The Mobile Architecture of Hunter-Gatherers and Nomadic Pastoralists

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marius Warg Næss

The history of humanity is a story of cooperation. Issues pertaining to the origin of human cooperation have, however, been characterized by a forager bias, the assumption being that they have a close link to our evolutionary past. In contrast little effort has been spent on documenting and explaining cooperative herding among nomadic pastoralists. As the Mongolian empire attest to nomadic pastoralists—in contrast to foragers—can form large-scale empires. In combination with the prevalence of small-scale cooperative herding groups, nomadic pastoral societies thus provide a fertile ground for expanding our understanding of the evolution of cooperation. In this paper I aim to extend our understanding of human cooperation through a comparison of the most well-known cooperative herding groups—namely the Mongolian khot ail and the Saami siida—and the most well-studied forager bands, namely the Hadza camp and Ache band.


2013 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 197-209 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Kinahan

An archaeological survey of the Linyanti and Liambezi marshlands in north-eastern Namibia revealed a number of hunting and fishing sites with first millennium AD farming community ceramics as well as evidence suggesting the adoption of ceramic technology by hunter-gatherers in this area during the second millennium AD. These finds have implications for the archaeology of recent southern African hunter-gatherers: they suggest both practical criteria for the recognition of ceramics obtained by trade during the spread of food production through southern Africa in the last two millennia, and point to a likely scenario for the appearance sui generis of ceramics associated with Khoe-speaking nomadic pastoralists.


2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erhard Schüttpelz

"Domestizierung lässt sich durch einen Nukleus aus drei technischen Tätigkeiten definieren: durch die gesteuerte Reproduktion, die eigens eingerichtete Ernährung und den Schutz von Tieren und Pflanzen vor Schädigungen. Wenn man diese Definition an einen Vergleich von Kulturen und Kollektiven anlegt, stellen sich zwei Überraschungen ein: Außerhalb jeder Domestizierung entwickeln Wildbeuter eine rituelle Domestizierung oder ein mythologisches Verständnis, ihre Welt sei bereits domestiziert. Und in der Moderne tritt an die Seite der technischen Domestizierung ihre mögliche Naturalisierung. Der Aufsatz zieht einige Konsequenzen aus diesem typologischen Vergleich. Domestication can be defined by a nucleus of three technical activities: controlled reproduction and nutrition as well as protection of animals and plants from damage. If one applies this definition to a comparison of cultures and collectives, two surprises arise: Without being in touch of any kind of domestication, hunter-gatherers develop a ritual domestication or a mythological understanding that their world already is domesticated. And in modernity, possible naturalization arises at the side of technical domestication. The paper draws some conclusions from this typological comparison. "


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document