I just came across this article suggesting that it may have been the lack of a sexual division of labor in Neanderthals that caused their extinction. Homo Sapiens, for most of our existence, have protected females of child bearing age from dangerous activities such as hunting and war. Neanderthals, on the other hand, seem to have had no such sex based division of labor. This allowed more fertile females to be killed and caused the population to decrease and the species to ultimately become extinct.


The Boston Globe
Stone Age feminism?
Females joining hunt may explain Neanderthals' end
By Colin Nickerson

The Neanderthal extinction some 30,000 years ago remains one of the great riddles of evolution, with rival theories blaming everything from genocide committed by "real" humans to prehistoric climate change.
more stories like this

But a recent study introduces another explanation: Stone Age feminism. Among Neanderthals, hunting big beasts was women's work as well as men's, so it's a safe bet that female hunters got stomped, gored, and worse with appalling frequency. And a high casualty rate among fertile women - the vital "reproductive core" of a tiny population - could well have meant demographic disaster for a species already struggling to survive among monster bears, yellow-fanged hyenas, and cunning Homo sapien newcomers.

a husband-wife anthropological team has raised the possibility that female derring-do may have contributed to Neanderthals' demise.

The University of Arizona's Steven L. Kuhn and Mary C. Stiner, use archeological evidence to argue that Neanderthal females - unlike Homo sapien women of the Upper Paleolithic period - joined men in hunts at a time when stabbing giant beasts with a sharpish stone affixed to a stick represented the cutting edge of technology.

That's courageous, but probably bad practice for a population that never numbered much more than 10,000 individuals. The loss of a few males to a flailing hoof or slashing antler is no big deal, in the long run. But losing females of child-bearing age could bring doom to a hard-pressed species.

"All elements of [Neanderthal] society appear to have been involved in the main subsistence pursuit" of hunting large animals, Kuhn said. "There's not much evidence of classic female roles.

"Putting the reproductive core of the population - pregnant women, mothers of infants, children themselves - at such danger could have put Neanderthals as a whole at serious demographic disadvantage," he said.

Not only would women suffer casualties, Kuhn said, their full participation in the hunt would mean they were not harvesting wild grains and other foods that could sustain their roving bands when game was scarce. http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2007/11/10/stone_age_feminism/?page=2
It's an intriguing hypothesis. We've seen in recent history that feminism most definitely results in decreased fertility. For a small population, especially one in competition with the more fertile Homo Sapiens, this might well have spelled disaster. Over time, Homo Sapiens may simply have overwhelmed Neanderthals via sheer numbers.

I believe one Neanderthal made it through all the way to now...and this guy who wrote this is him! :)

Sounds to me like a great leap of supposition based on a glimmer of evidence.

I'm curious. What is the evidence that women joined the hunt? I haven't hear do fthis before now.

Sounds to me like a great leap of supposition based on a glimmer of evidence.

I'm curious. What is the evidence that women joined the hunt? I haven't hear do fthis before now.

Same question here. What's the evidence?

Though, given what little I know about the dirt sciences, it's very likely to appear as bullshit.

I'm curious. What is the evidence that women joined the hunt? I haven't hear do fthis before now.The article I cited doesn't go into what the actual evidence is, it simply states:

The University of Arizona's Steven L. Kuhn and Mary C. Stiner, use archeological evidence to argue that Neanderthal females - unlike Homo sapien women of the Upper Paleolithic period - joined men in hunts at a time when stabbing giant beasts with a sharpish stone affixed to a stick represented the cutting edge of technology.
I'd guess they've found the remains of a bunch of Neanderthal females showing signs of violent deaths, but we'd have to find the source material to know for sure.

I wonder if this article will be used by some as a reason women should not be in traditionally male jobs - where the chances of being gored and trampled are also high, admittedly.

In any case, it is clear in today's world we must do everything to make sure we humans do not suffer underpopulation

EVEN IF

political correctness might restrain us.

Neanderthals, on the other hand, seem to have had no such sex based division of labor. This allowed more fertile females to be killed and ...

Whether they consciously had a division of labor is rather moot, isn't it? A female "almost-human" would have had a similar gestation period of about nine months. Ain't no female gonna' go hunting bison after six or eight months of pregnancy. Ditto for breast-feeding mothers.

So the "division of labor" would be natural, not man-made or conscious reasoning.


It's an intriguing hypothesis.

It is. I've also read some books that suggested that females were often buried with their "husband's" spears and/or tools. So to take that as a sign that females hunted is a little far-fetched, ain't it?

If future generations were to dig up our remains, what would it tell them about 20th century humans? That all men wore tuxedos?

But I agree with most ...evidence is important. And it's still a leap of faith in many cases even with evidence.

Baron Max

Whether they consciously had a division of labor is rather moot, isn't it? A female "almost-human" would have had a similar gestation period of about nine months. Ain't no female gonna' go hunting bison after six or eight months of pregnancy. Ditto for breast-feeding mothers.

So the "division of labor" would be natural, not man-made or conscious reasoning.
When they were well along in their pregnancy, sure. But the point is that if females always go along for the hunt, many who aren't pregnant will die. And, reproductively speaking, females are much more valuable than males. So long as one male remained, he could impregnate all the females. But the loss of even one female of child bearing age reduces the ability of the group to reproduce.

.... But the point is that if females always go along for the hunt, many who aren't pregnant will die. ...

Sure. But in many of the Native American tribes, the women went along on hunts with the men. But they didn't do the actual hunting, they stayed in safe places, then when the animals were killed, they came in and did the skinning and butchering. See?


And, reproductively speaking, females are much more valuable than males. So long as one male remained, he could impregnate all the females. But the loss of even one female of child bearing age reduces the ability of the group to reproduce.

Surely you're not trying to tell me that even very early huminoids didn't know that fact? How could they not know it? They were around it all the time, if nothing more than the female trying to raise the child ...breast feeding if nothing else.

No, no, you're going to have to go a long ways befroe you can convince me that Neanderthals were that stupid. If they were that stupid, they couldn't have survived a month! :D

Baron Max

Having the women in the hunt would have been an act of desperation---not a feminist act! Imagine the females running along with a spear in one hand and a baby or toddler in the other. If not, a female or two had to stay back to protect the young.

Neanderthals did not live in large groups like we humans did in Europe after about 40,000 years ago. To compete, the Neanderthals needed larger hunting teams---especially since they were carnivores and ate little of anything but meat---and also, they had to ram the game with their crude spears because they could not effectively throw them.

The theory does apply to us, however. In http://atheistic-science.com , there is a picture of how the hunting age society's success evaporated and they begin to run out of game after the Neanderthals were all gone. I can imagine that the reason for the gradual appearance of female idols beginning some 25,000 years ago was that the bounty-gathering women were saying to the big game hunters who return with a few rabbits and a mole that they, the women, deserved ever more control over society.

Isn't it natural for women to become assertive when a society goes into decline? After all, if the men mess things up, the women feel insecure. They try to fill the gap. This is noted in primate behavioral research. The females placate the males when there is friction between them.

According to the anthropologist Gimbutas, the women even replaced hunting with agriculture and created a society then was dominated totally by feminine public opinion.



charles

Having the women in the hunt would have been an act of desperation---not a feminist act! Imagine the females running along with a spear in one hand and a baby or toddler in the other. If not, a female or two had to stay back to protect the young.

Neanderthals did not live in large groups like we humans did in Europe after about 40,000 years ago. To compete, the Neanderthals needed larger hunting teams---especially since they were carnivores and ate little of anything but meat---and also, they had to ram the game with their crude spears because they could not effectively throw them.

The theory does apply to us, however. In http://atheistic-science.com , there is a picture of how the hunting age society's success evaporated and they begin to run out of game after the Neanderthals were all gone. I can imagine that the reason for the gradual appearance of female idols beginning some 25,000 years ago was that the bounty-gathering women were saying to the big game hunters who return with a few rabbits and a mole that they, the women, deserved ever more control over society.

Isn't it natural for women to become assertive when a society goes into decline? After all, if the men mess things up, the women feel insecure. They try to fill the gap. This is noted in primate behavioral research. The females placate the males when there is friction between them.

According to the anthropologist Gimbutas, the women even replaced hunting with agriculture and created a society then was dominated totally by feminine public opinion.



charles

Fascinating post...

Do you have more links to info on the female idol culture that pervaded 25000BP?

No, no, you're going to have to go a long ways befroe you can convince me that Neanderthals were that stupid. If they were that stupid, they couldn't have survived a month! :D

Baron MaxWell, we have women in the military, fighting fires, as police, etc. Maybe their women demanded equal rights as ours now have.

Well, we have women in the military, fighting fires, as police, etc.

Yeah, but how many? And we have the social, economic support structures in place for it.


Maybe their women demanded equal rights as ours now have.

I seriously doubt that the Neanderthals had the social and economic support that we do now. And without it, the women couldn't do those things. Just plain ol' birth control wasn't invent back then!

Baron Max

I really doubt female Neanderthals ran around hunting (regularly) with the men. After primates lost the opposable toe, babies could no longer hold on to momma all by themselves and became more dependent. Dad sure as fuck wasn't going to help....

According to National Geographic, she hunted. I don't see why they wouldn't have.
http://blogs.nationalgeographic.com/blogs/news/chiefeditor/Neanderthal-2.jpg

Well I guess they had that daycare thing figured out.

But in a pack, the young stay with 1 or 2 left behind. Not every female had to stay behind with her child.

I just came across this article suggesting that it may have been the lack of a sexual division of labor in Neanderthals that caused their extinction. The Onion's been scooped.

Neanderthals had much shorter lifespans than CroMagnons. This means it was far less likely for them to survive large scale environmental changes.

Women running with spears probably had little to do with this.

Neanderthals had much shorter lifespans than CroMagnons. This means it was far less likely for them to survive large scale environmental changes.

Hmm, scientists often use fruit flies for adaptation experiments because of their short life span. That short life span actually helps in the species adapting to new and different environments. How would it be so different with Neanderthals? Please explain.

Baron Max

But in a pack, the young stay with 1 or 2 left behind. Not every female had to stay behind with her child.

In almost every specie on Earth, they know of the value of the females and go to great lengths to protect them and their young. Why do you think it would be so different with Neanderthals?

I think if the women used spears or other weapons, it was in defense of the tribe, not in hunting for food. The exception would be, of course, in situations of dire need of food.

I just have to believe that the Neanderthals were smart enough to know that value of females ....you know, for cooking, cleaning the cave, caring for the kids, and, of course, providing sexual pleasures for men! What else are women good for? :D

Baron Max

Hmm, scientists often use fruit flies for adaptation experiments because of their short life span. That short life span actually helps in the species adapting to new and different environments. How would it be so different with Neanderthals? Please explain.

Baron Max
I don't think they use them for adaption experiments. they use them for genetics experiments and around mutation. I don't think they have created fruit flies that are better adapted to environments, but let me know.

I don't think they use them for adaption experiments. they use them for genetics experiments and around mutation. I don't think they have created fruit flies that are better adapted to environments, but let me know.

Experiments in mutation IS experiments in adaptation.

Baron Max

Experiments in mutation IS experiments in adaptation.

Baron MaxMost mutations are poor adaptions. At best neutral. I can remember studying fruit fly mutations. We had eye color changes and double wings and a lot of things that were either harmful or neutral.

The advantage of longer life spans in relation to Neanderthals and Cromagnons is that the latter, who live longer, can gain more problem solving skills. Say the weather changes radically and new food sources have to be found and the methods of acquiring them need to be mastered. If the adults die at 30 as opposed to 42 the population as a whole is much more likely to be devastated.

Large scale changes leave little room for the kinds of genetic adaption you are talking about. Those take luck and thousands of generations.

According to National Geographic, she hunted. I don't see why they wouldn't have.

But maybe they didn't throw stones or spears, due to an anatomic difference with modern humans:

Human aerial bombardments might have pushed Neanderthals to extinction, suggests new research. Changes in bone shape left by a life of overhand throwing hint that Stone Age humans regularly threw heavy objects, such as stones or spears, while Neanderthals did not. (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16091-were-neanderthals-stoned-to-death-by-modern-humans.html)

In almost every specie on Earth, they know of the value of the females and go to great lengths to protect them and their young. Why do you think it would be so different with Neanderthals?...

no. most have the female fending for herself. The male is only around long enough for procreation.
And I think male lions have a very good thing going.

....Changes in bone shape left by a life of overhand throwing hint that Stone Age humans regularly threw heavy objects, such as stones or spears, while Neanderthals did not. (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16091-were-neanderthals-stoned-to-death-by-modern-humans.html)

whoa! They were lobbers? How do you kill anything lobbing a rock at it?

Practice?

Practice?

like softball? I mean those are some pretty damn fast underhand pitches.

like softball? I mean those are some pretty damn fast underhand pitches.

You've never seen anything(living) hit by a fist sized rock have you?

He was talking about chucking spears I think(like javelin).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEYqRMYIXQU&feature=related

You've never seen anything(living) hit by a fist sized rock have you?

He was talking about chucking spears I think(like javelin).

yeah, underhanded. I was thinking they were lobbing it, not throwing it like a softball pitcher.

I don't think anyone is talking about softball pitches here. At worst(or best) we are talking a sidearm.

...Stone Age humans regularly threw heavy objects, such as stones or spears, while Neanderthals did not. (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16091-were-neanderthals-stoned-to-death-by-modern-humans.html)


I don't think anyone is talking about softball pitches here. At worst(or best) we are talking a sidearm.

so is it the weight of the object or how they threw it?

Yes how they threw it. OVERHAND, lots of power, long range. Neanderthals apparently couldn't do it.

Yes how they threw it. OVERHAND, lots of power, long range. Neanderthals apparently couldn't do it.

Apes and gorillas can do it, why couldn't the Neanderthals?

Baron Max

I just came across this article suggesting that it may have been the lack of a sexual division of labor in Neanderthals that caused their extinction.It's rather difficult to accept the authority of a report on anthropology in which "Homo sapiens" is consistently misspelled.

Apes and gorillas can do it, why couldn't the Neanderthals?

Baron Max

I dunno, I didn't say they couldn't. Someone else did