Defining Violence
What is violence and how do we recognise it in prehistory? For most of the Neolithic, specialised weapons are generally absent, and while ostensibly fortified sites exist, these may reflect expressions of power and/or community solidarity rather than defence.
This chapter therefore focuses primarily on bodily, that is, skeletal signs for violence, as the most direct evidence for its occurrence. We follow a definition of violence as ‘physically aggressive behaviour that does or potentially could cause injury or death'.[137] We acknowledge that there are other concepts of violence which entail emotional, psychological, sexual or material damage rather than bodily harm; that physical injury can result in emotional and psychological damage;[138] and probably most importantly, that different cultural norms exist for what actually constitutes physical violence.[139] The latter aspect is important in terms of trying to infer intention and meaning from evidence dating back millennia. While we focus here on violent trauma severe enough to affect the skeleton, osteological analysis also has the potential to provide a degree of insight regarding what is currently termed ‘structural violence' and inequality, through skeletal indicators of health and nutritional status. However, many other aspects may not be evident, including the threat of violence and emotional and psychological maltreatment.[140] It is also important to note that skeletal signs of violence provide us with only a minimum number of individuals affected, as not all violent injuries will affect the skeleton.[141]
More on the topic Defining Violence:
-
Conflictology -
Ecology -
Economy -
Finance -
History -
Law -
Medicine -
Philosophy -
Religious studies -