Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Oldest Nuclear Family Found Murdered In Germany

Posted by kdawson on Wed Nov 19, 2008 03:16 AM
from the calling-csi-stone-age dept.
Pickens writes "The oldest genetically identifiable nuclear family met a violent death, according to analysis of remains from 4,600-year-old burials in Germany where the broken bones of these stone age people show they were killed in a struggle. Comparisons of DNA from one grave confirm it contained a mother, father, and their two children. 'We're really sure, based on hard biological facts not just supposing or assuming,' says Dr. Wolfgang Haak, from The Australian Centre for Ancient DNA. The stone-age people are thought to belong to a group known as the Corded Ware Culture, signified by their pots decorated with impressions from twisted cords. The children and adult males had the same type of strontium in their teeth — which was also found locally, but the nearest match to the women's teeth was at least 50km away, suggesting they had moved to the area. 'They were definitely murdered, there are big holes in their heads, fingers and wrists are broken,' says Dr. Alistair Pike from Bristol University. He noted that one victim even had the tip of a stone weapon embedded in a vertebra. 'You feel some kind of sympathy for them, it's a human thing, somebody must have really cared for them. ... We don't know how hard daily life was back there and if there was any space for love,' added Dr. Haak."
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 19 2008, @03:22AM (#25814625)

    How the heck did they survive 4600 years? Was it from all the radiation?? Were they zombies? That is so awesome

    • I think they were killed for having WMD. They should not have been playing with nuclear material. Even though they were undead nuclear mutant zombies, they should get a decent burial and not be dug up by archaeologists and strangers ever few thousand years.
    • Re:How the heck.. (Score:5, Informative)

      by swid27 (869237) on Wednesday November 19 2008, @09:35AM (#25816977) Homepage
      ...on a "real science" note, these remains are one of the older human finds with enough intact DNA to reliably classify the maternal and paternal lineages. Usable mitochondrial DNA [wikipedia.org] was found in 9 of the 13 individuals; there were 3 in mtDNA haplogroup K1b [wikipedia.org], 2 in haplogroup X2 [wikipedia.org], and one apiece in haplogroup U5b [wikipedia.org], I [wikipedia.org], H [wikipedia.org], and K1a2. Three males in the same grave (an adult and two children) were found to be members of Y-DNA haplogroup R1a [wikipedia.org].
  • Ouch (Score:5, Funny)

    by kitsunewarlock (971818) on Wednesday November 19 2008, @03:31AM (#25814663) Journal
    Did anyone else read this as "the woman's teeth were found 50 km away from the rest of her body"? That would be one hell of a sucker-punch!
    • That would be one hell of a sucker-punch!

      World record donkey punch [wikipedia.org] perhaps?

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        D to the P, bro.

        I'm thinking she just left the teeth in a glass on her night stand.

        Seriously, I don't think it's surprising that some catastrophic or violent event caused the oldest "nuclear" family's remains to be found together in the same place.

        In face, under what other circumstances would you find the remains of a whole family in one place, except a cemetary, and then most of them would be fully grown?

    • Re:Ouch (Score:5, Insightful)

      by mcvos (645701) on Wednesday November 19 2008, @06:39AM (#25815535)

      Did anyone else read this as "the woman's teeth were found 50 km away from the rest of her body"? That would be one hell of a sucker-punch!

      As if "Nuclear family" wasn't confusing enough.

      I thought a family that was famous for something nuclear-related in the '50s had recently been killed.

  • by phozz bare (720522) on Wednesday November 19 2008, @03:32AM (#25814671)

    The perpetrator of this monstrosity must be caught and brought to justice!

  • by Max Romantschuk (132276) <max@romantschuk.fi> on Wednesday November 19 2008, @04:04AM (#25814827) Homepage

    Love seems to be embedded in the very genetic fabric of mammals on some level. I'm sure there was space for love, in a way that made sense back then anyway.

    • by totally bogus dude (1040246) on Wednesday November 19 2008, @06:28AM (#25815475)

      Your off-topic mod sucks, and I hope someone fixes it. It's definitely an interest subject, but I doubt we'll ever really know for sure -- there's only so much you can deduce from fossils. That said, I imagine it would be very different to how we behave today.

      Consider that even in our very recent past, most marriages were arranged by the parents or even other members of the society -- anyone who tried to "follow their heart" would've been punished, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if such punishments were pretty extreme like being stoned to death. [bbc.co.uk] (Fair warning: that article is pretty unpleasant.)

      I also wonder how long we humans have had the kind of intelligence we have today. 4,000 years isn't a very long time by evolutionary standards, but perhaps intelligence evolves faster? Are the incredible achievements we now take for granted the result of some kind of improvement in our ability to harness the power of the brain, or just a result of slow incremental improvements to our societal organisation? Perhaps it's all down to improved teaching methods and a realisation of its importance?

      • by theaveng (1243528) on Wednesday November 19 2008, @07:14AM (#25815701)

        At the time, 2500 B.C., we had already built advanced cultures in Egypt, Greece, and China. This is the era from which we get the great pyramids, the earliest oral legends about a great flood and god mythologies, and the first alphabet (not pictograms, but an actual letter-based form of writing).

        I don't think there was any difference in intelligence between them and us... not in such a short span of time.

        • by Emb3rz (1210286) on Wednesday November 19 2008, @08:44AM (#25816343) Homepage

          Haven't had time to do extensive research on it (just a few quick 'googles'), but it seems as though many people do put the event of the Noachian Flood at 2360BC or thereabouts.

          If that is the case then the violence shown toward this family was actually characteristic of the time they lived in. The Nephilim (known as Fellers of Men) were said to be extremely large and violent (and wouldn't you be, if you were the abomination-son of a demon?). It's also said that the Earth was filled with violence, so much so that God became saddened over his having created Humans who now acted so badly. This, in fact, motivated Him to wipe out the wicked people of that ancient world - doing so by a global deluge.

    • by dnoyeb (547705) on Wednesday November 19 2008, @09:39AM (#25817057) Homepage Journal

      Thank you.

      People that look back historically always seem to look at people back then as if they are children. Even when they are full grown adults. Its not like we are more capable then they were. Its not like they are somehow stupid. Like on TV cave men always simply grunt, when their vocal capabilities are vast. No other animal with vocal capabilities simply ignores them. Its un-scientifit. They couldn't develop without use.

      So this crack about if there is "space for love?" Come on! He says that as if Love is useless. Again, unscientific.

    • by Tisha_AH (600987) <Tisha.Hayes@gmail.com> on Wednesday November 19 2008, @09:41AM (#25817107)

      The authors statement about time for love is pedantic. There are numerous literary references from contemporary cultures of the same era on love (sumerians, egyptians, etc...). There are surviving cuneiform tablets of poetry, filled with references to love and adoration that are discovered with quite regularity in Iraq.

      The human species of 10,000 years ago and of today are virtually identical in our physical and emotional development.

      The differences that brought about "modern" civilization were on agricultural practices where we gradually converted from nomadic hunter-gatherer societies to stationary agricultural practices, animal husbandry and permanent communities. Then, as technologies developed (the wheel, the plow, irrigation, pottery, masonry, etc..) we had leisure time to devote to art and literature.

      To think that we did not have time for "love" in a harsh environment is to ignore the more contemporary examples such as the Inuit or rain forest peoples where life was very difficult but cohesive families based on love and a sense of belonging have existed for thousands of years.

  • by jandersen (462034) on Wednesday November 19 2008, @04:04AM (#25814831)

    Murder is a legal construct from relatively modern times; and even the modern definition excludes such things as killing of enemies. The ideas about who is your enemy has shiftet somewhat since that time, I imagine.

    • Actually, we're talking only 4600 years old. Codes of laws included murder in the same age, e.g., in Messopotamia or Egypt.

      And even by tribal warfare standards, it sounds as an atrocity. You don't take the time to smash someone's fingers _after_ they're already stone dead. Doing that to women and children? Oooer. (Women used to be taken as spoils of war anyway, since a disproportionately shorter life expectancy gave primitive people -- and by that I mean at least as late as 100 BC Roman Empire! -- a chronic

    • Bloody murder... or bloody LIE? Four mysterious skeletons found with holes in their skulls: join us as we delve into this shocking tale. Archaeologists say they were murdered... but could the truth be far more horrible?

  • For a moment, I thought Otto Hahn's family had fallen victim to a fanatic bent on turning back the clock of nuclear proliferation....

  • by Roland Piquepaille (780675) on Wednesday November 19 2008, @04:07AM (#25814841)

    it's a human thing, somebody must have really cared for them

    Big holes in the head, broken limbs, bits of stone axe in the back? someone must have really cared for them, but in a Charlie Manson sort of way...

  • i read this story on the bbc a few days ago, and again here today. but one thing i still dont get, what is a nuclear family?

  • by PinkyDead (862370) on Wednesday November 19 2008, @04:36AM (#25814979) Journal

    I often wonder, when we put characteristics on people when we name them are we making a huge mistake.

    Imagine, if you will...

    Here's Guntherisk, master of all he surveys, wielder of the mighty stone ax of Guildergrump, slayer of men and ravisher of women - confident that his greatness will be remembered in tales and song for thousands of years to come.

    Well apparently not, he will be remembered for his brilliant idea of putting cord marks into pottery (which was actually Mrs Guntherisk's idea).

  • No space for love? I'd assume that there was a form of love present between the family members. As for their deaths, it was probably similar to why people fight now: over territory, "stolen" mates, etc. I'm not trying to make a zillion assumptions, but I find it hard to believe that the crux of human behavior has changed that much, things like specialization of workers, writing, extensive schooling etc. seem more like cultural changes that have been building on one another for ages. I've heard from books th
    • Oh, I also just wanted to say, if you're wondering if these guys were so busy scrabbling to survive, feel more sorry for yourself. Turns out significantly less time [economist.com] was required for labor.

      Not only had hunter-gatherers enjoyed plenty of protein, not much fat and ample vitamins in their diet, but it also seems they did not have to work very hard. The Hadza of Tanzania "work" about 14 hours a week

      So they had plenty of time for love, way way more so than your average family with two working parents. Hmm. . .bot

      • So they had plenty of time for love, way way more so than your average family with two working parents.

        ...unless you account for the life expectancy, I guess?

  • by dontmakemethink (1186169) on Wednesday November 19 2008, @05:05AM (#25815115)

    "We don't know how hard daily life was back there and if there was any space for love"

    "there are big holes in their heads"

    Hell yeah. Mod me nasty, but you're feelin it.

  • by Drakkenmensch (1255800) on Wednesday November 19 2008, @08:25AM (#25816187)
    "If you were around this area in germany 4600 years ago and have information about this murder that could lead to th earrest of suspects, please the dial number at the bottom of your screen. I'm Robert Stacks, and this is Unsolved Mysteries."
      • by slart42 (694765) on Wednesday November 19 2008, @04:24AM (#25814915)

        I like bad taste.. but then again, I'm German.

        • by zeromorph (1009305) on Wednesday November 19 2008, @05:07AM (#25815133)

          But then, the small scale of the atrocity strikes me rather Ungerman, sorry for the taste, I'm German too.

          And just for the record, a quotation, attribute, of Margret Thatcher after a German football (soccer) victory:

          "They may have beat us at our national game, but we beat them twice at their national game."

          • by zeromorph (1009305) on Wednesday November 19 2008, @06:35AM (#25815513)

            Please forgive me commenting on a moderation, but who am I flaimbaiting here?

            Sorry, but we Germans have earned quite a reputation of going large-scale berzerk in the last centuries and every neighbouring country of us has suffered from it. Every sane German knows this and won't argue about this. And, I think, I hope, we changed much of our political attitude during the last sixty years. Making fun of our inglorious history may very well classify for bad taste - and bad jokes doubly so - but how can it be flamebait?

            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              Sorry, but we Germans have earned quite a reputation of going large-scale berzerk in the last centuries and every neighbouring country of us has suffered from it.

              Exactly. You worked hard for that reputation, so you earned it. I'd hate it if you had to start all over again. (Particularly since I'm one of those neighbours.)

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Sounds good on the surface but don't forget that our diversity of religion and state keeps us from a one government 1984 kind of world. Sure we disagree sure every nation has it's share of assholes, but different views and ideas allow todays people to find a culture that works for them and helps provide balance.
        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward

          it's hard to influence governments at a local level, harder at a regional level, almost impossible at a national level (bailouts in th US or Iraq war in the UK for example?). Checks and balances *aren't* working. Try doing it at the multinational level (EU? bwahaha, good luck with that).

          At the global level you might as well just spread your legs, grab your ankles and loosen up.

          • then your vote is but one in millions. your vote should not be worth more than that, nor less than that. what is this influence you speak of? you think you deserve more influence than the next person? i don't understnad your point

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward

          Because if you don't like the "One True World" government, where do you go? I myself have been fortunate enough to find a place where I was not born, where things are dealt with differently. This would be impossible under a worldwide system.

          Once there is no competition, no "outside" to peer in, no "inside" to peer out of, all those checks and balances go out the window.

          One world government means that the entire world will have to bow down to the lowest common denominator. Look at our "integrated" western so

        • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 19 2008, @05:45AM (#25815285)

          The argument against one world government is a simple one based on biodiversity. Basically, if that single government is fucked up, we are all screwed. You see that theme in a lot of dystopian scifi. It's the individuals on the fringe--the "savages"--that fight to topple the one world order (e.g., Gattaca, Brave New World).

          The advantage of tribalism was that many different groups developed their own cultures, both sustainable and unsustainable, and evolutionary processes weeded out the unsustainable ones (including the violent ones, if you examine tribal history in the Americas).

          The advent of larger social groupings like cities and nations, based on the development of totalitarian agriculture, allows the formation of caste systems including "warrior" castes (like the military or the police). Once a social group has enough resources to support a warrior caste it can exert its control upon its neighbors and wipe out more peaceful groups. I would argue that at this point a social group can no longer be called a tribe (which invalidates your original argument about the dangers of tribalism).

          We are trending towards one world culture, and the danger is that if this culture is fundamentally flawed (and it's not hard to arrive at that conclusion), the damage caused by its downfall will affect the entire planet rather than an isolated group.

          • because we all live on one tiny piece of rock. we are already in the same boat. what happens in beijing matters in new york matters in moscow matters in london. regardless of national divisions. there is no law, no border guard that protects you if they screw up rorally in beijing. there is no escaping the consequences of the poor choices someone somewhere else makes. already. regardless of world government or not

            and as for culture, we are part of the same culture. human culture. the differences betwen cult

            • by Koiu Lpoi (632570) <koiulpoi AT gmail DOT com> on Wednesday November 19 2008, @07:17AM (#25815721)

              and as for culture, we are part of the same culture. human culture. the differences betwen cultures are minimal and arbitrary and ultimately inconsequential

              Come visit Japan for a while (or pretty much anywhere that isn't Europe/US etc), and I suspect that your "differences are minimal and arbitrary" idea will fall away pretty quick. We're all human, and we all share that, but there's a LOT different as well.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      I figured they were talking about the murder of the, erm, oldest people in Germany living in this current age... So I clicked through out of curiousity, wondering what it might have to do with technology.

      Blah, that's better than me. I was expecting to read about the recent grizzly murder of a family of an elderly couple in their 90's and their seventy-something year old children who were still living with them (but no spouses for the children or third generation). In other words, the family that met the con

      • by zeromorph (1009305) on Wednesday November 19 2008, @04:46AM (#25815031)

        I cherish your slashdot bashing but here the BBC [bbc.co.uk] is the sensationalist:

        Oldest nuclear family 'murdered'
        By Julian Siddle
        Science Reporter, BBC News

        The oldest genetically identifiable nuclear family met
        a violent death, according to analysis of remains from
        4,600-year-old burials in Germany.

        • what exactly is sensationalized by the BBC? they are the oldest nuclear family to be positively identified. that is a fact, and a significant part of this archaeological find. they were in fact murdered (presumably bears and other native predators did not know how to use stone weapons).

          that some people don't know what a "nuclear family [wikipedia.org]" is, or jump to incorrect conclusions about the article before reading it does not mean BBC sensationalized the story.