Quote:
Originally Posted by _Richard_
doesn't make sense for the 'men' to go out to hunt, while the 'women' stay back to gather.
first of all, the 'city' would be defenseless.. secondly, the 'hunting party' would be rather small to make kills from massive herds where one death, not to mention 2+, would put the entire 'tribe' in extreme danger of starvation
they probably worked together as a team..
|
There weren't that much wars back then, not to mention "cities". But yes, there is at least one known case where women, children and old folks were massacred in one cave, as the men were probably hunting, etc. Wars usually occur when there is dispute about resources. Early human groups were tad small and thus not using that much resources, so there weren't that much incentive to fight unless there were dome drought or something that depleted resources.
About the hunting; some 10-30 men is more than sufficient to get kills even from a larger herd, even when using such tactics as driving animals off the cliff. No to mention just spearing some animals or using arrows.
And the women are not just left behind, as they are gathering. You don't gather that much the same vicinity over and over again, you have to move some distances. Also, hunting is more uncertain than gathering. There has to be gathering to ensure that they don't starve if the hunting goes fucked up. Thus there has to be divide, at least time wise, but based on current hunter-gatherers there is divide between men's and women's jobs. Gathered food makes most of the diet.