Individual Families in Pastoral Societies Are Most Likely to Own __________.
Hunter-Gatherers (Foragers)
In the quest to explain man culture, anthropologists have paid a great deal of attention to recent hunter-gatherer, or forager, societies. A major reason for this focus has been the widely held belief that cognition of hunter-gatherer societies could open a window into agreement early human cultures. After all, it is argued that for the vast stretch of man history, people lived by foraging for wild plants and animals. Indeed, not until about x thousand years agone did societies in Western asia (the famous Fertile Crescent) brainstorm to cultivate and domesticate plants and animals. Food production took over to such an extent that, in the past few hundred years, but an estimated five one thousand thousand people take subsisted by foraging. But while the numbers of recent hunter-gatherers may be relatively minor, that does not mean that food production inevitably becomes the dominant economic strategy. Many such societies go along to forage (Kramer and Greaves 2016, 15).
What tin can we infer most our afar ancestors by looking at a few well-known hunter-gatherer societies of recent times? To draw reliable inferences, nosotros would demand to believe that pockets of human guild could exist unchanged over tens of thousands of years—that hunter-gatherers did not acquire from experience, introduce, or adapt to changes in their natural and social environments. Even a cursory look at the ethnographic record, even so, reveals that many foraging cultures have changed substantially over time. Both in the archaeological record and more recently, hunter-gatherers have not only interacted with food producers through trade and other exchanges, simply many have also added cultivated crops to their economies that integrate well foraging wild resources (Kramer and Greaves 2016, 16). Moreover, recent hunter-gatherer cultures share some traits merely are also quite different from one some other.
How can we draw better inferences most the past? Cantankerous-cultural researchers ask how and why hunter-gatherer societies vary. Past agreement what weather predict variation and also using the paleoanthropological record to make educated guesses near past conditions in a detail place, anthropologists may take a improve take a chance of inferring what hunter-gatherers of the past were similar (Hitchcock and Beisele 2000, 5; Ember 1978; Marlowe 2005).
Because cultures modify through time, we cannot but projection ethnographic data from the present to the past
Below nosotros summarize the cross-cultural literature in the terminal half century on hunter-gatherers. Nosotros mostly restrict the discussion to statistically supported hypotheses based on samples of ten or more cultures. We also discuss what is not yet known and questions that invite further inquiry.
Simply before nosotros turn to what we know from cantankerous-cultural research, let the states outset talk briefly about the term "hunter-gatherers". Hunter-gatherers has go the commonly-used term for people who depend largely on food drove or foraging for wild resources. Foraged wild resources are obtained by a diversity of methods including gathering plants, collecting shellfish or other small fauna, hunting, scavenging, and fishing. This is in dissimilarity to food production, where people rely on cultivating domesticated plants and breeding and raising domesticated animals for food. Unfortunately, the common term hunter-gatherers overrates the importance of hunting, downplays gathering, and ignores line-fishing. All the same, in one cross-cultural sample of hunter-gatherers (foragers), fishing appeared to exist the most important activity in 38 percentage of the societies, gathering was next at 30 percent, and hunting was the least important at 25 pct (Ember 1978). So, if we were being fair, such societies should be called "fisher-gatherer-hunters" or, more than simply, "foragers." Just because the term "hunter-gatherers" is so widely used, we volition use it hither.
What We Take Learned
We know nigh hunter-gatherers of recent times from anthropologists who have lived and worked with hunting and gathering groups. Some of the recent and ofttimes discussed cases are the Mbuti of the Ituri Wood (fundamental Africa), the San of the Kalahari Desert (southern Africa) and the Copper Inuit of the Chill (Due north America). These hunter-gatherers live in environments that are non conducive to agriculture.
What Are Hunter-Gatherers of Recent Times Generally Like?
Based on the ethnographic data and cross-cultural comparisons, it is widely accustomed (Textor 1967; Service 1979; Murdock and Provost 1973) that recent hunter-gatherer societies generally
-
are fully or semi-nomadic.
-
live in small communities.
-
have low population densities.
-
practice not accept specialized political officials.
-
accept little wealth differentiation.
-
are economically specialized merely by age and gender.
-
usually divide labor by gender, with women gathering wild plants and men fishing and almost ever doing the hunting.
-
take animistic religions—that is, believe that all natural things have intentionality or a vital force that can affect humans (Peoples, Duda, and Marlowe 2016).
Complex Hunter-Gatherers
Not all hunter-gatherers arrange to this listing of traits. In fact, ethnographers of societies in the Pacific Coast of North America (largely northwestern U.S. and southwestern Canada) accept given united states of america a very different picture. These hunting-gathering societies, many of whom depended largely on fishing in their traditional economies, had larger communities, stationary villages, and social inequality. For a long time, many scholars idea of them equally dissonant hunter-gatherers. Merely the picture is quickly irresolute, largely as a consequence of archaeological enquiry on the Upper Paleolithic menstruation, prior to the emergence of agriculture. During this menstruation hunter-gatherers in many areas of the globe appear to have developed inequality. Such complex hunter-gatherers were found in North America in the Interior Northwest Plateau, the Canadian Arctic, and the American Southeast, likewise every bit in S America, the Caribbean, Japan, parts of Commonwealth of australia, northern Eurasia, and the Middle Eastward (Sassaman 2004, 228). Archaeologists infer inequality from the presence of prestige items such every bit ornamental jewelry, or major differences in burials indicative of "rich" and "poor" individuals (Hayden and Villeneuve 2011, 124–6).
Circuitous hunter-gatherer societies, in contrast to simpler hunter-gatherers by and large have the following traits (Hayden and Villeneuve 2011, 334–35):
-
higher population densities (.2 to ten people per square mile)
-
fully sedentary or seasonally sedentary communities
-
more circuitous sociopolitical organization primarily based on economic product
-
meaning socioeconomic differences
-
some private ownership of resources and individual storage
-
competitive displays and feasts
-
elites try to control access to the supernatural
-
while almost all hunter-gatherers have some kind of astronomical organization, circuitous hunter gatherer groups generally exhibit some solstice observation or calendars.
Hunter-Gatherer Childhoods
In a number of ways, childhood in hunter-gatherer societies appears to be more relaxed and like shooting fish in a barrel-going compared with most food-producers. And, hunter-gatherer children announced to receive more warmth and affection from parents (Rohner 1975, 97–105).
Children in hunting and gathering societies generally take fewer chores assigned to them, such as subsistence work and baby-tending, compared with other societies (Ember and Cunnar 2015). This means that kids take more time to play and explore their surroundings. But play does not mean that children are non learning about subsistence. In fact, much of their play involves playing at doing what adults exercise—boys often "chase" with miniature bows and arrows and girls commonly "gather" and "cook." In some hunter-gatherer groups, a lot of real work goes on with these activities. For example, Crittenden and colleagues (2013) study that amongst the Hadza of Tanzania, children 5 years of historic period and younger may exist getting half their food on their own and by 6 years of historic period, 75 percent of their food. At 3, boys receive their offset minor bow and pointer and chase for little animals. Peradventure to the amazement of many parents in Northward America, children as young every bit iv build fires and cook meals on their own in their childhood groups. Kids in many hunter-gatherer groups do not do as much as the Hadza though, mayhap because other environments in other places are more than unsafe. Dangers may include the presence of large predators, little water, or few recognizable features to help children detect their way dorsum habitation. Children also learn more directly from parents when they accompany them on trips—watching, participating when they can, and receiving explicit pedagogy. Hunting is one of the most difficult skills to learn and usually requires more direct instruction (Lew-Levy et al. 2017).
Sharing with others is widely agreed to be an important hunter-gatherer value which parents begin to instill every bit early as infancy; later on this didactics is taken upward by older children. In some groups, teaching to share begins as early equally half-dozen weeks to 6 months (Lew-Levy et al. 2018).
Why are hunter-gatherer parents generally more appreciating? Ronald Rohner'southward (1975, 97–105) inquiry suggests that warmth toward children is more probable when a mother has help in childcare. In the case of hunter-gatherers, fathers are more often than not much more engaged in babe care compared to food-producing fathers (Marlowe 2000; Hewlett and Macfarlan 2010). If fathers or other caretakers provide assist, mothers may be less stressed (Rohner 1975). Fathers providing help is consistent with the fact that hunter-gatherer husbands and wives are more likely to appoint in all kinds of activities together—eating together, working together, and sleeping together (Hewlett and Macfarlan 2010). Leisure time may too help explain more affection expressed toward children. Leisure time generally decreases with increasing societal complication, and parents with fiddling leisure time may be more than irritable and curt-tempered (Ember and Ember 2019, 60).
Of grade, the fact that hunter-gatherer children have more than fourth dimension to play does not mean that parents are not active teachers. In a study of hunter-gatherer social learning, Garfield, Garfield and Hewlett (2016) report that teaching by parents or the older generation is the main course of learning about subsistence. Parents do more instruction in early childhood; other elders do more in later childhood. Didactics religious beliefs and practices is more common in adolescence and is oftentimes undertaken by the larger community.
Some inquiry suggests that hunter-gatherers place unlike emphases on valued traits for children to acquire. Compared to nutrient producers, hunter-gatherers are less probable to stress obedience and responsibility in child grooming and are more than likely to stress independence, cocky-reliance, and achievement (Barry, Child, and Salary (1959); Hendrix (1985) finds that high hunting is especially associated with high accomplishment). Why? Barry, Child, and Bacon argue that child grooming is adaptive for different subsistence needs. Nutrient producers depend on food accumulation for the long-run, and mistakes made in subsistence are very risky. In contrast, if hunter-gatherers brand mistakes, the furnishings are short-lived, but gains in creativity could provide long-term benefits.
Other Hunter-Gatherer Differences
-
Marriages amongst hunter-gatherers are much more likely to exist with unrelated individuals or distantly related kin compared with food producers (horticulturalists and agro-pastoralists) who more than frequently ally closely-related individuals (Walker 2014; Walker and Bailey 2014). In full general, hunter-gatherer groups have low levels of relatedness (Hill et al. 2011).
Why? It is theorized that nomadic populations may need a wider network of kin who might exist able to provide residential options in times of fluctuating resources.
-
The songs of hunter-gatherers are less wordy and characterized by more nonwords, repetition, and relaxed enunciation (Lomax 1968, 117–28).
Why? As discussed further in the Arts module, Lomax theorizes that songs reflect the way people in a society work. In less circuitous societies people learn by observation and gradual pedagogy, and therefore explicit exact instruction is not needed.
-
Hunter-gatherer languages rarely have the sounds "F" and "5" in their languages contrasted with agriculturalists (Blasi et al. 2019).
Why? The researchers observe testify supporting the theory that "F" and "V" sounds emerged with the transition to agriculture, probably because of dietary changes to softer foods. Softer foods lead to the teeth formation well-nigh of u.s.a. are used to—the top front teeth come down in front of the lesser front teeth when the rima oris is closed. Nevertheless, harder foods that hunter-gatherers traditionally ate prevented this overbite; the edge of the top teeth merely met with the edge of the bottom teeth. The "F" and "5" sounds are hard to produce without an overbite.
Are Hunter-Gatherers More Peaceful Than Food Producers?
It is widely agreed that, compared to nutrient producers, hunter-gatherers fight less (Ember and Ember 1997). But why? Perhaps it is because in contrast to nutrient producers, hunter-gatherers are less prone to resources unpredictability, famines, and food shortages (Textor 1967; Ember and Ember 1997, 10; Berbesque et al. 2014). And resource unpredictability is a major predictor of increased warfare in the ethnographic record (Ember and Ember 1992, 1997).
But fighting less than food producers does not necessarily mean that hunter-gatherers are typically peaceful. For example, Ember (1978) reported that well-nigh hunter-gatherers engaged in warfare at least every two years. But another study found that warfare was rare or absent among most hunter-gatherers (Lenski and Lenski 1978; reported in Nolan 2003).
Why are there these contradictory answers to the question well-nigh the peacefulness of hunter-gatherers?
How we define terms will affect the consequence of a cross-cultural study. When asking if hunter-gatherers are typically peaceful, for case, researchers will get dissimilar results depending upon what they mean by peaceful, how they ascertain hunter-gatherers, and whether they have excluded societies forced to stop fighting (that is, pacified) by colonial powers or national governments in their analyses.
Most researchers dissimilarity war and peace. If the researcher views peace as the absenteeism of war, then the answer to whether hunter-gatherers are more peaceful than food producers depends on the definition of war. Anthropologists agree that war in smaller-scale societies needs to be defined differently from war in nation-states that have armed forces and large numbers of casualties. Besides, within-community or purely private acts of violence are nearly always distinguished from warfare. Withal, in that location is controversy most what to call different types of socially organized violence between communities. For instance, Fry (2006, 88, 172–74) does not consider feuding between communities warfare, merely Ember and Ember (1992) do.
In the warfare department beneath, nosotros hash out predictors of variation in warfare amidst hunter-gatherers.
How and Why practise Hunter-Gatherers Vary?
Hunter-gatherers vary in many ways, only cross-cultural enquiry has focused on variations in the surroundings and types of subsistence, contributions to the nutrition by gender, marital residence, the degree of nomadism, and the frequency and type of warfare.
Variation in Environment and Subsistence Practices
-
The closer to the equator, the higher the constructive temperature, or the more than plant biomass, the more than hunter-gatherers depend upon gathering rather than hunting or fishing (Lee and DeVore 1968, 42–43; Kelly 1995, 70; Binford 1990, 132).
-
The lower the effective temperature, the more hunter-gatherers rely on fishing (Binford 1990, 134).
-
As the growing flavour lengthens, hunter-gatherers are more likely to exist fully nomadic (Binford 1990, 131).
-
In New Guinea, foragers with a high dependence on line-fishing tend to have higher population density and large settlements. Some of the foragers in New Guinea with a high dependence on fishing have densities of 40 or more than people/square km and settlements of over one thousand people (Roscoe 2006).
Division Of Labor By Gender
-
Males contribute more to the diet the lower the effective temperature or the higher the latitude (Kelly 1995, 262; Marlowe 2005, 56). As we saw above, gathering is a more than important subsistence activeness closer to the equator. Since gathering is more often women's work, and hunting more than often men'south piece of work, this may account for the relationship.
-
In higher quality environments (with more than plant growth), men are more likely to share gathering tasks with women. Greater division of labor by gender occurs in lower quality environments (Marlowe 2007).
Marital Residence
-
Amidst hunter-gatherers, how much males and females contribute to primary production predicts rules of marital residence—more specifically, when male contribution is high, patrilocal residence is probable; when not that high, matrilocal residence is likely.
-
Not surprisingly, the more a foraging club depends upon gathering, the more probable the club is to exist matrilocal. The more dependent upon fishing, the more than likely a social club is to be patrilocal. However, degree of dependence on hunting does non predict marital residence (Ember 1975).
-
This finding is contrary to the general worldwide trend when all types of subsistence economies are considered—gender contribution to subsistence does non by and large predict marital residence (Ember and Ember 1971; Divale 1974; Ember 1975). Why hunter-gathering societies are dissimilar is not clear.
-
-
Bilocal residence, where couples can live with either set of relatives (in dissimilarity to matrilocal or patrilocal residence), is predicted past small (under fifty) community size, high rainfall variability, and recent drastic population loss (Ember 1975).
Why? The finding regarding population loss is consequent with previous findings from a broader study (Ember and Ember 1972) which tested Service'due south (1962, 137) theory that drastic loss from introduced diseases made it necessary for couples to live with whoever was alive (Ember and Ember 1972). High rainfall variability is an indicator of resource unpredictability. Theory suggests that residential motility is a way to flexibly adapt to variability of resource over time—couples tin move to places that have more abundance (Ember 1975). Finally, when communities are very small-scale, the ratio of marriageable males to marriageable females can fluctuate greatly. Following a unilocal residence rule might mean that all marriageable men have to leave if residence were matrilocal, or all marriageable women would have to leave if residence were patrilocal. Small communities would non exist able to maintain a consistent size. Bilocality allows flexibility.
Territoriality
- Hunter-gatherers with richer environments are more likely to make territorial claims over land (Baker 2003).
Warfare
-
Hunter-gatherers with college population densities have more than warfare than those with lower population densities. Similarly, more than circuitous hunter-gatherer societies accept more than warfare than simpler hunter-gatherers (Nolan 2003, 26; Kelly 2000, 51–52; Fry 2006, 106).
-
Hunter-gatherers with a high dependence on fishing are more likely to have internal warfare than external warfare (Ember 1975).
-
Amidst prehistoric hunter-gatherers in primal California, resources scarcity predicts more violence every bit indicated by abrupt force skeletal trauma in burial sites (Allen et al. 2016). This parallels worldwide research on a sample including all subsistence types that finds that unpredictable food-destroying disasters is a major predictor of higher warfare frequency (Ember and Ember 1992).
-
Among foragers, as in other societies, patrilocal residence is predicted past internal (within society) warfare or a high male contribution to subsistence; matrilocality is predicted by a combination of purely external warfare and a loftier female contribution to subsistence (Ember 1975).
What We Practise Non Know
-
Why do some foraging societies share more than than others? Is meat consistently shared more than plants? Does sharing differ past gender?
-
Why should division of labor predict residence amongst hunter-gatherers, simply not among nutrient-producing cultures? (Encounter Ember 1975)
-
Do foragers with a high dependence on fishing tend to have higher population density and large settlements, every bit is the instance in New Guinea? (Run across Roscoe 2006)
-
How dissimilar are foragers with a little agriculture from those who lack agronomics?
-
Are foragers with horses more like pastoralists than foragers defective horses?
-
How practice complex hunter-gatherers differ from simpler hunter-gatherers in the means we have discussed hither—child-rearing values, marital residence, subsistence strategies, partition of labor, etc.
-
What predicts the emergence of hunter-gatherer complexity?
Exercises Using eHRAF World Cultures
Explore some texts in eHRAF Earth Cultures individually or as part of classroom assignments. Meet the Teaching eHRAF Exercise one.22 for suggestions.
Credits
Photo Credits: San firestarters, photograph by Ian sewell CC by 2.5. Copper Inuit spearing salmon, photo past Diamond Jenness available in the Canadian Museum of History drove, CC by 4.0. Tlingit Chief in Alaska, photograph by Dmitry Pichugin via Shutterstock, University of Washington Libraries, Special Collections Partition. Hadza children around a fire, via EcoPrint/Shutterstock. San gathered together, photo by AinoTuominen via pixabay. Hadza with bow and pointer, photo by alexstrachan via pixabay.
Citation
The summary should be cited as:
Ballad R. Ember. 2020. "Hunter-Gatherers" in C. R. Ember, ed.Explaining Homo Civilisation.Human being Relations Area Files, http://hraf.yale.edu/ehc/summaries/hunter-gatherers, accessed [requite date].
Glossary
- Bilocal residence
-
A pattern in which married couples live with or most the married woman's or the hubby's parents with near equal frequency
- Ethnographic record
-
What is known from descriptions written by observers, usually anthropologists, who have lived in and carried out fieldwork on a civilisation in the present and recent past
- Matrilocal residence
-
A pattern in which couples typically live with or about the wife's parents
- Multilocal residence
-
A pattern in which married couples may exist bilocal or unilocal with a frequent alternative
- Patrilocal residence
-
A pattern in which married couples typically alive with or near the married man's parents
- Unilocal residence
-
A blueprint in which married couples live with or nigh one specified set of relatives (patrilocal, matrilocal, or avunculocal)
Additional Cantankerous-Cultural Studies of Hunter-Gatherers
Collard, Marking, Briggs Buchanan, Michael J. O'Brien, and Jonathan Scholnick. (2013). Risk, mobility or population size? Drivers of technological richness amongst contact-period western North American hunter–gatherers. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 368, no. 1630: 20120412.
Freeman, Jacob, and John M. Anderies. (2015). The socioecology of hunter–gatherer territory size." Journal of Anthropological Archeology 39: 110-123.
Halperin, Rhonda H. (1980). Environmental and mode of product: Seasonal variation and the segmentation of labor past sex among hunter-gatherers. Journal of Anthropological Research 36, 379-399.
Korotayev, Andrey 5. & Alexander A. Kazankov (2003). Factors of sexual freedom among foragers in cantankerous-cultural perspective. Cantankerous-Cultural Inquiry 37: 29-61.
Langley, Michelle, and Mirani Litster. (2018). Is it ritual? Or is information technology children?: distinguishing consequences of play from ritual actions in the prehistoric archaeological tape. Current Anthropology 59(five):616-643).
Lozoff, Betsy and Gary Brittenham (1979). Baby intendance: Cache or conduct. The Journal of Pediatrics 95, 478-483.
Marlowe, Frank W. (2003). The mating system of foragers in the standard cross-cultural sample. Cross-Cultural Research 37, 282-306.
Thompson, Barton. (2016). Sense of place amid hunter-gatherers. Cross-Cultural Research 50, no. iv (2016): 283-324.
References
Allen, Mark W., Robert Lawrence Bettinger, Brian F. Codding, Terry Fifty. Jones, and Al West. Schwitalla. 2016. "Resources Scarcity Drives Lethal Aggression Among Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers in Key California." Proceedings of the National University of Sciences 113 (43): 12120–5. https://doi.org/ten.1073/pnas.1607996113.
Baker, Matthew J. 2003. "An Equilibrium Disharmonize Model of Land Tenure in Hunter-Gatherer Societies." Journal of Political Economy 111 (1): 124–73. https://doi.org/10.1086/344800.
Barry, Herbert, Iii, Irvin L. Child, and Margaret G. Bacon. 1959. "Relation of Child Training to Subsistence Economy." American Anthropologist 61 (one): 51–63. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1959.61.i.02a00080.
Berbesque, J. Colette, Frank W. Marlowe, Peter Shaw, and Peter Thompson. 2014. "Hunter–Gatherers Have Less Famine Than Agriculturalists." Biology Messages 10 (1): 20130853. https://doi.org/x.1098/rsbl.2013.0853.
Binford, Lewis R. 1990. "Mobility, Housing, and Environment: A Comparative Study." Periodical of Anthropological Research 46 (2): 119–52. https://doi.org/x.1086/jar.46.2.3630069.
Blasi, Damián E., Steven Moran, Scott R. Moisik, Paul Widmer, Dan Dediu, and Balthasar Bickel. 2019. "Human Sound Systems Are Shaped by Post-Neolithic Changes in Bite Configuration." Scientific discipline 363 (6432): eaav3218. https://doi.org/ten.1126/science.aav3218.
Crittenden, Alyssa N., Nancy Fifty. Conklin-Brittain, David A. Zes, Margaret J. Schoeninger, and Frank W. Marlowe. 2013. "Juvenile Foraging Amidst the Hadza: Implications for Human Life History." Evolution and Man Behavior 34 (4): 299–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2013.04.004.
Divale, William Tulio. 1974. "The Causes of Matrilocal Residence: A Cross-Ethnohistorical Survey."
Ember, Carol R. 1975. "Residential Variation Among Hunter-Gatherers." Beliefs Science Inquiry 10 (iii): 199–277. https://doi.org/10.1177/106939717501000302.
———. 1978. "Myths Almost Hunter-Gatherers." Ethnology 17 (4): 439–48. https://doi.org/10.2307/3773193.
Ember, Ballad R., and Christiane M. Cunnar. 2015. "Children's Play and Work: The Relevance of Cross-Cultural Ethnographic Research for Archaeologists." Childhood in the Past 8 (2): 87–103. https://doi.org/x.1179/1758571615Z.00000000031.
Ember, Carol R., and Melvin Ember. 1972. "The Conditions Favoring Multilocal Residence." Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 28 (4): 382–400. https://doi.org/10.1086/soutjanth.28.iv.3629318.
———. 1992. "Resources Unpredictability, Mistrust, and War: A Cross-Cultural Study." Journal of Conflict Resolution 36 (2): 242–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002792036002002.
———. 1997. "Violence in the Ethnographic Record: Results of Cross-Cultural Research on State of war and Assailment." In Troubled Times: Violence and Warfare in the Past, edited by Debra L. Martin and David West. Frayer, three:1–20. Gordon and Breach.
———. 2019. Cultural Anthropology. Pearson.
Ember, Melvin, and Carol R. Ember. 1971. "The Conditions Favoring Matrilocal Versus Patrilocal Residence." American Anthropologist 73 (3): 571–94. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1971.73.three.02a00040.
Fry, Douglas. 2006. The Human being Potential for Peace: An Anthropological Challenge to Assumptions Well-nigh State of war and Violence. Oxford University Press.
Garfield, Zachary H., Melissa J. Garfield, and Barry S. Hewlett. 2016. "A Cross-Cultural Analysis of Hunter-Gatherer Social Learning." In Social Learning and Innovation in Gimmicky Hunter-Gatherers, edited by Hideaki Terashima and Barry South. Hewlett, 19–34. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-55997-9_2.
Hayden, Brian, and Suzanne Villeneuve. 2011. "Astronomy in the Upper Palaeolithic?" Cambridge Archaeological Journal 21 (3): 331–55. https://doi.org/ten.1017/S0959774311000400.
Hendrix, Lewellyn. 1985. "Economic system and Child Grooming Reexamined." Ethos thirteen (iii): 246–61. https://doi.org/10.1525/eth.1985.13.3.02a00030.
Hewlett, Barry S., and Shane J. Macfarlan. 2010. "Fathers' Roles in Hunter-Gatherer and Other Small Cultures." In The Role of the Male parent in Kid Development, edited by Michael Due east. Lamb, five:413–34. John Wiley & Sons.
Hill, Kim R., Robert Southward. Walker, Miran Božičević, James Eder, Thomas Headland, Barry Hewlett, A. Magdalena Hurtado, Frank Marlowe, Polly Wiessner, and Brian Forest. 2011. "Co-Residence Patterns in Hunter-Gatherer Societies Show Unique Human Social Structure." Scientific discipline 331 (6022): 1286–9. https://doi.org/x.1126/science.1199071.
Hitchcock, Robert Thou., and Megan Beisele. 2000. "Introduction." In Hunters and Gatherers in the Modern World: Conflict, Resistance, and Cocky-Determinations, ane–x. Berghahn Books.
Kelly, Raymond C. 2000. Warless Societies and the Origin of War. The University of Michigan Printing.
Kelly, Robert L. 1995. The Foraging Spectrum. Smithsonian Establishment Press.
Kramer, Karen 50., and Russell D. Greaves. 2016. "Diverseness or Replace. What Happens to Wild Foods When Cultigens Are Introduced into Hunter–Gatherer Diets." In Why Forage, xv–42. School for Advanced Research.
Lee, Richard B., and Irven DeVore. 1968. Man the Hunter. Aldine Publishing Company.
Lenski, Gerhard, and Jean Lenski. 1978. Human Societies: An Introduction to Macrosociology. McGraw-Hill.
Lew-Levy, Sheina, Noa Lavi, Rachel Reckin, Jurgi Cristóbal-Azkarate, and Kate Ellis-Davies. 2018. "How Do Hunter-Gatherer Children Larn Social and Gender Norms? A Meta-Ethnographic Review." Cantankerous-Cultural Research 52 (two): 213–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069397117723552.
Lew-Levy, Sheina, Rachel Reckin, Noa Lavi, Jurgi Cristóbal-Azkarate, and Kate Ellis-Davies. 2017. "How Do Hunter-Gatherer Children Learn Subsistence Skills?" Human Nature 28 (four): 367–94.
Lomax, Alan. 1968. Folk Vocal Style and Civilization. 88. American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Marlowe, Frank. 2000. "Paternal Investment and the Human Mating System." Behavioural Processes 51 (1-3): 45–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0376-6357(00)00118-ii.
Marlowe, Frank W. 2005. "Hunter-Gatherers and Human being Evolution." Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews 14 (2): 56–67. https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.20046.
———. 2007. "Hunting and Gathering: The Human Sexual Division of Foraging Labor." Cross-Cultural Research 41 (2): 170–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069397106297529.
Murdock, George P., and Caterina Provost. 1973. "Factors in the Division of Labor past Sex: A Cross-Cultural Assay." Ethnology 12 (2): 203–25. https://doi.org/ten.2307/3773347.
Nolan, Patrick. 2003. "Toward an Ecological-Evolutionary Theory of the Incidence of Warfare in Preindustrial Societies." Soociological Theory 21 (1): 18–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9558.00172.
Peoples, Hervey C., Pavel Duda, and Frank W. Marlowe. 2016. "Hunter-Gatherers and the Origins of Religion." Human Nature 27 (3): 261–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-016-9260-0.
Rohner, Ronald P. 1975. They Love Me, They Love Me Non: A Worldwide Written report of the Furnishings of Parental Credence and Rejection. HRAF Press.
Roscoe, Paul. 2006. "Fish, Game, and the Foundations of Complexity in Forager Lodge: The Bear witness from New Guinea." Cross-Cultural Research 4 (one): 29–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069397105282432.
Sassaman, Kenneth E. 2004. "Complex Hunter-Gatherers in Evolution and History: A Northward American Perspective." Journal of Anthropological Research 12 (3): 227–fourscore. https://doi.org/x.1023/B:JARE.0000040231.67149.a8.
Service, Elman R. 1979. The Hunters. Prentice Hall.
Service, Elman Rogers. 1962. Primitive Social Organization: An Evolutionary Perspective. Random House.
Textor, Robert B. 1967. A Cross-Cultural Summary. HRAF Press.
Walker, Robert S. 2014. "Amazonian Horticulturalists Live in Larger, More than Related Groups Than Hunter–Gatherers." Evolution and Homo Behavior 35 (5): 384–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2014.05.003.
Walker, Robert South., and Drew H. Bailey. 2014. "Marrying Kin in Modest-Calibration Societies." American Periodical of Human Biology 26 (iii): 384–88. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajhb.22527.
Source: https://hraf.yale.edu/ehc/summaries/hunter-gatherers
0 Response to "Individual Families in Pastoral Societies Are Most Likely to Own __________."
Post a Comment