Re: Modern Humans using wild grains and tubers for food more than 100,000 ya
Eric Stevens
wrote:
--- snip ----
>It has been postulated that one of the cultural changes
>which gave rise to modern humans was the division of labor
>along gender lines. It has been further postulated that
>Neanderthalers, for example, had no such division and
>that females and males hunted along side each other.
><National Geographic sometime last year>.
>
>The postulated division of labor in moderns is that of
>the male hunting and the female gathering. If this was
>indeed the case, then the gathering person, who probably
>had the greatest success providing calories for herself,
>her mate and her offspring, would have searched out
>plants from which these calories could be extracted from
>early on in the species development.
>
>The 'work' the male did would have strengthened the group
>by providing needed protein in the form of meat, but success
>in doing so was not required on a daily basis as long as there
>was a daily supply of calories sufficient for life and
>foraging.
>
>Some plant products need processing and preparation before
>eating. Discovery of tools used in such processing and
>preparation helps to make the case for this division as
>well as helping to show how human adaptation can lead to
>a very wide dispersal of populations.
Division of labour between the sexes is apparent in the behaviour of
animals much further down the evolutionary tree than Neanderthalers.
It is nonsense to suggest that division of labour is the invention of
modern man.
Eric Stevens
Tom McDonald
The division of labor in humans is a subject for archaeological,
and paleoanthropological, investigation. Whether it is nonsense
to say that we'uns invented it or not is that which is to be
determined.
The reduced canines in Ardipithecus ramidus may suggest a change
in the relationship between the genders. If A.r. males didn't
need large canines for either display or defense then it is
possible that there might have been a shift to A.r. males
courting females with food.
This has been discussed in terms of a shift in sexual behavior,
but it may equally be seen as a potential precursor to division
of labor based on gender.
In any case, that is the sort of thing that needs looking into,
not being assumed.
--
Tom "Go Pack" McDonald
Lee Olsen
>
> Division of labour between the sexes is apparent in the behaviour of
> animals much further down the evolutionary tree than Neanderthalers.
> It is nonsense to suggest that division of labour is the invention of
> modern man.
OK, morphologically speaking I agree with you
and sexual dimorphism is a big clue that
something very different was going on between
males and females well into our distant
past (Frayer & Wolpoff 1985).
But since this is an archaeology list, what
is found in the archaeological record that would
indicate a recent division of labor is nonsense?
>
> Eric Stevens
Eric Stevens
At the very most, we reinvented it. One must then ask if we even did
that.
>
>The reduced canines in Ardipithecus ramidus may suggest a change
>in the relationship between the genders. If A.r. males didn't
>need large canines for either display or defense then it is
>possible that there might have been a shift to A.r. males
>courting females with food.
>
>This has been discussed in terms of a shift in sexual behavior,
>but it may equally be seen as a potential precursor to division
>of labor based on gender.
>
>In any case, that is the sort of thing that needs looking into,
>not being assumed.
For obvious reasons, that the behavior of the sexes was different is a
given. I think that what you are suggesting is that there was a shift
in the differences of behaviour.
Eric Stevens