Book ReviewsTROUBLED TIMES: VIOLENCE AND WARFARE IN

THE PAST. Edited by Debra L. Martin andDavid W. Frayer. Amsterdam: Gordonand Breach. 1997. 376 pp. ISBN 90-5699-534-0. $20.00 (paper)

Troubled Times—a provocative mix of os-teological and archaeological data, leavenedwith some ethnographic detail—focuses ona significant but understudied subject: vio-lence in the preindustrial, and mostly small-scale, societies that are known only throughstudies of skeletons, sites, and artifacts. Aneditor’s introduction is followed by analysesof skeletal collections from North America(Lambert, Martin, Smith, Walker, Wilkin-son), Mesoamerica (Aguade and Lory), Eu-rope (Frayer, Robb, Walker), and Asia(Walker), as well as archaeological sites inEurope (Keeley) and North America (Mas-chner). A cross-cultural ethnographic sur-vey (Ember and Ember) and a summary(Ferguson) provide a broader anthropologi-cal context for the results presented in thisvolume.

The contributions to this book are valu-able additions to a rapidly expanding bodyof work that convincingly demonstrates thatprehistoric times were by no means uni-formly peaceful. This conclusion contradictsa curiously persistent and surprisingly com-mon longing among scholars and the publicalike for a pacific prehistory that wasgreatly different from a more violent mod-ern world.

The identification of skeletal and archae-ological evidence of conflict is, of course, theinitial step in the study of violence in pre-history. The contributors to this volumeclearly explain what they used for this pur-pose. While the recognition of violencemight sound relatively straightforward,there has been an astounding and inexpli-cable reluctance among archaeologists torecognize the true purpose of defensiveworks and weapons, as noted by Keeley.Researchers dealing with human bones are

not as often afflicted by this particularblindness. After all, it is hard to miss thesignificance of stone points deeply embed-ded in bones. But osteologists face greatproblems in dealing with differential bonepreservation when undertaking compara-tive studies, as noted by several authors.

Identifying the behavior that likely re-sulted in various kinds of intentionaltrauma can tell us much about the nature ofrelations between and within past societies.Much of this book focuses on evidence foroutright warfare among separate groups ofpeople. But chapters by Martin, Walker,and Wilkinson broaden osteological studiesto include trauma attributable to intracom-munity violence. In an examination of abroad array of ancient and recent skeletalcollections, Walker found that the mostcommon forms of intentional but nonlethaltrauma varied greatly from one culturalcontext to another. For example, an unex-pectedly large number of broken nasalbones were found in early to mid-twentiethcentury autopsy skeletons drawn from lowsocioeconomic groups. Whatever the reasonfor this finding—Walker attributes it to les-sons learned from boxing—these resultsalong with collections I have examined in-dicate that fractured nasal bones tend to bemore common in modern than ancient sam-ples.

Working out patterns over time and spacein the evidence for various forms of violencerepresents a major challenge. Particularlyfine examples of this kind of research in-clude the work of Lambert with skeletons aswell as Keeley and Maschner with fortifica-tions and weapons. Unfortunately, studiesof violence in distant times, including sev-eral of these chapters, are plagued by smallsamples. Another problem is the limitednumber of sites or skeletal collections gen-erally used to characterize life in broadlydefined regions and time periods. If thisbook does nothing else, it should stimulateadditional efforts to fill the many gaps thatexist in spotty geographical and temporalcoverages. In fact, much of potential value

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 112:285–290 (2000)

© 2000 WILEY-LISS, INC.

lies unused on dusty museum shelves, asshown by the work of Frayer and Smith onold collections of skeletons.

The most difficult issue is why the formand frequency of violence vary from oneplace to another and from one time period tothe next. This topic is the real reason we areinterested in these osteological and archae-ological materials, but for the most part itawaits further research. As the editors note,it is difficult or impossible to identify fromancient remains the immediate causes ofviolence, such as seeking revenge, enhanc-ing personal prestige, and the like. But thisshortcoming is of little importance to thestudy of the social and environmental set-tings fostering conditions where seriousconflicts were more likely to break out thanin other times and places. Several authors,including Lambert and Keeley, point outthat periods of increased violence seem to beassociated with greater pressure on scarceor unpredictable resources, as well as popu-lation expansions at the expense of neigh-boring peoples.

The kinds of studies highlighted by thisvolume can greatly advance our knowledgeof violence in preindustrial societies. Emberand Ember make the commonly voiced pointthat relatively recent small-scale societiescannot be considered survivals from ancienttimes, and thus their propensity for violencecannot be directly extrapolated to their pre-historic counterparts. This point is arguedforcefully by Ferguson, both here and in hisother writings, when he maintains that theintensity of conflict among newly contacted

peoples exceeds that which occurred in pre-history. Here we have one of the most im-portant reasons for systematically examin-ing prehistoric skeletons, sites, and arti-facts: they are the only means of identifyingthe kinds of violence experienced by peoplesunaffected by the inexorable advance of col-onizing powers over the last few hundredyears.

One result of the osteological work is wor-thy of special note. For healed injuries, it iscommonly assumed that trauma frequen-cies increase with advanced age. Just such acorrelation of fractures with age appears tobe true of the broken noses in Walker’sstudy. Yet this simple relationship was notfound in fractures of the cranial vault inWalker’s several skeletal samples or inLambert’s prehistoric California Indians.Nor was it found in Robb’s ancient Italianskeletons where all forms of trauma werecombined. Apparently the survivors ofmany forms of intentional and accidentaltrauma experienced a greater risk of deaththan their uninjured contemporaries.

This provocative volume will commandthe attention of future researchers inter-ested in this relatively neglected aspect ofthe behavior of prehistoric peoples. It willappeal to a wide variety of scholars in themany academic disciplines concerned withunderstanding purposeful violence in hu-man societies.

GEORGE R. MILNER

Department of AnthropologyPennsylvania State UniversityUniversity Park, Pennsylvania

BIOARCHEOLOGY OF THE SOUTH CENTRAL

UNITED STATES. Edited by Jerome C. Rose.Fayetteville, AR: Arkansas Archeologi-cal Survey Research Series No. 55. 1999.297 pp. ISBN 1-56349-086-2. $30.00 (pa-per).

Despite the publication of several majorregional syntheses of osteological data overthe past two decades, biological anthropolo-gists continue to crave more comparativedata in order to address increasingly com-

plex questions concerning subsistencechanges, health trends, and genetic rela-tionships among past populations. This vol-ume has, to a large extent, answered thatcall. Packed with 160 tables and 39 figures,the primary purpose of this volume is toprovide an exhaustive synthesis of datafrom both published and unpublishedsources representing six broadly defined re-gions encompassing Colorado, Kansas, NewMexico, Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri, Arkan-sas, and Louisiana.

286 BOOK REVIEWS