Prehistoric warfare is war conducted in the era before writing, states and other such large social organizations.

When humans first began fighting wars is a matter of great debate among anthropologists and historians. There are examples of Neanderthals with spear points embedded in their skeleton, and some archaeological evidence of other early groups of humans having killed each other. These are isolated incidents and are far more likely evidence of murder between individuals, rather than war between groups. It is also quite likely a number of these deaths were the result of hunting or other accidents.

Of the hunter-gatherer societies still in existence today some lead lives of great violence, frequently raiding neighbouring groups and seizing territory, women, and goods from others by force. Other groups, such as the famous Bushmen of the Kalahari live in societies with no warfare and very little murder. Which of these states was more common among early humans is still unknown, and a matter of deep debate.

The main weaponry of early humans was at first simple clubs and spears. These were heavily used for hunting from 35,000 BC, but there is little evidence there was much war in this era. Of the many cave paintings from this period none depict humans attacking other humans. There is no archaeological evidence of large scale fighting.

Beginning in about 12,000 BC combat was transformed by the development of bows, maces, and slings. The bow seems to have been the most important weapon in the development of early warfare, allowing attacks to be launched with far less risk to the attacker. While there are no cave paintings of battles between men armed with clubs the development of the bow brings the first depictions of organized warfare with clear illustrations of two groups of men attacking each other. These figures are clearly arrayed in lines and columns with a distinctly garbed leader at the front, some paintings even portray still recognizable techniques like flankings and envelopments .

The mace seems to have enjoyed a period of primacy, but quickly the development of leather armour greatly limited its effectiveness, leaving projectiles and edged weapons paramount.

The first archaeological record of what could be a battle is located on the Nile in Egypt near the border with Sudan. Known as Cemetery 117 it is at least seven thousand years old. It contains a large number of bodies, many with arrowheads embedded in their skeletons, indicating they may have been the casualties of a battle. Some question this site, arguing that the bodies may have accumulated over many decades and may be the evidence of the murder of trespassers, but not war. That about half the bodies are female also causes some to question their origin.

What is common among those groups that still remain and fight frequently is that warfare is highly ritualized, with a number of taboos and practices in place that limit the number of casualties and the duration of a conflict.

With the development of agriculture and the domestication of animals societies became more clearly war-like. Agriculture created large enough surpluses to enable farmers to spend some of the year as warriors, or to support a dedicated class of fighters.

Nomadic cattle and horse herders were even more likely to engage in combat, as their mounted warriors could gain much plunder by attacking the agriculturists of the river valleys.

Perhaps to dissuade the nomadic raiders, or to counter other pastoralists, fortifications and city walls began to be built, with earliest known being those of Jericho, built around 8000 BC. However, this wall was more probably for flood defense or to protect against wild animals than for defense against warriors.

The Maori of New Zealand are also notable for the thousands of fortifications constructed to enhance a group's standing in the near continuous fighting on those islands. In an era before siege weapons had been very advanced, and when attackers had limited supplies and time, fortifications seem to have been a successful method of securing a population and livestock, though the fields and homes would likely be pillaged by the attackers. These substantial fortifications show that there was considerable social organization to prehistoric peoples; extra evidence for them also being able to conduct organized warfare.

The onset of the Chalcolithic saw the introduction of copper daggers, axes, and other items. For the most part these were far too expensive and far too malleable to make efficient weapons, and are today believed to have been largely ceremonial. It would not be until the development of bronze that metal weapons became common place.

The size of prehistoric armies is a matter of debate. Those who deny the very notion of prehistoric war argue that population densities were too low to have anything larger than raiding parties of a few dozen men. This is supported by the Amarna letters, where up to 20 armed people were able to terrorise towns in the southern Levant. Others argue that settlements of the size of Çatal Höyük in modern day Turkey would have likely fielded several hundred men, and an alliance of a few cities would produce a sizable force. Certainly these groups were large enough that all the elements of warfare such as tactics, logistics, and organizational structure would have been essential to the success of an expedition.

References

• Bouthoul, Gaston. Traité de polémologie: Sociologie des guerres. Paris: Payot, 1991.
• Guilaine, Jean. Jean Zammit. Le sentier de la guerre : visages de la violence préhistorique. Paris : Seuil, 2001.
• Kelly, Raymond C. Warless societies and the origin of war. Ann Arbor : University of Michigan Press, 2000.
• LeBlanc, Steven A., Katherine E. Register. Constant battles : the myth of the peaceful, noble savage. New York : St. Martin's Griffin, 2004.
• Otterbein, Keith F.. How war began. College Station : Texas A&M University Press, 2004
• Randsborg, Klavs. Hjortspring : warfare and sacrifice in early Europe. Aarhus, Denmark; Oakville, Connecticut. : Aarhus University Press, 1995.
• Roksandic, Mirjana ed.. Violent interactions in the Mesolithic : evidence and meaning. Oxford, England : Archaeopress, 2004