints, gaping
saberwounds, and gruesome scalping marks.People seem to have a deep-seated
fascinationwith violence, especially if the victim was a stranger(thus the enor-
mous popularityof cinema-veritetelevision shows featuringemergency rooms
and traumavictims). This prurientinterestperhapsexplainsin partthe impressive
numberof paleopathologicalcase reports devoted to describing the wounds of
individualtraumavictims (Elerick & Tyson 1997). This "case"approachto the
documentationof ancientviolence dominatedthe field of paleopathologyduring
most of the twentiethcenturyandreflectsthe diagnosticinterestsand lack of pop-
ulation perspectiveof the physicians who did much of this earlier work. These
problems of possible overreportingand lack of a population perspective mean
thatmost of the paleopathologicalliteratureprovideslittle basis for estimatingthe
prevalenceof past violence. We know thatthroughoutthe prehistoricworld, many
people died at the handsof others,but almost nowhereare dataavailablefor even
roughly estimatinghow the frequencyof such assaults variedthroughspace and
time (Walker1997).
In spite of these limitations,case reportsdo have much to teach us about the
historyof humanaggression.They show us thatthe rootsof interpersonalviolence
penetratedeepinto theevolutionaryhistoryof ourspecies. Bones bearingcutmarks
inflictedby otherhumansaresurprisinglycommonconsideringthe paucityof early
hominidremains.The anatomicalposition of stone tool markson the cheekbone
of a Plio-Pleistocenespecimenfromthe Sterkfonteinsite in SouthAfrica suggests
thatthey were inflictedby someone who cut throughthis person'smuscles during
the process of removingthe jaw from the rest of the head (Pickeringet al 2000).
THEHISTORY
OFVIOLENCE 585

Similarmarkson the foreheadof one of the earliestmembersof our species show


thatas early as 600,000 years ago, people living at the Bodo site in Ethiopiawere
defleshingthe heads of otherpeople (White 1986). The numberof such specimens
is small, and the limitationsof associatedcontextualinformationmake it difficult
to determinewhat motivated this early practice of cutting into the flesh of the
dead;cannibalism,anatomicalcuriosity,and ritualmanipulationof body partsare
all possibilities.
Speculationover the extent to which early humanskilled and consumed each
other has long been a part of the anthropologicalliterature.In the 1930s, Franz
Weidenreichsuggested, based on the abundanceof cranialvaults with fractured
bases and the paucityof infra-cranialremains,thatHomo erectus specimensfrom
the Zhoukoudiensite were the victims of brainextractionduringcannibalfeasts
(Weidenreich1943). This evidence of cannibalismhas always been controversial,
and the ongoing dispute will be difficult to resolve because many of the orig-
inal specimens were lost during World War II. Some prehistoriansstill accept
Weidenreich'sevidence as compelling (Lanpo & Weiwen 1990, Walpoff 1996),
whereasothershave reinterpretedthe conditionof the Zhoukoudienbones as post-
mortemdamagefromporcupinegnawingandothersite formationprocess(Binford
& Ho 1985, Binford & Stone 1986).
By the Middle Paleolithic, evidence of skeletal traumaincreases markedly,
perhapsin partbecause of the availabilityof much largerskeletalsamples.Healed
fracturesare especially common among the Neanderthals.Many of these injuries
appearto have been accidental and perhaps are explained by the dangers of a
predatoryadaptationthatinvolved huntingbig game with simple tools (Berger&
Trinkaus1995, Gardner2001, Richardset al 2000, Trinkaus& Zimmerman1982).
Some of these injuriesmay also be a result of interpersonalviolence. Although
no bones have been found with embeddedpoints or undisputedweapon wounds,
one earlyHomo sapiens specimenfrom Israel(SkhulIX) has a perimorteminjury
suggestiveof a lethal attack:A spearwas thrustthroughthe upperleg and into the
pelvic cavity (McCown& Keith 1939).
Cutmarksand other signs of postmortemprocessing possibly associated with
cannibalismhave been reportedin severalcollections of Neanderthalremains.The
tool markson a few of these specimens can be explainedin much less dramatic,
noncannibalisticways. Scratches on the cranium of the Engis 2 child thought
by some to be cutmarks(Russell & Lemort 1986) appearinstead to be recent
damagefrom the tools used to prepareand measurethe specimen (White & Toth
1989). Since its discovery more than 50 years ago, the isolated Circeo I cranium
from GuattariCave with its damagedbase and purportedfaunal associationshas
traditionallybeen viewed as an exampleof a Neanderthalmortuaryritualinvolving
brainextraction.Recentreexaminationof this specimenalong with new studiesof
the associatedfaunalassemblage,however,suggests that spottedhyenas are most
likely responsiblefor the conditionof the skull (Stiner 1991, White & Toth 1991).
It is also importantto rememberthat even in cases where a strong case for
cannibalism can be shown, this does not necessarily mean that someone was
586 WALKER

murderedto obtain their flesh. Although rare,ritual consumptionof portions of


the bodies of people who died from naturalcauses has been reportedethnograph-
ically, and the phenomenonof starvationcannibalismamong famine victims is
a well-documented modem phenomenon (Keenleyside et al 1997, Petrinovich
2000).
The earliest evidence of Europeancannibalismcomes from 800,000-year-old
humanremainsrecoveredat the Spanishsite of Atapuerca.The Atapuercaskele-
tons are highly fragmentedand are scored with cutmarksthat have been inter-
preted as evidence of decapitationand defleshing (Femandez-Jalvoet al 1999).
Some of the long bones show perimortemdamage consistent with marrowex-
traction,and the entirehumanbone assemblageappearsto have been treatedlike
food refuse. The cutmarksand fragmentaryconditionof the KrapinaNeanderthal
remains from Croatia have often been interpretedas evidence of cannibalism
(Gorjanovic-Kramberger 1906, Ullrich 1978). Others suggest that Neanderthal
morticianscould have made the cutmarksand attributethe fracturesto nonhuman
causes, such as naturalrock falls or excavationdamage(Russell 1987a,b;Trinkaus
1985). The evidence for Neanderthalcannibalismhas been greatly strengthened
throughrecent studies of the spatial distributions,tool marks, and skeletal ele-
ment frequencies on human and animal remains from Moula-Guercy,a French
cave site. These studies show strikinglysimilar patternsof perimortemdamage
that suggest both the humanand the ungulatebones depositedat the site are food
refuse (Defleur et al 1999). Bones from La Baume Fontebregoua,a FrenchNe-
olithic site, show a similarcorrespondencebetween fragmentaryhumanremains
and faunal collections of food refuse (Villa 1992, Villa et al 1986). These data
suggest thatthe practiceof cannibalismwas not confinedto Neanderthals.Instead,
it seems to have persisted throughthe transitionfrom hunting and gatheringto
farming.
By Mesolithic times, evidence of mortalinjuriesstronglysuggestive of homi-
cide begins to increasemarkedly.This is in parta by-productof increaseduse of
bows and arrows,a weaponwhose small points embed securelyin a victim's bone
(Figure 1). When multiplearrowwounds are present,it is unmistakablyevidence
of homicide (e.g. Boule & Vallois 1937).
Ofnet, a 7720-year-oldMesolithic site in Bavaria,provides the firstclear evi-
dence of mass murder(Frayer1997). The Ofnet collection consists of 38 skulls.
Many of these show beveled fracturesat the back of the head thatstronglysuggest
perimortembludgeoning. There is no evidence of cannibalism and few indi-
cations of butchering.However, decapitationis suggested by perimortemcut-
markson many of the cervical vertebraerecoveredwith the skulls. This evidence
of mass killing among hunter-gatherersis importantbecause it shows that the
developmentof sedentaryagriculturalcommunities is not a prerequisitefor or-
ganized, large-scale, homicidal activity. It seems clear that Mesolithic hunter-
gatherers, like their moder counterparts(e.g Knauft 1987), sometimes lived
in societies where fear of becoming a homicide victim was a fact of everyday
life.
THE HISTORYOF VIOLENCE 587

A recent survey of traumaticinjuriesin ancient Italy shows some interesting


post-Mesolithictrends(Robb 1997). Althoughthe samplesaresmall,clearchanges
can be seen betweenthe Neolithic andIronAge. Cranialinjuries,which in modern-
day people are often a result of interpersonalviolence, and infra-cranialinjuries,
which aremore often associatedwith occupationalactivity,follow differenttrajec-
tories.The frequencyof infra-cranialinjuriesincreasedover time. Cranialinjuries,
in contrast,were common duringthe Neolithic, diminishedduringthe Eneolithic,
andincreasedagainduringthe BronzeandIronages. The high frequencyof cranial
injuriesamong Neolithic farmersis interestingbecause it is at odds with the tra-
ditionalview of Neolithic Italiansas peaceful comparedwith latergroups,whose
iconographyglorifies weapons and male warriors(Robb 1997). In other words,
the culturalcelebrationof violence seems to have had an inverse relationshipto
its frequency.
Probing the antiquityof the modem hegemonic position of men as both the
perpetratorsand the victims of interpersonalviolence is made difficultby the tech-
nical problemsof accuratesex determination(Walker1995), and the small sizes
of earliercollections, which, when partitionedby sex, often prove inadequatefor
statisticalcomparisons.The Ofnet materialis interestingin this regardbecause it
is the earliestcollection of homicide victims from a single site thatis largeenough
for meaningfuldemographicanalysis. Women and childrenpredominateamong
the massacrevictims. This could be interpretedin severalways: The bodies of men
could have been disposed of elsewhere, they could have escaped, or they could
have been away from theirfamilies at the time of the attack.This last scenariofits
well with the patternseen in the skeletal remainsfrom Saunaktuk,an Inuvialuit
(Eskimo)village in the Canadianarticthatcontainsthe bones of manywomen and
childrenwith perimorteminjuries,which suggests violent death,dismemberment,
andprobablecannibalism(Walker1990) (Figure6, see color insert).The Inuvialuit
have recordedthis incident in oral histories that describe an attackby Dene (In-
dians) thatoccurredwhen most of the Inuvialuitmen were away huntingwhales.
During the attack,the people who remainedat the village are said to have been
torturedin variousways before being slaughtered(Melbye & Fairgrieve1994).
When ancientcollections from large geographicalareas and spans of time are
pooled, the moder patternof more male traumaticinjuries begins to emerge.
Angel (1974) pooled 11 samples from the easternMediterraneanrangingin age
from the early Neolithic to recent times and found a tendency for females to
have fewer fracturesthroughout,especially of the head and neck. Robb (1997)
has done a similar survey of Italiancollections. He found that afterthe Neolithic
period, the frequencyof male cranialtraumaincreases markedlyover that of fe-
males, and by the Iron age, traumaof all kinds was much more common among
males thanfemales (Robb 1997). Robb concludesthatthese injurypatternsarenot
a direct result of violence in warfare;instead, he attributesthem to the develop-
ment of gender roles that prescribedviolent behaviorfor males and reinforceda
sexual division of labor in which women were not expected to performactivities
consideredheavy or dangerous,includingwarfare.
588 WALKER

PREHISTORICNATIVEAMERICANVIOLENCE
It could be arguedthatthese datasuggesting a long historyof mass killing, homi-
cide, and male-dominatedinterpersonalviolence in the Old Worldhave little rel-
evance to the question of the effects Europeancontact had on patternsof Native
Americanwarfareandviolence. Aftertheirarrivalin the New World,NativeAmer-
icans could have evolved their own, less-violent, culturallymediatedsystems for
disputeresolutionthatdivergedsignificantlyfrom the pathologicaltrajectoryfol-
lowed by Westernsocieties. Fortunately,there are many large, well-studied,New
Worldcollections directlyrelevantto this issue.
The 9000-year-oldKennewickfind, one of the earliestNative Americanskele-
tons,has a largeleaf-shapedprojectilepoint,probablypropelledby a spearthrower,
healed into the bone of his pelvis as well as a small, well-healed cranial frac-
ture (Chatters2000). Although it is conceivable that both of these injurieswere
accidental, interpersonalviolence is a much more likely interpretationof the
spear-throwerwound. Similar injuries, including embedded points and cranial
injuries,have been found in other early Native Americanremains (Dickel et al
1988; J. Chatters,personal communication).These data suggest that the first
Americansbroughtwith them patternsof violence similar to those documented
in contemporaneousOld World populations, and that those patternspersisted
despite low population densities and the availability of vast expanses of
uninhabitedland.
Archaicperiod(ca. 6000-500 BC)skeletalcollections from westernTennessee
provide additionalevidence of interpersonalviolence among early New World
populations.Embeddedprojectile points, cutmarks,and missing bones suggest
that homicide, scalping, decapitation,and forearm-trophytaking were common
practicesamongthese earlyhunter-gatherers (Smith 1997). Out of 439 interments
fromthe KentuckyLakeReservoirsample, 10 individuals,all males,showevidence
of warfare-relatedinterpersonalviolence, including 6 people, mostly from one
site, with embeddedprojectilepoints. At one cemetery,20.4% of the people show
evidenceof perimortemviolence. This figureincludessix people apparentlykilled
in a massacre,whose bodies were haphazardlythrowninto a mass grave.
The prevalenceof wounds inflictedby clubs, spears,and arrowsclearly shows
that levels of prehistoricNative American violence varied both regionally and
throughtime. This is consistentwith ethnographicevidence of markedtribaldif-
ferencesin warfarepatterns.Many of the tribesof centralCalifornia,for example,
practicedhighly ritualizedformsof combat,with specialweaponsandrulesremu-
neratinginjuredopponents,thatminimizedfatalities;others, such as the Mojave,
are well known ethnographicallyfor their cultural emphasis on lethal conflict
(Kroeber1925, McCorkle 1978, Stewart1947).
Bioarchaeologicalstudies of patternsof interpersonalviolence among native
Californiansclearly show thatsuch differenceshave considerabletime depth.The
low frequencyof cranialinjuriesin prehistoriccentralCalifornians(2.7%-3.5%
of adultsaffected)is differentfrom the extremelyhigh frequencyseen in roughly
THEHISTORY
OFVIOLENCE 589

contemporaneouspeople living in the Santa BarbaraChannel area, where 17%


have antemortemcranial injuries (Jurmain& Bellifemine 1997, Lambert 1997,
Walker& Thornton2001). Patternsof violence seem to have variedeven within a
single region. For example, in the SantaBarbaraChannelarea, nonlethalcranial
injuries are more common on the Channel Islands than on the mainland.This
may be the result of a ritualizedform of dispute resolutionthat evolved because
conflictavoidancethroughpopulationmovementis not feasible for geographically
circumscribedisland populations(Walker1989).
Levels of violence in the Santa BarbaraChannel area varied significantly
throughtime. Nonlethal cranial injuries and lethal projectile wounds gradually
increasedin frequencywith the growthof the coastal population.Theirfrequency
peaked during the Middle period and then appearsto have declined somewhat
thereafter(Lambert1994, 1997; Walkeret al 1996) (Figure 1). The age and sex
distributionsof people with fatal projectilepoint wounds is similarto that seen in
moder homicide victims, with nearly20%of the 15- to 26-year-oldmales having
projectilepoint injuries(Lambert1997, p. 96).
Althoughthe causes of the exceptionallyhigh ratesof Middle period violence
are undoubtedlycomplex, with many differentcultural,historical,and ecological
dimensions, there is strongevidence that resource stress was a significantfactor.
Paleopathologicaldatashow thatliving conditionsdeclinedmarkedlyat the end of
the Middle period in the ChannelIsland area (Lambert1993, Walker& Lambert
1989). This was a time of climatic instability and drought-inducedincreases in
competitionoverresourcesthroughoutthe westernUnitedStates(Joneset al 1999,
Walker& Lambert1989). ThroughoutCaliforniathereis archaeologicalevidence
of populationmovement,reorganizationof tradenetworks,and increasedwarfare
duringthe Middle period (Moratto& Fredrickson1984, pp. 213-14, 564; Walker
& Lambert1989).
Anotherpotentiallysignificantvariableis the introductionof the bow andarrow,
which beganto replacespearsandspearthrowersin warfarethroughoutCalifornia
beginningaroundAD 500 (Moratto& Fredrickson1984). The bow andarrowhas a
greaterkilling distancethanthe spearthrowerand is well suitedfor use in raiding
and ambushattacks.Its introductionwould have createda short-termdisequilib-
rium in offensive capabilities and consequent social disruptions,comparableto
those seen among modem tribalsocieties with the introductionof firearms(e.g.,
Mathew 1996).
Bioarchaeological studies of warfareand violence in late prehistoricperiod
Native American communities in the eastern United States show inter- and in-
fraregionalvariationin levels of violence, similar to those documentedin Cali-
fornia (Kuemin Drews 2001, Smith 2001). At some sites, there is little or no
evidence of interpersonalviolence, whereas at others, a significantproportionof
the burialsappearto be those of homicide victims. For example, an analysis of
264 burialsfrom an Oneotacemeteryin Illinois dating to aboutAD 1300 suggest
that chronic warfarecaused at least one third of all adult deaths (Milner et al
1991).
590 WALKER

Data from other fourteenth-centurysites show that this was a time of extreme
violence. Excavationsat CrowCreek,a largepalisadedvillage site on the Missouri
River, uncoveredthe remains of at least 486 victims of a mass killing dating to
AD 1325 (Willey & Emerson 1993). The bones of men, women, and childrenare
present,and nearly 95% of the intact skulls bear scalping marks.Many of these
victims were decapitatedanddismembered.The conclusionthatthis massacrewas
a resultof intervillagewarfareis reinforcedby ongoing researchthathas produced
evidence of similar massacresat two fourteenth-centuryvillages within striking
rangeof Crow Creek(Pringle 1998).

CONCLUSIONS

What have we learned from bioarchaeologicalstudies of these hapless victims


of ancientviolence? The first, and perhapsmost painful, lesson is one of human
equality.Everywherewe probeinto the historyof ourspecies we findevidence of a
similarpatternof behavior:People have alwaysbeen capableof bothkindnessand
extremecruelty.The searchfor an earlier,less-violent way to organizeour social
affairs has been fruitless. All the evidence suggests that peaceful periods have
always been punctuatedby episodes of warfareand violence. As far as we know,
thereare no forms of social organization,modes of production,or environmental
settings thatremainfree from interpersonalviolence for long.
Ontheotherhand,themanyobviousdifferencesbetweenpatternsof moder and
ancientviolence shouldbe of considerabletheoreticalinterestto anthropologists.
The technologies we have created to maim and kill each other have gradually
advancedfromstonesandspears,whichrequiredintimatephysicalcontactbetween
the assailantandthe victim, to modem depersonalizedkilling techniques,in which
unwittingvictims appearas illuminatedpixels on computerscreens.This abilityto
kill at a distancehas greatlytransformedthe demographyof warfare;the ritualized
battlesof the past in which young men slaughteredyoung men arebeing replaced
by roomsfull of techniciansof both sexes trainedin "surgicalbombing"and"target
neutralization."Unfortunately,as the manyvictims of moder warfarewell know,
none of this has appreciablyreduced the toll of death and human suffering that
warfarestill takes.
Moder urbanenvironmentshaveprovento be anidealrefugefor thepersistence
of old patternsof male-dominatedviolence in the form of gang warfareand armed
robberies.The social anonymityandisolationof moder urbanlife has also created
opportunitiesfor new forms of violence that, as far as we know, did not exist
in the past. Although "serial killers" who delighted in murderingother people
undoubtedlyexisted in the past, their careers are likely to have been abruptly
terminatedby execution if they were foolish enough to redirecttheir homicidal
urgescloser to home and away fromthe socially sanctionedkilling of outlawsand
dehumanized"others."
THEHISTORY
OFVIOLENCE 591

The "battered-childsyndrome"is a similar example of a modem patternof


violence thatlacks a clear ancientanalog. This is a severe form of physical abuse
in which parentschronicallybeattheiryoung children,often untildeath.Like serial
killing, the batteredchild syndromeseems, at least in part,to be a productof the
lack of surveillanceand weakened social control associated with modem urban
anonymity.Suchabusivebehaviorleaves clearskeletalstigmatathatmy colleagues
andI havelooked for in vainin manylargeprehistoricskeletalseries (Walker1997,
2001a) (Figures 4 and 7, see color inserts). It seems likely that treatingchildren
in this way was simply impossible in earliersocieties. When people lived in large
kin-basedgroups,whereeveryactionwas publiclyscrutinizedandprivacyunheard
of, the repeatedabuse of infants in this way would inevitably elicit intervention
from relatives.
A final lesson from our violent past is the complexity that is apparentin its
causes. First, arguingover the extent to which natureor nurtureis responsiblefor
cross-culturalregularities,such as the apparentlong-standingdominanceof males
as perpetratorsandvictims of violent acts, is a sterileexercise. The questionmakes
no more sense than arguingabout whetherthe length or the width of a rectangle
makes a greatercontributionto its area (Petrinovich2000). We are productsof
both ourbiological and culturalheritages,andtheircontributionsare,for all prac-
tical purposes,inseparable.Proponentsof simplisticmaterialist/ecologicalmodels
that reduce warfareto competitionover land and food will find little comfort in
the evidence for frequentviolent conflicts among earliest immigrantsto the New
World.These people lived at low densities and had ample opportunityto avoid
violence by moving away from it but apparentlywere unable to do so. On the
otherhand,explanationsthatmyopicallyfocus on the quest for prestige,mates, or
gender-based"binaristic"thinking(Cooke 1996) as primemoversof violence are
equally suspect.
One soberingpatternthat emerges from a survey of past violence is the close
relationshiprepeatedly seen between large-scale outbreaksof violence and cli-
matic instabilities. Crop failures and a greatly diminished zone of arable land
inducedby climate cooling duringthe fourteenthcenturyhave been suggested as
stimulantsfor the warfareand mass killing documentedat Crow Creek. Similar
climatically induced conflicts appearto have occurredon the Colorado Plateau
and other areas of the western United States (Jones et al 1999, LeBlanc 1999).
Many of us are fortunateenough to live comfortablyin culturallybuffereden-
vironments, where modern climatic perturbationsdo not perceptibly interfere
with our food supply or plunge us into the dangerousworld of drought-induced
warfareand civil unrest. This shows the fallacy of making simplistic equations
between climatic change andwarfare.However,we know frompaleoenvironmen-
tal records that major climatic fluctuationson a scale unheardof during recent
times are a fact of the earth'shistory.Dealing with the violent potential of such
a worldwide climatic catastropheis a challenge future generations surely will
face.
592 WALKER

Visit the Annual Reviews home page at www.AnnualReviews.org

LITERATURE CITED
Aalund O, Danielsen L, SanhuezaRO. 1990. Victimization,1994. Spec. Rep. Publ. NCJ-
Injuriesdue to deliberateviolence in Chile. 164508. Washington,DC: US Dept. Justice,
ForensicSci. Int. 46:189-202 Bur.JusticeStat.
Angel JL. 1974. Patterns of fracture from CroesMM. 1996. Samenwonersvangelijk ges-
Neolithic to moder times. Anthropol. lacht. SamenwonersGelijk Geslacht 44:24-
Kozlemenyek18:9-18 26
Baker SP. 1992. The Injury Fact Book. New DarlingJA. 1998.Massinhumationandthe exe-
York:OxfordUniv. Press. 344 pp. cutionof witchesin theAmericanSouthwest.
Berger TD, Trinkaus E. 1995. Patterns of Am.Anthropol.100:732-33
traumaamongthe Neanderthals.J. Archaeol. Dart RA. 1953. The predatorytransitionfrom
Sci. 22:841-52 ape to man. Int. Anthropol.Linguist. Rev.
Berlet AC, TalentiDP, CarrollSF. 1992. The 1:201-17
baseball bat: a popularmechanismof urban Defleur A, White T, Valensi P, Slimak L,
injury.J. Trauma33:167-70 Cregut-BonnoureE. 1999. Neanderthalcan-
BillmanBR, LambertPM, LeonardBL. 2000. nibalismat Moula Guercy,Ardeche,France.
Cannibalism, warfare, and drought in the Science 286:128-31
Mesa Verde region during the twelfth cen- Dickel DN, Aker CG, Dickel DN, Aker CG,
turyA.D. Am.Antiq.65:145-78 BartonBK, DoranGH. 1988.An orbitalfloor
Binford LR, Ho CK. 1985. Taphonomyat a and ulna fracturefrom the early Archaic of
distance:Zhoukoudian,"The cave home of Florida.J. Paleopathol.2:165-70
Beijing man?"Curr Anthropol.26:413-42 Dongoske KE, MartinDL, FergusonTJ. 2000.
BinfordLR, Stone NM. 1986. Zhoukoudian:a Critiqueof the claim of cannibalismat Cow-
closer look. Curr Anthropol.27:453-75 boy Wash.Am.Antiq.65:179-90
Boule M, Vallois HV. 1937. Anthropologie.In Dunnell RC. 1991. Methodological impacts
Teviec: Station-NecropoleMesolithigue du of catastrophicdepopulation.In Columbian
Morbihan,ed. M Saint-JustPequart,H Val- Consequences:The Spanish Borderlandsin
lois, pp. 111-223. Paris:Arch. Inst. Paleon- Pan-AmericanPerspective,ed. DH Thomas,
tol. Hum. pp. 561-80. Washington,D.C.: Smithsonian
Cartmill M. 1993. A View to a Death in the Inst.
Morning:Huntingand NatureThroughHis- Elerick DV, Tyson RA. 1997. Human Pale-
tory. Cambridge,MA: HarvardUniv. Press opathologyand Related Subjects:An Inter-
ChattersJC.2000. The recoveryandfirstanaly- national Bibliography.San Diego, CA: San
sis of an earlyholocene humanskeletonfrom Diego Mus. Man. 716 pp.
Kennewick,Washington.Am.Antiq.65:291- FergusonRB. 1997. Violence andwarin prehis-
316 tory. See Martin& Frayer1997, pp. 321-55
Cooke M. 1996. Womenand the War Story. FergusonRB. 1995. YanomamiWarfare:A Po-
Berkeley:Univ. Calif. Press litical History.SantaFe, NM: Sch. Am. Res.
CornwellEE III, JacobsD, WalkerM, Jacobs 449 pp.
L, PorterJ, FlemingA. 1995. NationalMedi- Fernandez-JalvoY, Diez JC, CaceresI, Rosell
cal AssociationSurgicalSection positionpa- J. 1999. Human cannibalism in the early
per on violence prevention.A resolutionof Pleistocene of Europe (GranDolina, Sierra
traumasurgeons caring for victims of vio- de Atapuerca,Burgos, Spain).J. Hum.Evol.
lence. JAMA273:1788-89 37:591-622
Craven D. 1997. Sex Differences in Violent Fox JA. 1994. Uniform Crime Reports of the
THE HISTORYOF VIOLENCE 593

UnitedStates: SupplementaryHomicideRe- nessee. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol.35 (Suppl.):


ports, 1976-1992. Boston, MA: Northeast- 93
ern Univ., Coll. Crim.Justice LambertPM. 1993. Healthin prehistoricpopu-
FrayerDW. 1997. Ofnet: evidence for a meso- lationsof the SantaBarbaraChannelIslands.
lithic massacre. See Martin& Frayer 1997, Am.Antiq. 58.:509-21
pp. 181-216 LambertPM. 1994. Warandpeace on the west-
GardnerJC. 2001. An analysis of the pathol- ernfront: a study of violent conflict and its
ogy of the KrapinaNeandertals.Am.J. Phys. correlates in prehistorichunter-gathererso-
Anthropol.35:68 (Abstr.) cieties of coastal southern California. PhD
Gorjanovfc-KrambergerD. 1906. Der Dilu- diss., SantaBarbara,CA: Universityof Cal-
viale Menschvon Krapinain Kroatien.Weis- ifornia.259 pp.
baden, Ger.:Kreidel LambertPM. 1997. Patternsof violence in pre-
GroleauGA, Tso EL, OlshakerJS,BarishRA, historic hunter-gatherersocieties of coastal
Lyston DJ. 1993. Baseball bat assault in- southern California. See Martin & Frayer
juries. J. Trauma34:366-72 1997, pp. 77-109
HolingerPC. 1987. ViolentDeathsin the United LancasterHO. 1990. Expectations of Life: A
States:An EpidemiologicalStudyof Suicide, Studyin theDemography,Statistics,andHis-
Homicide and Accidents. New York: Guil- toryof WorldMortality.New York:Springer-
ford. 274 pp. Verlag.605 pp.
Ilic N, Petricevic A, TanfaraS, Mimica Z, LanpoJ, WeiwenH. 1990. TheStoryof Peking
Radonic V, et al. 1999. War injuries to the Man: From Archaeology to Mystery. New
chest. Acta Chir.Hung. 38:43-47 York:OxfordUniv. Press. 270 pp.
Jones TL, Brown GM, Raab LM, McVickar LeBlanc SA. 1999. Prehistoric Warfarein the
JL, SpauldingWG, et al. 1999. Environmen- American Southwest.Salt Lake City: Univ.
tal imperativesreconsidered.Curr Anthro- Utah Press
pol. 40:137-70 Lovell NC. 1997. Traumaanalysis in paleo-
Jurmain R, Bellifemine VI. 1997. Patterns pathology. Yearb.Phys. Anthropol.40:139-
of cranial trauma in a prehistoric popula- 70
tion from centralCalifornia.Int. J. Osteoar- MarlarRA,LeonardBL, BillmanBR, Lambert
chaeol. 7:43-50 PM, MarlarJE.2000. Biochemicalevidence
Keeley LH. 1996. WarBefore Civilization:The of cannibalismat a prehistoricPuebloansite
Mythof the PeacefulSavage. New York:Ox- in southwesternColorado.Nature407:74-78
ford Univ. Press. 245 pp. MartinDL. 2000. Man corn: cannibalismand
KeenleysideA, Bertulli M, FrickeHC. 1997. violence in the prehistoricAmericanSouth-
The final days of the Franklin expedition: west. Am.Antiq. 65:199
new skeletal evidence. Arctic 50:36-46 MartinD, FrayerD, eds. 1997. TroubledTimes:
Knauft BM. 1987. Reconsidering violence in Violence and Warfarein the Past. Toronto:
simple human societies. Curr Anthropol. Gordon& Breach
28:457-98 Mathew PK. 1996. Changing trends in tribal
KroeberAL. 1925. Handbookof the Indiansof fightsin the highlandsof PapuaNew Guinea:
California.Washington,DC: US Gov. Print. a five-yearreview. PapuaNew GuineaMed.
Off. 995 pp. J. 39:117-20
Krohn-Hansen C. 1994. The anthropology McCorkle T. 1978. Intergroup conflict. In
of violent interaction. J. Anthropol. Res. Handbookof NorthAmericanIndians: Cali-
50:367-81 fornia, ed. RF Heizer, pp. 694-700.
Kuemin Drews NJ. 2001. Warfare in the Washington,DC: SmithsonianInst.
late prehistoric Southeast: a multi-site os- McCown TD, Keith A. 1939. The Stone Age
teological analysis from west-central Ten- Men of Mount Carmel: The Fossil Human
594 WALKER

Remains from the Levalloiso-Mousterian. derthaldietatVindijaandNeanderthalpreda-


Oxford,UK: Clarendon tion:the evidencefromstableisotopes.Proc.
Melbye J, Fairgrieve SI. 1994. A massacre Natl. Acad. Sci. USA97:7663
and possible cannibalism in the Canadian Robb J. 1997. Violence and gender in early
Arctic-new evidence from the Saunaktuk Italy. See Martin& Frayer 1997, pp. 111-
site (Ngtn-1).ArcticAnthropol.31:57-77 44
MilnerGR, AndersonE, SmithVG. 1991. War- RussellMD. 1987a.Bone breakagein the Krap-
fare in late prehistoricwest-centralIllinois. ina hominidcollection.Am. J. Phys. Anthro-
Am. Antiq.56:581-603 pol. 72:373-79
MMWR. 1995. Emergency department sur- Russell MD. 1987b. Mortuarypracticesat the
veillance for weapon-relatedinjuries-Mas- KrapinaNeandertal site.Am.J. Phys.Anthro-
sachusetts, November 1993-April 1994. pol. 72:381-97
Morbid.Mortal. Wkly.Rep. 44:160, 163-69 Russell MD, LemortF. 1986. Cutmarkson the
MMWR. 1996. Trendsin rates of homicide- Engis 2 calvaria?Am. J. Phys. Anthropol.
United States, 1985-1994. Morbid.Mortal. 69:317-24
Wkly.Rep. 45:460-64 ShepherdJP, GayfordJJ, Leslie IJ, Scully C.
MorattoMJ, FredricksonDA. 1984. California 1988. Female victims of assault.A study of
Archaeology. Orlando, FL: Academic. 757 hospitalattenders.J. Craniomaxillofac.Surg.
PP. 16:233-37
MuckartDJ,MeumannC, BothaJB. 1995. The ShepherdJP, ShaplM, PearceNX, Scully C.
changingpatternof penetratingtorso trauma 1990. Pattern,severity,and aetiology of in-
in KwaZulu/Natal-a clinical and patholog- juries in victims of assault. J. R. Soc. Med.
ical review.S. Afr Med. J. 85:1172-74 83:161-62
MurrayCJL, LopezAD. 1996. TheGlobalBur- Smith MO. 1997. Osteological indications of
den of Disease: A ComprehensiveAssess- warfarein the Archaicperiod of the western
ment of Mortalityand Disabilityfrom Dis- TennesseeValley.See Martin& Frayer1997,
eases, Injuries,and RiskFactorsin 1990 and pp. 241-65
Projectedto 2020. Cambridge,MA: Harvard Smith MO. 2001. Intergroupviolence: a com-
Univ. Press. 990 pp. parison between Dallas phase and Mouse
Ord RA, Benian RM. 1995. Baseball bat in- Creek phase frequencies and patterns.Am.
juries to the maxillofacial region caused by J. Phys. Anthropol.35 (Suppl.):139
assault.J. Oral Maxillofac.Surg.53:514-17 Spitz WU. 1993. Medicolegal Investigationof
Petrinovich LF. 2000. The Cannibal Within. Death: Guidelines for the Application of
New York:de Gruyter.232 pp. Pathology to Crime Investigation. Spring-
PickeringTR, White TD, TothN. 2000. Brief field, IL: Thomas. 829 pp.
communication:cutmarkson a Plio-Pleisto- StedmanTL. 1982. Steadman'sMedical Dic-
cene hominid from Sterkfontein, South tionary.Baltimore,MD: William & Wilkins
Africa. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 111:579- StewartKM. 1947. Mojavewarfare.Southwest.
84 J. Anthropol.3:257-78
PringleH. 1998. CrowCreek'srevenge.Science Stiner MC. 1991. The faunal remains from
279:2039 Grotta Guattari:a taphonomicperspective.
RandM, StromK. 1997. Violence-RelatedIn- Curr Anthropol.32:103-17
juries Treated in Hospital EmergencyDe- StrausMA. 1999. The controversyover domes-
partments. Spec. Rep. Publ. NCJ-156921. tic violence by women: a methological,the-
Washington,DC: US Dept. Justice,Bur.Jus- oretical, and sociology of science analysis.
tice Stat. In Violencein IntimateRelationships,ed. B
RichardsMP, PettittPB, TrinkausE, Smith Ximena,E Arriaga,S Oskamp,et al., pp. vii,
FH, PaunovicM, KaravanicI. 2000. Nean- 17-44. NewburyPark,CA: Sage
THE HISTORYOF VIOLENCE 595

SummerfieldD. 1997. The social, culturaland ring, S Saunders,pp. 31-47. Toronto:Can.


political dimensions of contemporarywar. Scholars
Med. Confl.Surviv.13:3-25 Walker PL. 1997. Wife beating, boxing, and
SwannIJ, MacMillanR, StrongI. 1981. Head broken noses: skeletal evidence for the
injuries at an inner city accident and emer- cultural patterning of interpersonal vio-
gency department.Injury12:274-78 lence. See Martin& Frayer 1997, pp. 145-
TooleMJ. 1995.Mass populationdisplacement. 75
A global public healthchallenge.Infect.Dis. WalkerPL. 2001a. Is the Battered-ChildSyn-
Clin. N. Am. 9:353-66 drome a Modern Phenomenon? Presented
Toole MJ, WaldmanRJ. 1993. Refugees and at 10th Eur. Meet. Paleopathol. Assoc.,
displaced persons. War,hunger, and public Goettingen,Ger.
health.JAMA270:600-5 WalkerPL. 2001b. A Spanishborderlandsper-
TrinkausE. 1985. Cannibalismand burial at spective on La Florida bioarchaeology. In
Krapina.J. Hum.Evol. 14:203-16 Bioarchaeologyof La Florida: HumanBio-
TrinkausE, ZimmermanMR. 1982. Trauma logy in NorthernFrontierNew Spain, ed. CS
among the Shanidar Neandertals. Am. J. Larsen.Gainesville: Univ. FloridaPress. In
Phys. Anthropol.57:61-76 press
TurnerCG,TurnerJA.1999.Man Corn:Canni- WalkerPL, Cook DC. 1998. Genderand sex:
balismand Violencein the PrehistoricAmer- vive la difference.Am. J. Phys. Anthropol.
ican Southwest.Salt Lake City: Univ. Utah 106:255-59
Press WalkerPL, DrayerF, Siefkin S. 1996. Mal-
Ullrich H. 1978. Kannibalismusund leichenz- ibuHumanSkeletalRemains:A Bioarchaeo-
erstuckelungbeim Neandertalervon Krap- logical Analysis. Sacramento,CA: Resource
ina. In Krapinski Pracovjek i Evolucija Manage.Div., Dept. Parks& Recreat.
Hominida, pp. 293-318. Zagreb: Jugoslav. WalkerPL, LambertPM. 1989. Skeletal ev-
Akad. Znan.Umjet. idence for stress duringa period of cultural
UnitedNations. 1993. Declarationon theElim- changein prehistoricCalifornia.InAdvances
ination of ViolenceAgainst Women.Resolu- in Paleopathology,ed. L Capasso,pp. 207-
tion 48/104. New York:UN Dept. PublicInf. 12. Chieti, Italy:Solfanelli
Villa P. 1992. Cannibalism in prehistoric WalkerPL, ThorntonR. 2001. Health, nutri-
Europe.Evol. Anthropol.1:93-104 tion, and demographicchange in nativeCal-
Villa P, Bouville C, Courtin J, Helmer D, ifornia. In The Backboneof History:Health
Mahieu E, et al. 1986. Cannibalismin the and Disease in the WesternHemisphere,ed.
Neolithic. Science 233:431-37 R Steckel, J Rose. Cambridge,UK: Cam-
Villa P, MahieuE. 1991. Breakagepatternsof bridgeUniv. Press. In press
humanlong bones. J. Hum.Evol. 21:27-48 Walpoff MH. 1996. Human Evolution. New
WalkerPL. 1989. Cranialinjuries as evidence York:McGrawHill. 927 pp.
of violence in prehistoricsouthernCalifor- WeidenreichF. 1943. The Skull of Sinanthro-
nia. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol.80:313-23 pus Pekinensis;A ComparativeStudy on a
WalkerPL. 1990. Appendix5: Tool Marks on Primitive Hominid Skull. Pehpei, Chungk-
Human Bone from Saunaktuk.Yellowknife, ing: Geol. Surv.China.484 pp.
NorthwestTerr.:Princeof WalesNorth.Her- White TD. 1986. Cut marks on the Bodo cra-
itage Cent. nium:a case of prehistoricdefleshing.Am.J.
Walker PL. 1995. Problems of preserva- Phys. Anthropol.69:503-10
tion and sexism in sexing: some lessons White TD. 1992. Prehistoric Cannibalism
from historical collections for paleodemo- at Mancos 5MTUMR-2346.Princeton, NJ:
graphers.In Grave Reflections: Portraying PrincetonUniv. Press. 462 pp.
the Past ThroughSkeletalStudies,ed. A Her- White TD, Toth N. 1989. Engis: preparation
596 WALKER

damage, not ancient cutmarks.Am. J. Phys. WilleyP, EmersonTE. 1993.Theosteology and


Anthropol.78:361-68 archaeology of the Crow Creek massacre.
WhiteTD, TothN. 1991. The questionof ritual Plains Anthropol.38:227-69
cannibalismat GrottaGuattari.Curr.Anthro- Yip KM, Tam TY, Hung LK. 1997. Mul-
pol. 32:118-38 tiple chop wounds in Hong Kong. An
WhitmanS, Benbow N, Good G. 1996. The epidemiological study of an unusual in-
epidemiology of homicide in Chicago. J. jury. Arch. Orthop.TraumaSurg. 116:295-
Natl. Med.Assoc. 88:781-87 98

You might also like