Question: What type of society relies on domestication for producing food?

Answer: agricultural

<hl> A hunter-gatherer is a human living in a society in which most or all food is obtained by foraging (collecting wild plants and pursuing wild animals), in contrast to agricultural societies, which rely mainly on domesticated species. <hl>

A hunter-gatherer is a human living in a society in which most or all food is obtained by foraging (collecting wild plants and pursuing wild animals), in contrast to <hl> agricultural <hl> societies, which rely mainly on domesticated species.


Question: What type of plants and animals do agricultural groups harvest?

A hunter-gatherer is a human living in a society in which most or all food is obtained by foraging (collecting wild plants and pursuing wild animals), in contrast to agricultural societies, which rely mainly on domesticated species.

Answer: domesticated species

<hl> A hunter-gatherer is a human living in a society in which most or all food is obtained by foraging (collecting wild plants and pursuing wild animals), in contrast to agricultural societies, which rely mainly on domesticated species . <hl>

A hunter-gatherer is a human living in a society in which most or all food is obtained by foraging (collecting wild plants and pursuing wild animals), in contrast to agricultural societies, which rely mainly on <hl> domesticated species <hl>.

A hunter-gatherer is a human living in a society in which most or all food is obtained by foraging (collecting wild plants and pursuing wild animals), in contrast to agricultural societies, which rely mainly on <hl> domesticated species <hl> .


Question: What has been humans' best adaptation in food production?

Hunting and gathering was humanity's first and most successful adaptation, occupying at least 90 percent of human history. Following the invention of agriculture, hunter-gatherers have been displaced or conquered by farming or pastoralist groups in most parts of the world.

Answer: Hunting and gathering

<hl> Hunting and gathering was humanity's first and most successful adaptation, occupying at least 90 percent of human history. <hl> Following the invention of agriculture, hunter-gatherers have been displaced or conquered by farming or pastoralist groups in most parts of the world.

<hl> Hunting and gathering <hl> was humanity's first and most successful adaptation, occupying at least 90 percent of human history. Following the invention of agriculture, hunter-gatherers have been displaced or conquered by farming or pastoralist groups in most parts of the world.


Question: What was the first way humans used to find food?

Answer: Hunting and gathering

<hl> Hunting and gathering was humanity's first and most successful adaptation, occupying at least 90 percent of human history. <hl> Following the invention of agriculture, hunter-gatherers have been displaced or conquered by farming or pastoralist groups in most parts of the world.

<hl> Hunting and gathering <hl> was humanity's first and most successful adaptation, occupying at least 90 percent of human history. Following the invention of agriculture, hunter-gatherers have been displaced or conquered by farming or pastoralist groups in most parts of the world.


Question: What stopped the widespread use of hunting and gathering?

Answer: invention of agriculture

Hunting and gathering was humanity's first and most successful adaptation, occupying at least 90 percent of human history. <hl> Following the invention of agriculture , hunter-gatherers have been displaced or conquered by farming or pastoralist groups in most parts of the world. <hl>

Hunting and gathering was humanity's first and most successful adaptation, occupying at least 90 percent of human history. Following the <hl> invention of agriculture <hl>, hunter-gatherers have been displaced or conquered by farming or pastoralist groups in most parts of the world.

Following the <hl> invention of agriculture <hl> , hunter-gatherers have been displaced or conquered by farming or pastoralist groups in most parts of the world.


Question: What are the basic types of agricultural groups?

Answer: farming or pastoralist groups

Hunting and gathering was humanity's first and most successful adaptation, occupying at least 90 percent of human history. <hl> Following the invention of agriculture, hunter-gatherers have been displaced or conquered by farming or pastoralist groups in most parts of the world. <hl>

Hunting and gathering was humanity's first and most successful adaptation, occupying at least 90 percent of human history. Following the invention of agriculture, hunter-gatherers have been displaced or conquered by <hl> farming or pastoralist groups <hl> in most parts of the world.


Question: How many groups of modern hunter-gatherers are there?

Answer: Only a few

<hl> Only a few contemporary societies are classified as hunter-gatherers, and many supplement their foraging activity with horticulture and/or keeping animals. <hl>

<hl> Only a few <hl> contemporary societies are classified as hunter-gatherers, and many supplement their foraging activity with horticulture and/or keeping animals.


Question: What do modern hunter-gatherers use to produce food in addition to gathering?

Answer: horticulture and/or keeping animals

<hl> Only a few contemporary societies are classified as hunter-gatherers, and many supplement their foraging activity with horticulture and/or keeping animals . <hl>

Only a few contemporary societies are classified as hunter-gatherers, and many supplement their foraging activity with <hl> horticulture and/or keeping animals <hl>.

Only a few contemporary societies are classified as hunter-gatherers, and many supplement their foraging activity with <hl> horticulture and/or keeping animals <hl> .


Question: Who uses agriculture and animal domestication to supplement their food?

Answer: hunter-gatherers

<hl> Only a few contemporary societies are classified as hunter-gatherers , and many supplement their foraging activity with horticulture and/or keeping animals. <hl>

Only a few contemporary societies are classified as <hl> hunter-gatherers <hl>, and many supplement their foraging activity with horticulture and/or keeping animals.

Only a few contemporary societies are classified as <hl> hunter-gatherers <hl> , and many supplement their foraging activity with horticulture and/or keeping animals.


Question: Besides agriculture, how do gatherers add to their food supply?

Answer: keeping animals

<hl> Only a few contemporary societies are classified as hunter-gatherers, and many supplement their foraging activity with horticulture and/or keeping animals . <hl>

Only a few contemporary societies are classified as hunter-gatherers, and many supplement their foraging activity with horticulture and/or <hl> keeping animals <hl>.

Only a few contemporary societies are classified as hunter-gatherers, and many supplement their foraging activity with horticulture and/or <hl> keeping animals <hl> .


Question: In addition to domesticated animals, how do gatherers supplement their food?

Answer: horticulture

<hl> Only a few contemporary societies are classified as hunter-gatherers, and many supplement their foraging activity with horticulture and/or keeping animals. <hl>

Only a few contemporary societies are classified as hunter-gatherers, and many supplement their foraging activity with <hl> horticulture <hl> and/or keeping animals.


Question: How did early humans locate meat without hunting ?

In the 1950s, Lewis Binford suggested that early humans were obtaining meat via scavenging, not hunting. Early humans in the Lower Paleolithic lived in forests and woodlands, which allowed them to collect seafood, eggs, nuts, and fruits besides scavenging. Rather than killing large animals for meat, according to this view, they used carcasses of such animals that had either been killed by predators or that had died of natural causes. Archaeological and genetic data suggest that the source populations of Paleolithic hunter-gatherers survived in sparsely wooded areas and dispersed through areas of high primary productivity while avoiding dense forest cover.

Answer: scavenging

<hl> In the 1950s, Lewis Binford suggested that early humans were obtaining meat via scavenging , not hunting. <hl> Early humans in the Lower Paleolithic lived in forests and woodlands, which allowed them to collect seafood, eggs, nuts, and fruits besides scavenging. Rather than killing large animals for meat, according to this view, they used carcasses of such animals that had either been killed by predators or that had died of natural causes. Archaeological and genetic data suggest that the source populations of Paleolithic hunter-gatherers survived in sparsely wooded areas and dispersed through areas of high primary productivity while avoiding dense forest cover.

In the 1950s, Lewis Binford suggested that early humans were obtaining meat via <hl> scavenging <hl>, not hunting. Early humans in the Lower Paleolithic lived in forests and woodlands, which allowed them to collect seafood, eggs, nuts, and fruits besides scavenging. Rather than killing large animals for meat, according to this view, they used carcasses of such animals that had either been killed by predators or that had died of natural causes. Archaeological and genetic data suggest that the source populations of Paleolithic hunter-gatherers survived in sparsely wooded areas and dispersed through areas of high primary productivity while avoiding dense forest cover.

In the 1950s, Lewis Binford suggested that early humans were obtaining meat via <hl> scavenging <hl> , not hunting.


Question: In addition to finding already dead animals, what other cause of death were their animal finds?

Answer: natural causes

In the 1950s, Lewis Binford suggested that early humans were obtaining meat via scavenging, not hunting. Early humans in the Lower Paleolithic lived in forests and woodlands, which allowed them to collect seafood, eggs, nuts, and fruits besides scavenging. <hl> Rather than killing large animals for meat, according to this view, they used carcasses of such animals that had either been killed by predators or that had died of natural causes . <hl> Archaeological and genetic data suggest that the source populations of Paleolithic hunter-gatherers survived in sparsely wooded areas and dispersed through areas of high primary productivity while avoiding dense forest cover.

In the 1950s, Lewis Binford suggested that early humans were obtaining meat via scavenging, not hunting. Early humans in the Lower Paleolithic lived in forests and woodlands, which allowed them to collect seafood, eggs, nuts, and fruits besides scavenging. Rather than killing large animals for meat, according to this view, they used carcasses of such animals that had either been killed by predators or that had died of <hl> natural causes <hl>. Archaeological and genetic data suggest that the source populations of Paleolithic hunter-gatherers survived in sparsely wooded areas and dispersed through areas of high primary productivity while avoiding dense forest cover.

Rather than killing large animals for meat, according to this view, they used carcasses of such animals that had either been killed by predators or that had died of <hl> natural causes <hl> .


Question: Where did hunter-gatherer peoples live?

Answer: sparsely wooded areas

In the 1950s, Lewis Binford suggested that early humans were obtaining meat via scavenging, not hunting. Early humans in the Lower Paleolithic lived in forests and woodlands, which allowed them to collect seafood, eggs, nuts, and fruits besides scavenging. Rather than killing large animals for meat, according to this view, they used carcasses of such animals that had either been killed by predators or that had died of natural causes. <hl> Archaeological and genetic data suggest that the source populations of Paleolithic hunter-gatherers survived in sparsely wooded areas and dispersed through areas of high primary productivity while avoiding dense forest cover. <hl>

In the 1950s, Lewis Binford suggested that early humans were obtaining meat via scavenging, not hunting. Early humans in the Lower Paleolithic lived in forests and woodlands, which allowed them to collect seafood, eggs, nuts, and fruits besides scavenging. Rather than killing large animals for meat, according to this view, they used carcasses of such animals that had either been killed by predators or that had died of natural causes. Archaeological and genetic data suggest that the source populations of Paleolithic hunter-gatherers survived in <hl> sparsely wooded areas <hl> and dispersed through areas of high primary productivity while avoiding dense forest cover.


Question: What type of area did early humans avoid?

Answer: dense forest

In the 1950s, Lewis Binford suggested that early humans were obtaining meat via scavenging, not hunting. Early humans in the Lower Paleolithic lived in forests and woodlands, which allowed them to collect seafood, eggs, nuts, and fruits besides scavenging. Rather than killing large animals for meat, according to this view, they used carcasses of such animals that had either been killed by predators or that had died of natural causes. <hl> Archaeological and genetic data suggest that the source populations of Paleolithic hunter-gatherers survived in sparsely wooded areas and dispersed through areas of high primary productivity while avoiding dense forest cover. <hl>

In the 1950s, Lewis Binford suggested that early humans were obtaining meat via scavenging, not hunting. Early humans in the Lower Paleolithic lived in forests and woodlands, which allowed them to collect seafood, eggs, nuts, and fruits besides scavenging. Rather than killing large animals for meat, according to this view, they used carcasses of such animals that had either been killed by predators or that had died of natural causes. Archaeological and genetic data suggest that the source populations of Paleolithic hunter-gatherers survived in sparsely wooded areas and dispersed through areas of high primary productivity while avoiding <hl> dense forest <hl> cover.


Question: What is long-distance running as a food hunting-gathering technique?

According to the endurance running hypothesis, long-distance running as in persistence hunting, a method still practiced by some hunter-gatherer groups in modern times, was likely the driving evolutionary force leading to the evolution of certain human characteristics. This hypothesis does not necessarily contradict the scavenging hypothesis: both subsistence strategies could have been in use – sequentially, alternating or even simultaneously.

Answer: persistence hunting

<hl> According to the endurance running hypothesis, long-distance running as in persistence hunting , a method still practiced by some hunter-gatherer groups in modern times, was likely the driving evolutionary force leading to the evolution of certain human characteristics. <hl> This hypothesis does not necessarily contradict the scavenging hypothesis: both subsistence strategies could have been in use – sequentially, alternating or even simultaneously.

According to the endurance running hypothesis, long-distance running as in <hl> persistence hunting <hl>, a method still practiced by some hunter-gatherer groups in modern times, was likely the driving evolutionary force leading to the evolution of certain human characteristics. This hypothesis does not necessarily contradict the scavenging hypothesis: both subsistence strategies could have been in use – sequentially, alternating or even simultaneously.

According to the endurance running hypothesis, long-distance running as in <hl> persistence hunting <hl> , a method still practiced by some hunter-gatherer groups in modern times, was likely the driving evolutionary force leading to the evolution of certain human characteristics.


Question: What theory says that long-distance running drove the evolution of some human traits?

Answer: endurance running hypothesis

<hl> According to the endurance running hypothesis , long-distance running as in persistence hunting, a method still practiced by some hunter-gatherer groups in modern times, was likely the driving evolutionary force leading to the evolution of certain human characteristics. <hl> This hypothesis does not necessarily contradict the scavenging hypothesis: both subsistence strategies could have been in use – sequentially, alternating or even simultaneously.

According to the <hl> endurance running hypothesis <hl>, long-distance running as in persistence hunting, a method still practiced by some hunter-gatherer groups in modern times, was likely the driving evolutionary force leading to the evolution of certain human characteristics. This hypothesis does not necessarily contradict the scavenging hypothesis: both subsistence strategies could have been in use – sequentially, alternating or even simultaneously.

According to the <hl> endurance running hypothesis <hl> , long-distance running as in persistence hunting, a method still practiced by some hunter-gatherer groups in modern times, was likely the driving evolutionary force leading to the evolution of certain human characteristics.


Question: Who still practices persistence hunting?

Answer: some hunter-gatherer groups

<hl> According to the endurance running hypothesis, long-distance running as in persistence hunting, a method still practiced by some hunter-gatherer groups in modern times, was likely the driving evolutionary force leading to the evolution of certain human characteristics. <hl> This hypothesis does not necessarily contradict the scavenging hypothesis: both subsistence strategies could have been in use – sequentially, alternating or even simultaneously.

According to the endurance running hypothesis, long-distance running as in persistence hunting, a method still practiced by <hl> some hunter-gatherer groups <hl> in modern times, was likely the driving evolutionary force leading to the evolution of certain human characteristics. This hypothesis does not necessarily contradict the scavenging hypothesis: both subsistence strategies could have been in use – sequentially, alternating or even simultaneously.


Question: Besides the endurance running hypothesis, what other theory of food collection is there?

Answer: scavenging hypothesis

According to the endurance running hypothesis, long-distance running as in persistence hunting, a method still practiced by some hunter-gatherer groups in modern times, was likely the driving evolutionary force leading to the evolution of certain human characteristics. <hl> This hypothesis does not necessarily contradict the scavenging hypothesis : both subsistence strategies could have been in use – sequentially, alternating or even simultaneously. <hl>

According to the endurance running hypothesis, long-distance running as in persistence hunting, a method still practiced by some hunter-gatherer groups in modern times, was likely the driving evolutionary force leading to the evolution of certain human characteristics. This hypothesis does not necessarily contradict the <hl> scavenging hypothesis <hl>: both subsistence strategies could have been in use – sequentially, alternating or even simultaneously.

This hypothesis does not necessarily contradict the <hl> scavenging hypothesis <hl> : both subsistence strategies could have been in use – sequentially, alternating or even simultaneously.


Question: What food gathering techniques could have been used by early man at the same time?

Answer: both subsistence strategies

According to the endurance running hypothesis, long-distance running as in persistence hunting, a method still practiced by some hunter-gatherer groups in modern times, was likely the driving evolutionary force leading to the evolution of certain human characteristics. <hl> This hypothesis does not necessarily contradict the scavenging hypothesis: both subsistence strategies could have been in use – sequentially, alternating or even simultaneously. <hl>

According to the endurance running hypothesis, long-distance running as in persistence hunting, a method still practiced by some hunter-gatherer groups in modern times, was likely the driving evolutionary force leading to the evolution of certain human characteristics. This hypothesis does not necessarily contradict the scavenging hypothesis: <hl> both subsistence strategies <hl> could have been in use – sequentially, alternating or even simultaneously.


Question: When did human populations begin using hunting-gathering?

Hunting and gathering was presumably the subsistence strategy employed by human societies beginning some 1.8 million years ago, by Homo erectus, and from its appearance some 0.2 million years ago by Homo sapiens. It remained the only mode of subsistence until the end of the Mesolithic period some 10,000 years ago, and after this was replaced only gradually with the spread of the Neolithic Revolution.

Answer: 1.8 million years ago

<hl> Hunting and gathering was presumably the subsistence strategy employed by human societies beginning some 1.8 million years ago , by Homo erectus, and from its appearance some 0.2 million years ago by Homo sapiens. <hl> It remained the only mode of subsistence until the end of the Mesolithic period some 10,000 years ago, and after this was replaced only gradually with the spread of the Neolithic Revolution.

Hunting and gathering was presumably the subsistence strategy employed by human societies beginning some <hl> 1.8 million years ago <hl>, by Homo erectus, and from its appearance some 0.2 million years ago by Homo sapiens. It remained the only mode of subsistence until the end of the Mesolithic period some 10,000 years ago, and after this was replaced only gradually with the spread of the Neolithic Revolution.

Hunting and gathering was presumably the subsistence strategy employed by human societies beginning some <hl> 1.8 million years ago <hl> , by Homo erectus, and from its appearance some 0.2 million years ago by Homo sapiens.


Question: What phase of human used subsistence strategies to find food?

Answer: Homo erectus

<hl> Hunting and gathering was presumably the subsistence strategy employed by human societies beginning some 1.8 million years ago, by Homo erectus , and from its appearance some 0.2 million years ago by Homo sapiens. <hl> It remained the only mode of subsistence until the end of the Mesolithic period some 10,000 years ago, and after this was replaced only gradually with the spread of the Neolithic Revolution.

Hunting and gathering was presumably the subsistence strategy employed by human societies beginning some 1.8 million years ago, by <hl> Homo erectus <hl>, and from its appearance some 0.2 million years ago by Homo sapiens. It remained the only mode of subsistence until the end of the Mesolithic period some 10,000 years ago, and after this was replaced only gradually with the spread of the Neolithic Revolution.

Hunting and gathering was presumably the subsistence strategy employed by human societies beginning some 1.8 million years ago, by <hl> Homo erectus <hl> , and from its appearance some 0.2 million years ago by Homo sapiens.


Question: When did Homo sapiens begin using subsistence gathering?

Answer: 0.2 million years ago

<hl> Hunting and gathering was presumably the subsistence strategy employed by human societies beginning some 1.8 million years ago, by Homo erectus, and from its appearance some 0.2 million years ago by Homo sapiens. <hl> It remained the only mode of subsistence until the end of the Mesolithic period some 10,000 years ago, and after this was replaced only gradually with the spread of the Neolithic Revolution.

Hunting and gathering was presumably the subsistence strategy employed by human societies beginning some 1.8 million years ago, by Homo erectus, and from its appearance some <hl> 0.2 million years ago <hl> by Homo sapiens. It remained the only mode of subsistence until the end of the Mesolithic period some 10,000 years ago, and after this was replaced only gradually with the spread of the Neolithic Revolution.


Question: When did hunting-gathering begin to fade from use?

Answer: 10,000 years ago

Hunting and gathering was presumably the subsistence strategy employed by human societies beginning some 1.8 million years ago, by Homo erectus, and from its appearance some 0.2 million years ago by Homo sapiens. <hl> It remained the only mode of subsistence until the end of the Mesolithic period some 10,000 years ago , and after this was replaced only gradually with the spread of the Neolithic Revolution. <hl>

Hunting and gathering was presumably the subsistence strategy employed by human societies beginning some 1.8 million years ago, by Homo erectus, and from its appearance some 0.2 million years ago by Homo sapiens. It remained the only mode of subsistence until the end of the Mesolithic period some <hl> 10,000 years ago <hl>, and after this was replaced only gradually with the spread of the Neolithic Revolution.

It remained the only mode of subsistence until the end of the Mesolithic period some <hl> 10,000 years ago <hl> , and after this was replaced only gradually with the spread of the Neolithic Revolution.


Question: What began replacing hunting-gathering at the end of the Mesolithic period?

Answer: Neolithic Revolution

Hunting and gathering was presumably the subsistence strategy employed by human societies beginning some 1.8 million years ago, by Homo erectus, and from its appearance some 0.2 million years ago by Homo sapiens. <hl> It remained the only mode of subsistence until the end of the Mesolithic period some 10,000 years ago, and after this was replaced only gradually with the spread of the Neolithic Revolution . <hl>

Hunting and gathering was presumably the subsistence strategy employed by human societies beginning some 1.8 million years ago, by Homo erectus, and from its appearance some 0.2 million years ago by Homo sapiens. It remained the only mode of subsistence until the end of the Mesolithic period some 10,000 years ago, and after this was replaced only gradually with the spread of the <hl> Neolithic Revolution <hl>.

It remained the only mode of subsistence until the end of the Mesolithic period some 10,000 years ago, and after this was replaced only gradually with the spread of the <hl> Neolithic Revolution <hl> .


Question: During what period did hunter-gatherers begin to focus food collection on a more limited range?

Starting at the transition between the Middle to Upper Paleolithic period, some 80,000 to 70,000 years ago, some hunter-gatherers bands began to specialize, concentrating on hunting a smaller selection of (often larger) game and gathering a smaller selection of food. This specialization of work also involved creating specialized tools, like fishing nets and hooks and bone harpoons. The transition into the subsequent Neolithic period is chiefly defined by the unprecedented development of nascent agricultural practices. Agriculture originated and spread in several different areas including the Middle East, Asia, Mesoamerica, and the Andes beginning as early as 12,000 years ago.

Answer: Middle to Upper Paleolithic

<hl> Starting at the transition between the Middle to Upper Paleolithic period, some 80,000 to 70,000 years ago, some hunter-gatherers bands began to specialize, concentrating on hunting a smaller selection of (often larger) game and gathering a smaller selection of food. <hl> This specialization of work also involved creating specialized tools, like fishing nets and hooks and bone harpoons. The transition into the subsequent Neolithic period is chiefly defined by the unprecedented development of nascent agricultural practices. Agriculture originated and spread in several different areas including the Middle East, Asia, Mesoamerica, and the Andes beginning as early as 12,000 years ago.

Starting at the transition between the <hl> Middle to Upper Paleolithic <hl> period, some 80,000 to 70,000 years ago, some hunter-gatherers bands began to specialize, concentrating on hunting a smaller selection of (often larger) game and gathering a smaller selection of food. This specialization of work also involved creating specialized tools, like fishing nets and hooks and bone harpoons. The transition into the subsequent Neolithic period is chiefly defined by the unprecedented development of nascent agricultural practices. Agriculture originated and spread in several different areas including the Middle East, Asia, Mesoamerica, and the Andes beginning as early as 12,000 years ago.


Question: How many years ago did hunting-gatherers start specializing in their collection practices?

Answer: 80,000 to 70,000 years ago

<hl> Starting at the transition between the Middle to Upper Paleolithic period, some 80,000 to 70,000 years ago , some hunter-gatherers bands began to specialize, concentrating on hunting a smaller selection of (often larger) game and gathering a smaller selection of food. <hl> This specialization of work also involved creating specialized tools, like fishing nets and hooks and bone harpoons. The transition into the subsequent Neolithic period is chiefly defined by the unprecedented development of nascent agricultural practices. Agriculture originated and spread in several different areas including the Middle East, Asia, Mesoamerica, and the Andes beginning as early as 12,000 years ago.

Starting at the transition between the Middle to Upper Paleolithic period, some <hl> 80,000 to 70,000 years ago <hl>, some hunter-gatherers bands began to specialize, concentrating on hunting a smaller selection of (often larger) game and gathering a smaller selection of food. This specialization of work also involved creating specialized tools, like fishing nets and hooks and bone harpoons. The transition into the subsequent Neolithic period is chiefly defined by the unprecedented development of nascent agricultural practices. Agriculture originated and spread in several different areas including the Middle East, Asia, Mesoamerica, and the Andes beginning as early as 12,000 years ago.

Starting at the transition between the Middle to Upper Paleolithic period, some <hl> 80,000 to 70,000 years ago <hl> , some hunter-gatherers bands began to specialize, concentrating on hunting a smaller selection of (often larger) game and gathering a smaller selection of food.


Question: What was the change in gathering?

Answer: a smaller selection

<hl> Starting at the transition between the Middle to Upper Paleolithic period, some 80,000 to 70,000 years ago, some hunter-gatherers bands began to specialize, concentrating on hunting a smaller selection of (often larger) game and gathering a smaller selection of food. <hl> This specialization of work also involved creating specialized tools, like fishing nets and hooks and bone harpoons. The transition into the subsequent Neolithic period is chiefly defined by the unprecedented development of nascent agricultural practices. Agriculture originated and spread in several different areas including the Middle East, Asia, Mesoamerica, and the Andes beginning as early as 12,000 years ago.

Starting at the transition between the Middle to Upper Paleolithic period, some 80,000 to 70,000 years ago, some hunter-gatherers bands began to specialize, concentrating on hunting <hl> a smaller selection <hl> of (often larger) game and gathering a smaller selection of food. This specialization of work also involved creating specialized tools, like fishing nets and hooks and bone harpoons. The transition into the subsequent Neolithic period is chiefly defined by the unprecedented development of nascent agricultural practices. Agriculture originated and spread in several different areas including the Middle East, Asia, Mesoamerica, and the Andes beginning as early as 12,000 years ago.


Question: When did the use of agriculture begin it's spread?

Answer: 12,000 years ago

Starting at the transition between the Middle to Upper Paleolithic period, some 80,000 to 70,000 years ago, some hunter-gatherers bands began to specialize, concentrating on hunting a smaller selection of (often larger) game and gathering a smaller selection of food. This specialization of work also involved creating specialized tools, like fishing nets and hooks and bone harpoons. The transition into the subsequent Neolithic period is chiefly defined by the unprecedented development of nascent agricultural practices. <hl> Agriculture originated and spread in several different areas including the Middle East, Asia, Mesoamerica, and the Andes beginning as early as 12,000 years ago . <hl>

Starting at the transition between the Middle to Upper Paleolithic period, some 80,000 to 70,000 years ago, some hunter-gatherers bands began to specialize, concentrating on hunting a smaller selection of (often larger) game and gathering a smaller selection of food. This specialization of work also involved creating specialized tools, like fishing nets and hooks and bone harpoons. The transition into the subsequent Neolithic period is chiefly defined by the unprecedented development of nascent agricultural practices. Agriculture originated and spread in several different areas including the Middle East, Asia, Mesoamerica, and the Andes beginning as early as <hl> 12,000 years ago <hl>.

Agriculture originated and spread in several different areas including the Middle East, Asia, Mesoamerica, and the Andes beginning as early as <hl> 12,000 years ago <hl> .


Question: In what kind of area did forest gardening start?

Forest gardening was also being used as a food production system in various parts of the world over this period. Forest gardens originated in prehistoric times along jungle-clad river banks and in the wet foothills of monsoon regions.[citation needed] In the gradual process of families improving their immediate environment, useful tree and vine species were identified, protected and improved, whilst undesirable species were eliminated. Eventually superior foreign species were selected and incorporated into the gardens.

Answer: jungle-clad river banks

Forest gardening was also being used as a food production system in various parts of the world over this period. <hl> Forest gardens originated in prehistoric times along jungle-clad river banks and in the wet foothills of monsoon regions.[citation needed] In the gradual process of families improving their immediate environment, useful tree and vine species were identified, protected and improved, whilst undesirable species were eliminated. <hl> Eventually superior foreign species were selected and incorporated into the gardens.

Forest gardening was also being used as a food production system in various parts of the world over this period. Forest gardens originated in prehistoric times along <hl> jungle-clad river banks <hl> and in the wet foothills of monsoon regions.[citation needed] In the gradual process of families improving their immediate environment, useful tree and vine species were identified, protected and improved, whilst undesirable species were eliminated. Eventually superior foreign species were selected and incorporated into the gardens.


Question: In what other types of areas did forest gardening show up?

Answer: foothills of monsoon regions

Forest gardening was also being used as a food production system in various parts of the world over this period. <hl> Forest gardens originated in prehistoric times along jungle-clad river banks and in the wet foothills of monsoon regions .[citation needed] <hl> In the gradual process of families improving their immediate environment, useful tree and vine species were identified, protected and improved, whilst undesirable species were eliminated. Eventually superior foreign species were selected and incorporated into the gardens.

Forest gardening was also being used as a food production system in various parts of the world over this period. Forest gardens originated in prehistoric times along jungle-clad river banks and in the wet <hl> foothills of monsoon regions <hl>.[citation needed] In the gradual process of families improving their immediate environment, useful tree and vine species were identified, protected and improved, whilst undesirable species were eliminated. Eventually superior foreign species were selected and incorporated into the gardens.

Forest gardens originated in prehistoric times along jungle-clad river banks and in the wet <hl> foothills of monsoon regions <hl> .[citation needed]


Question: What kind of plant did these early gardeners seek out?

Answer: tree and vine species

Forest gardening was also being used as a food production system in various parts of the world over this period. <hl> Forest gardens originated in prehistoric times along jungle-clad river banks and in the wet foothills of monsoon regions.[citation needed] In the gradual process of families improving their immediate environment, useful tree and vine species were identified, protected and improved, whilst undesirable species were eliminated. <hl> Eventually superior foreign species were selected and incorporated into the gardens.

Forest gardening was also being used as a food production system in various parts of the world over this period. Forest gardens originated in prehistoric times along jungle-clad river banks and in the wet foothills of monsoon regions.[citation needed] In the gradual process of families improving their immediate environment, useful <hl> tree and vine species <hl> were identified, protected and improved, whilst undesirable species were eliminated. Eventually superior foreign species were selected and incorporated into the gardens.


Question: What use did forest gardeners put to tree and vines to?

Answer: identified, protected and improved

Forest gardening was also being used as a food production system in various parts of the world over this period. <hl> Forest gardens originated in prehistoric times along jungle-clad river banks and in the wet foothills of monsoon regions.[citation needed] In the gradual process of families improving their immediate environment, useful tree and vine species were identified, protected and improved , whilst undesirable species were eliminated. <hl> Eventually superior foreign species were selected and incorporated into the gardens.

Forest gardening was also being used as a food production system in various parts of the world over this period. Forest gardens originated in prehistoric times along jungle-clad river banks and in the wet foothills of monsoon regions.[citation needed] In the gradual process of families improving their immediate environment, useful tree and vine species were <hl> identified, protected and improved <hl>, whilst undesirable species were eliminated. Eventually superior foreign species were selected and incorporated into the gardens.

Forest gardens originated in prehistoric times along jungle-clad river banks and in the wet foothills of monsoon regions.[citation needed] In the gradual process of families improving their immediate environment, useful tree and vine species were <hl> identified, protected and improved <hl> , whilst undesirable species were eliminated.


Question: What did these gardeners do about unwanted species?

Answer: eliminated

Forest gardening was also being used as a food production system in various parts of the world over this period. <hl> Forest gardens originated in prehistoric times along jungle-clad river banks and in the wet foothills of monsoon regions.[citation needed] In the gradual process of families improving their immediate environment, useful tree and vine species were identified, protected and improved, whilst undesirable species were eliminated . <hl> Eventually superior foreign species were selected and incorporated into the gardens.

Forest gardening was also being used as a food production system in various parts of the world over this period. Forest gardens originated in prehistoric times along jungle-clad river banks and in the wet foothills of monsoon regions.[citation needed] In the gradual process of families improving their immediate environment, useful tree and vine species were identified, protected and improved, whilst undesirable species were <hl> eliminated <hl>. Eventually superior foreign species were selected and incorporated into the gardens.

Forest gardens originated in prehistoric times along jungle-clad river banks and in the wet foothills of monsoon regions.[citation needed] In the gradual process of families improving their immediate environment, useful tree and vine species were identified, protected and improved, whilst undesirable species were <hl> eliminated <hl> .


Question: Where do many modern day hunter-gatherers live?

Many groups continued their hunter-gatherer ways of life, although their numbers have continually declined, partly as a result of pressure from growing agricultural and pastoral communities. Many of them reside in the developing world, either in arid regions or tropical forests. Areas that were formerly available to hunter-gatherers were—and continue to be—encroached upon by the settlements of agriculturalists. In the resulting competition for land use, hunter-gatherer societies either adopted these practices or moved to other areas. In addition, Jared Diamond has blamed a decline in the availability of wild foods, particularly animal resources. In North and South America, for example, most large mammal species had gone extinct by the end of the Pleistocene—according to Diamond, because of overexploitation by humans, although the overkill hypothesis he advocates is strongly contested.[by whom?]

Answer: in the developing world

Many groups continued their hunter-gatherer ways of life, although their numbers have continually declined, partly as a result of pressure from growing agricultural and pastoral communities. <hl> Many of them reside in the developing world , either in arid regions or tropical forests. <hl> Areas that were formerly available to hunter-gatherers were—and continue to be—encroached upon by the settlements of agriculturalists. In the resulting competition for land use, hunter-gatherer societies either adopted these practices or moved to other areas. In addition, Jared Diamond has blamed a decline in the availability of wild foods, particularly animal resources. In North and South America, for example, most large mammal species had gone extinct by the end of the Pleistocene—according to Diamond, because of overexploitation by humans, although the overkill hypothesis he advocates is strongly contested.[by whom?]

Many groups continued their hunter-gatherer ways of life, although their numbers have continually declined, partly as a result of pressure from growing agricultural and pastoral communities. Many of them reside <hl> in the developing world <hl>, either in arid regions or tropical forests. Areas that were formerly available to hunter-gatherers were—and continue to be—encroached upon by the settlements of agriculturalists. In the resulting competition for land use, hunter-gatherer societies either adopted these practices or moved to other areas. In addition, Jared Diamond has blamed a decline in the availability of wild foods, particularly animal resources. In North and South America, for example, most large mammal species had gone extinct by the end of the Pleistocene—according to Diamond, because of overexploitation by humans, although the overkill hypothesis he advocates is strongly contested.[by whom?]

Many of them reside <hl> in the developing world <hl> , either in arid regions or tropical forests.


Question: In what type of climate do hunter-gatherers live?

Answer: arid regions or tropical forests

Many groups continued their hunter-gatherer ways of life, although their numbers have continually declined, partly as a result of pressure from growing agricultural and pastoral communities. <hl> Many of them reside in the developing world, either in arid regions or tropical forests . <hl> Areas that were formerly available to hunter-gatherers were—and continue to be—encroached upon by the settlements of agriculturalists. In the resulting competition for land use, hunter-gatherer societies either adopted these practices or moved to other areas. In addition, Jared Diamond has blamed a decline in the availability of wild foods, particularly animal resources. In North and South America, for example, most large mammal species had gone extinct by the end of the Pleistocene—according to Diamond, because of overexploitation by humans, although the overkill hypothesis he advocates is strongly contested.[by whom?]

Many groups continued their hunter-gatherer ways of life, although their numbers have continually declined, partly as a result of pressure from growing agricultural and pastoral communities. Many of them reside in the developing world, either in <hl> arid regions or tropical forests <hl>. Areas that were formerly available to hunter-gatherers were—and continue to be—encroached upon by the settlements of agriculturalists. In the resulting competition for land use, hunter-gatherer societies either adopted these practices or moved to other areas. In addition, Jared Diamond has blamed a decline in the availability of wild foods, particularly animal resources. In North and South America, for example, most large mammal species had gone extinct by the end of the Pleistocene—according to Diamond, because of overexploitation by humans, although the overkill hypothesis he advocates is strongly contested.[by whom?]

Many of them reside in the developing world, either in <hl> arid regions or tropical forests <hl> .


Question: What kind of human life-style is pushing hunter-gatherers out of their environment?

Answer: settlements of agriculturalists

Many groups continued their hunter-gatherer ways of life, although their numbers have continually declined, partly as a result of pressure from growing agricultural and pastoral communities. Many of them reside in the developing world, either in arid regions or tropical forests. <hl> Areas that were formerly available to hunter-gatherers were—and continue to be—encroached upon by the settlements of agriculturalists . <hl> In the resulting competition for land use, hunter-gatherer societies either adopted these practices or moved to other areas. In addition, Jared Diamond has blamed a decline in the availability of wild foods, particularly animal resources. In North and South America, for example, most large mammal species had gone extinct by the end of the Pleistocene—according to Diamond, because of overexploitation by humans, although the overkill hypothesis he advocates is strongly contested.[by whom?]

Many groups continued their hunter-gatherer ways of life, although their numbers have continually declined, partly as a result of pressure from growing agricultural and pastoral communities. Many of them reside in the developing world, either in arid regions or tropical forests. Areas that were formerly available to hunter-gatherers were—and continue to be—encroached upon by the <hl> settlements of agriculturalists <hl>. In the resulting competition for land use, hunter-gatherer societies either adopted these practices or moved to other areas. In addition, Jared Diamond has blamed a decline in the availability of wild foods, particularly animal resources. In North and South America, for example, most large mammal species had gone extinct by the end of the Pleistocene—according to Diamond, because of overexploitation by humans, although the overkill hypothesis he advocates is strongly contested.[by whom?]

Areas that were formerly available to hunter-gatherers were—and continue to be—encroached upon by the <hl> settlements of agriculturalists <hl> .


Question: What has Jared Diamond blamed the decline of gatherers on?

Answer: availability of wild foods

Many groups continued their hunter-gatherer ways of life, although their numbers have continually declined, partly as a result of pressure from growing agricultural and pastoral communities. Many of them reside in the developing world, either in arid regions or tropical forests. Areas that were formerly available to hunter-gatherers were—and continue to be—encroached upon by the settlements of agriculturalists. In the resulting competition for land use, hunter-gatherer societies either adopted these practices or moved to other areas. <hl> In addition, Jared Diamond has blamed a decline in the availability of wild foods , particularly animal resources. <hl> In North and South America, for example, most large mammal species had gone extinct by the end of the Pleistocene—according to Diamond, because of overexploitation by humans, although the overkill hypothesis he advocates is strongly contested.[by whom?]

Many groups continued their hunter-gatherer ways of life, although their numbers have continually declined, partly as a result of pressure from growing agricultural and pastoral communities. Many of them reside in the developing world, either in arid regions or tropical forests. Areas that were formerly available to hunter-gatherers were—and continue to be—encroached upon by the settlements of agriculturalists. In the resulting competition for land use, hunter-gatherer societies either adopted these practices or moved to other areas. In addition, Jared Diamond has blamed a decline in the <hl> availability of wild foods <hl>, particularly animal resources. In North and South America, for example, most large mammal species had gone extinct by the end of the Pleistocene—according to Diamond, because of overexploitation by humans, although the overkill hypothesis he advocates is strongly contested.[by whom?]

In addition, Jared Diamond has blamed a decline in the <hl> availability of wild foods <hl> , particularly animal resources.


Question: What type of food animal went extict by the end of the Pleistocene era?

Answer: large mammal species

Many groups continued their hunter-gatherer ways of life, although their numbers have continually declined, partly as a result of pressure from growing agricultural and pastoral communities. Many of them reside in the developing world, either in arid regions or tropical forests. Areas that were formerly available to hunter-gatherers were—and continue to be—encroached upon by the settlements of agriculturalists. In the resulting competition for land use, hunter-gatherer societies either adopted these practices or moved to other areas. In addition, Jared Diamond has blamed a decline in the availability of wild foods, particularly animal resources. <hl> In North and South America, for example, most large mammal species had gone extinct by the end of the Pleistocene—according to Diamond, because of overexploitation by humans, although the overkill hypothesis he advocates is strongly contested.[by whom?] <hl>

Many groups continued their hunter-gatherer ways of life, although their numbers have continually declined, partly as a result of pressure from growing agricultural and pastoral communities. Many of them reside in the developing world, either in arid regions or tropical forests. Areas that were formerly available to hunter-gatherers were—and continue to be—encroached upon by the settlements of agriculturalists. In the resulting competition for land use, hunter-gatherer societies either adopted these practices or moved to other areas. In addition, Jared Diamond has blamed a decline in the availability of wild foods, particularly animal resources. In North and South America, for example, most <hl> large mammal species <hl> had gone extinct by the end of the Pleistocene—according to Diamond, because of overexploitation by humans, although the overkill hypothesis he advocates is strongly contested.[by whom?]


Question: Who expanded into the territory of hunter-gathers?

As the number and size of agricultural societies increased, they expanded into lands traditionally used by hunter-gatherers. This process of agriculture-driven expansion led to the development of the first forms of government in agricultural centers, such as the Fertile Crescent, Ancient India, Ancient China, Olmec, Sub-Saharan Africa and Norte Chico.

Answer: agricultural societies

<hl> As the number and size of agricultural societies increased, they expanded into lands traditionally used by hunter-gatherers. <hl> This process of agriculture-driven expansion led to the development of the first forms of government in agricultural centers, such as the Fertile Crescent, Ancient India, Ancient China, Olmec, Sub-Saharan Africa and Norte Chico.

As the number and size of <hl> agricultural societies <hl> increased, they expanded into lands traditionally used by hunter-gatherers. This process of agriculture-driven expansion led to the development of the first forms of government in agricultural centers, such as the Fertile Crescent, Ancient India, Ancient China, Olmec, Sub-Saharan Africa and Norte Chico.


Question: What did the increase in agricultural areas produce?

Answer: first forms of government

As the number and size of agricultural societies increased, they expanded into lands traditionally used by hunter-gatherers. <hl> This process of agriculture-driven expansion led to the development of the first forms of government in agricultural centers, such as the Fertile Crescent, Ancient India, Ancient China, Olmec, Sub-Saharan Africa and Norte Chico. <hl>

As the number and size of agricultural societies increased, they expanded into lands traditionally used by hunter-gatherers. This process of agriculture-driven expansion led to the development of the <hl> first forms of government <hl> in agricultural centers, such as the Fertile Crescent, Ancient India, Ancient China, Olmec, Sub-Saharan Africa and Norte Chico.


Question: What were the Fertile Crescent and Ancient India ?

Answer: agricultural centers

As the number and size of agricultural societies increased, they expanded into lands traditionally used by hunter-gatherers. <hl> This process of agriculture-driven expansion led to the development of the first forms of government in agricultural centers , such as the Fertile Crescent, Ancient India, Ancient China, Olmec, Sub-Saharan Africa and Norte Chico. <hl>

As the number and size of agricultural societies increased, they expanded into lands traditionally used by hunter-gatherers. This process of agriculture-driven expansion led to the development of the first forms of government in <hl> agricultural centers <hl>, such as the Fertile Crescent, Ancient India, Ancient China, Olmec, Sub-Saharan Africa and Norte Chico.

This process of agriculture-driven expansion led to the development of the first forms of government in <hl> agricultural centers <hl> , such as the Fertile Crescent, Ancient India, Ancient China, Olmec, Sub-Saharan Africa and Norte Chico.


Question: What type of expansion was it in places like the Fertile Crescent?

Answer: agriculture-driven

As the number and size of agricultural societies increased, they expanded into lands traditionally used by hunter-gatherers. <hl> This process of agriculture-driven expansion led to the development of the first forms of government in agricultural centers, such as the Fertile Crescent, Ancient India, Ancient China, Olmec, Sub-Saharan Africa and Norte Chico. <hl>

As the number and size of agricultural societies increased, they expanded into lands traditionally used by hunter-gatherers. This process of <hl> agriculture-driven <hl> expansion led to the development of the first forms of government in agricultural centers, such as the Fertile Crescent, Ancient India, Ancient China, Olmec, Sub-Saharan Africa and Norte Chico.


Question: Why did agricultural societies push into hunter-gatherer areas?

Answer: agricultural societies increased

<hl> As the number and size of agricultural societies increased , they expanded into lands traditionally used by hunter-gatherers. <hl> This process of agriculture-driven expansion led to the development of the first forms of government in agricultural centers, such as the Fertile Crescent, Ancient India, Ancient China, Olmec, Sub-Saharan Africa and Norte Chico.

As the number and size of <hl> agricultural societies increased <hl>, they expanded into lands traditionally used by hunter-gatherers. This process of agriculture-driven expansion led to the development of the first forms of government in agricultural centers, such as the Fertile Crescent, Ancient India, Ancient China, Olmec, Sub-Saharan Africa and Norte Chico.

As the number and size of <hl> agricultural societies increased <hl> , they expanded into lands traditionally used by hunter-gatherers.


Question: What type of areas do modern hunter-gathers live in?

As a result of the now near-universal human reliance upon agriculture, the few contemporary hunter-gatherer cultures usually live in areas unsuitable for agricultural use.

Answer: unsuitable for agricultural use

<hl> As a result of the now near-universal human reliance upon agriculture, the few contemporary hunter-gatherer cultures usually live in areas unsuitable for agricultural use . <hl>

As a result of the now near-universal human reliance upon agriculture, the few contemporary hunter-gatherer cultures usually live in areas <hl> unsuitable for agricultural use <hl>.

As a result of the now near-universal human reliance upon agriculture, the few contemporary hunter-gatherer cultures usually live in areas <hl> unsuitable for agricultural use <hl> .


Question: How many modern hunter-gatherer cultures are there?

Answer: few

<hl> As a result of the now near-universal human reliance upon agriculture, the few contemporary hunter-gatherer cultures usually live in areas unsuitable for agricultural use. <hl>

As a result of the now near-universal human reliance upon agriculture, the <hl> few <hl> contemporary hunter-gatherer cultures usually live in areas unsuitable for agricultural use.


Question: What do people basically rely on now?

Answer: agriculture

<hl> As a result of the now near-universal human reliance upon agriculture , the few contemporary hunter-gatherer cultures usually live in areas unsuitable for agricultural use. <hl>

As a result of the now near-universal human reliance upon <hl> agriculture <hl>, the few contemporary hunter-gatherer cultures usually live in areas unsuitable for agricultural use.

As a result of the now near-universal human reliance upon <hl> agriculture <hl> , the few contemporary hunter-gatherer cultures usually live in areas unsuitable for agricultural use.


Question: Who lives in areas not usable for agriculture?

Answer: hunter-gatherer cultures

<hl> As a result of the now near-universal human reliance upon agriculture, the few contemporary hunter-gatherer cultures usually live in areas unsuitable for agricultural use. <hl>

As a result of the now near-universal human reliance upon agriculture, the few contemporary <hl> hunter-gatherer cultures <hl> usually live in areas unsuitable for agricultural use.


Question: What kind of food production is worldwide now?

Answer: reliance upon agriculture

<hl> As a result of the now near-universal human reliance upon agriculture , the few contemporary hunter-gatherer cultures usually live in areas unsuitable for agricultural use. <hl>

As a result of the now near-universal human <hl> reliance upon agriculture <hl>, the few contemporary hunter-gatherer cultures usually live in areas unsuitable for agricultural use.

As a result of the now near-universal human <hl> reliance upon agriculture <hl> , the few contemporary hunter-gatherer cultures usually live in areas unsuitable for agricultural use.


Question: What is the lifestyle of hunter-gatherers?

Most hunter-gatherers are nomadic or semi-nomadic and live in temporary settlements. Mobile communities typically construct shelters using impermanent building materials, or they may use natural rock shelters, where they are available.

Answer: nomadic or semi-nomadic

<hl> Most hunter-gatherers are nomadic or semi-nomadic and live in temporary settlements. <hl> Mobile communities typically construct shelters using impermanent building materials, or they may use natural rock shelters, where they are available.

Most hunter-gatherers are <hl> nomadic or semi-nomadic <hl> and live in temporary settlements. Mobile communities typically construct shelters using impermanent building materials, or they may use natural rock shelters, where they are available.


Question: What is the permanence of hunter-gatherer settlements?

Answer: temporary

<hl> Most hunter-gatherers are nomadic or semi-nomadic and live in temporary settlements. <hl> Mobile communities typically construct shelters using impermanent building materials, or they may use natural rock shelters, where they are available.

Most hunter-gatherers are nomadic or semi-nomadic and live in <hl> temporary <hl> settlements. Mobile communities typically construct shelters using impermanent building materials, or they may use natural rock shelters, where they are available.


Question: What kind of building materials do they use?

Answer: impermanent

Most hunter-gatherers are nomadic or semi-nomadic and live in temporary settlements. <hl> Mobile communities typically construct shelters using impermanent building materials, or they may use natural rock shelters, where they are available. <hl>

Most hunter-gatherers are nomadic or semi-nomadic and live in temporary settlements. Mobile communities typically construct shelters using <hl> impermanent <hl> building materials, or they may use natural rock shelters, where they are available.


Question: What kind of natural structure do hunter-gatherers use?

Answer: rock shelters

Most hunter-gatherers are nomadic or semi-nomadic and live in temporary settlements. <hl> Mobile communities typically construct shelters using impermanent building materials, or they may use natural rock shelters , where they are available. <hl>

Most hunter-gatherers are nomadic or semi-nomadic and live in temporary settlements. Mobile communities typically construct shelters using impermanent building materials, or they may use natural <hl> rock shelters <hl>, where they are available.

Mobile communities typically construct shelters using impermanent building materials, or they may use natural <hl> rock shelters <hl> , where they are available.


Question: What is the movement ability of hunter-gathers?

Answer: Mobile communities

Most hunter-gatherers are nomadic or semi-nomadic and live in temporary settlements. <hl> Mobile communities typically construct shelters using impermanent building materials, or they may use natural rock shelters, where they are available. <hl>

Most hunter-gatherers are nomadic or semi-nomadic and live in temporary settlements. <hl> Mobile communities <hl> typically construct shelters using impermanent building materials, or they may use natural rock shelters, where they are available.


Question: What kind of area allowed a more permanent settlement?

Answer: rich environments

<hl> Some hunter-gatherer cultures, such as the indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast, lived in particularly rich environments that allowed them to be sedentary or semi-sedentary. <hl>

Some hunter-gatherer cultures, such as the indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast, lived in particularly <hl> rich environments <hl> that allowed them to be sedentary or semi-sedentary.


Question: What is the life style of the indigenous people of the Pacific Northwest?

Answer: hunter-gatherer

<hl> Some hunter-gatherer cultures, such as the indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast, lived in particularly rich environments that allowed them to be sedentary or semi-sedentary. <hl>

Some <hl> hunter-gatherer <hl> cultures, such as the indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast, lived in particularly rich environments that allowed them to be sedentary or semi-sedentary.


Question: What does a lush environment allow hunter-gatherers to be?

Answer: sedentary or semi-sedentary

<hl> Some hunter-gatherer cultures, such as the indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast, lived in particularly rich environments that allowed them to be sedentary or semi-sedentary . <hl>

Some hunter-gatherer cultures, such as the indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast, lived in particularly rich environments that allowed them to be <hl> sedentary or semi-sedentary <hl>.

Some hunter-gatherer cultures, such as the indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast, lived in particularly rich environments that allowed them to be <hl> sedentary or semi-sedentary <hl> .


Question: What kind of environment is the Pacific Northwest?

Answer: rich environments

<hl> Some hunter-gatherer cultures, such as the indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast, lived in particularly rich environments that allowed them to be sedentary or semi-sedentary. <hl>

Some hunter-gatherer cultures, such as the indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast, lived in particularly <hl> rich environments <hl> that allowed them to be sedentary or semi-sedentary.


Question: What are the indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest?

Answer: hunter-gatherer cultures

<hl> Some hunter-gatherer cultures , such as the indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast, lived in particularly rich environments that allowed them to be sedentary or semi-sedentary. <hl>

Some <hl> hunter-gatherer cultures <hl>, such as the indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast, lived in particularly rich environments that allowed them to be sedentary or semi-sedentary.

Some <hl> hunter-gatherer cultures <hl> , such as the indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast, lived in particularly rich environments that allowed them to be sedentary or semi-sedentary.


Question: What is the social style of hunter-gather societies?

Hunter-gatherers tend to have an egalitarian social ethos, although settled hunter-gatherers (for example, those inhabiting the Northwest Coast of North America) are an exception to this rule. Nearly all African hunter-gatherers are egalitarian, with women roughly as influential and powerful as men.

Answer: egalitarian

<hl> Hunter-gatherers tend to have an egalitarian social ethos, although settled hunter-gatherers (for example, those inhabiting the Northwest Coast of North America) are an exception to this rule. <hl> Nearly all African hunter-gatherers are egalitarian, with women roughly as influential and powerful as men.

Hunter-gatherers tend to have an <hl> egalitarian <hl> social ethos, although settled hunter-gatherers (for example, those inhabiting the Northwest Coast of North America) are an exception to this rule. Nearly all African hunter-gatherers are egalitarian, with women roughly as influential and powerful as men.


Question: Where do people who are an exception to egalitarianism live?

Answer: Northwest Coast of North America

<hl> Hunter-gatherers tend to have an egalitarian social ethos, although settled hunter-gatherers (for example, those inhabiting the Northwest Coast of North America ) are an exception to this rule. <hl> Nearly all African hunter-gatherers are egalitarian, with women roughly as influential and powerful as men.

Hunter-gatherers tend to have an egalitarian social ethos, although settled hunter-gatherers (for example, those inhabiting the <hl> Northwest Coast of North America <hl>) are an exception to this rule. Nearly all African hunter-gatherers are egalitarian, with women roughly as influential and powerful as men.

Hunter-gatherers tend to have an egalitarian social ethos, although settled hunter-gatherers (for example, those inhabiting the <hl> Northwest Coast of North America <hl> ) are an exception to this rule.


Question: what group of hunter-gatherers are nearly all egalitarian?

Answer: African

Hunter-gatherers tend to have an egalitarian social ethos, although settled hunter-gatherers (for example, those inhabiting the Northwest Coast of North America) are an exception to this rule. <hl> Nearly all African hunter-gatherers are egalitarian, with women roughly as influential and powerful as men. <hl>

Hunter-gatherers tend to have an egalitarian social ethos, although settled hunter-gatherers (for example, those inhabiting the Northwest Coast of North America) are an exception to this rule. Nearly all <hl> African <hl> hunter-gatherers are egalitarian, with women roughly as influential and powerful as men.


Question: How is it interesting to view hunter-gatherers' egalitarianism?

The egalitarianism typical of human hunters and gatherers is never total, but is striking when viewed in an evolutionary context. One of humanity's two closest primate relatives, chimpanzees, are anything but egalitarian, forming themselves into hierarchies that are often dominated by an alpha male. So great is the contrast with human hunter-gatherers that it is widely argued by palaeoanthropologists that resistance to being dominated was a key factor driving the evolutionary emergence of human consciousness, language, kinship and social organization.

Answer: in an evolutionary context

<hl> The egalitarianism typical of human hunters and gatherers is never total, but is striking when viewed in an evolutionary context . <hl> One of humanity's two closest primate relatives, chimpanzees, are anything but egalitarian, forming themselves into hierarchies that are often dominated by an alpha male. So great is the contrast with human hunter-gatherers that it is widely argued by palaeoanthropologists that resistance to being dominated was a key factor driving the evolutionary emergence of human consciousness, language, kinship and social organization.

The egalitarianism typical of human hunters and gatherers is never total, but is striking when viewed <hl> in an evolutionary context <hl>. One of humanity's two closest primate relatives, chimpanzees, are anything but egalitarian, forming themselves into hierarchies that are often dominated by an alpha male. So great is the contrast with human hunter-gatherers that it is widely argued by palaeoanthropologists that resistance to being dominated was a key factor driving the evolutionary emergence of human consciousness, language, kinship and social organization.

The egalitarianism typical of human hunters and gatherers is never total, but is striking when viewed <hl> in an evolutionary context <hl> .


Question: What do chimpanzees act like as pertains to being egalitarianism?

Answer: anything but egalitarian

The egalitarianism typical of human hunters and gatherers is never total, but is striking when viewed in an evolutionary context. <hl> One of humanity's two closest primate relatives, chimpanzees, are anything but egalitarian , forming themselves into hierarchies that are often dominated by an alpha male. <hl> So great is the contrast with human hunter-gatherers that it is widely argued by palaeoanthropologists that resistance to being dominated was a key factor driving the evolutionary emergence of human consciousness, language, kinship and social organization.

The egalitarianism typical of human hunters and gatherers is never total, but is striking when viewed in an evolutionary context. One of humanity's two closest primate relatives, chimpanzees, are <hl> anything but egalitarian <hl>, forming themselves into hierarchies that are often dominated by an alpha male. So great is the contrast with human hunter-gatherers that it is widely argued by palaeoanthropologists that resistance to being dominated was a key factor driving the evolutionary emergence of human consciousness, language, kinship and social organization.

One of humanity's two closest primate relatives, chimpanzees, are <hl> anything but egalitarian <hl> , forming themselves into hierarchies that are often dominated by an alpha male.


Question: How do chimpanzees arrange themselves in a group setting?

Answer: into hierarchies

The egalitarianism typical of human hunters and gatherers is never total, but is striking when viewed in an evolutionary context. <hl> One of humanity's two closest primate relatives, chimpanzees, are anything but egalitarian, forming themselves into hierarchies that are often dominated by an alpha male. <hl> So great is the contrast with human hunter-gatherers that it is widely argued by palaeoanthropologists that resistance to being dominated was a key factor driving the evolutionary emergence of human consciousness, language, kinship and social organization.

The egalitarianism typical of human hunters and gatherers is never total, but is striking when viewed in an evolutionary context. One of humanity's two closest primate relatives, chimpanzees, are anything but egalitarian, forming themselves <hl> into hierarchies <hl> that are often dominated by an alpha male. So great is the contrast with human hunter-gatherers that it is widely argued by palaeoanthropologists that resistance to being dominated was a key factor driving the evolutionary emergence of human consciousness, language, kinship and social organization.


Question: What is the dominate one in a chimpanzee group?

Answer: alpha male

an alpha male .

The egalitarianism typical of human hunters and gatherers is never total, but is striking when viewed in an evolutionary context. One of humanity's two closest primate relatives, chimpanzees, are anything but egalitarian, forming themselves into hierarchies that are often dominated by <hl> an alpha male . <hl> So great is the contrast with human hunter-gatherers that it is widely argued by palaeoanthropologists that resistance to being dominated was a key factor driving the evolutionary emergence of human consciousness, language, kinship and social organization.

The egalitarianism typical of human hunters and gatherers is never total, but is striking when viewed in an evolutionary context. One of humanity's two closest primate relatives, chimpanzees, are anything but egalitarian, forming themselves into hierarchies that are often dominated by an <hl> alpha male <hl>. So great is the contrast with human hunter-gatherers that it is widely argued by palaeoanthropologists that resistance to being dominated was a key factor driving the evolutionary emergence of human consciousness, language, kinship and social organization.


Question: What permanent group representative do hunter-gatherers not have?

Anthropologists maintain that hunter/gatherers don't have permanent leaders; instead, the person taking the initiative at any one time depends on the task being performed. In addition to social and economic equality in hunter-gatherer societies, there is often, though not always, sexual parity as well. Hunter-gatherers are often grouped together based on kinship and band (or tribe) membership. Postmarital residence among hunter-gatherers tends to be matrilocal, at least initially. Young mothers can enjoy childcare support from their own mothers, who continue living nearby in the same camp. The systems of kinship and descent among human hunter-gatherers were relatively flexible, although there is evidence that early human kinship in general tended to be matrilineal.

Answer: permanent leaders

<hl> Anthropologists maintain that hunter/gatherers don't have permanent leaders ; instead, the person taking the initiative at any one time depends on the task being performed. <hl> In addition to social and economic equality in hunter-gatherer societies, there is often, though not always, sexual parity as well. Hunter-gatherers are often grouped together based on kinship and band (or tribe) membership. Postmarital residence among hunter-gatherers tends to be matrilocal, at least initially. Young mothers can enjoy childcare support from their own mothers, who continue living nearby in the same camp. The systems of kinship and descent among human hunter-gatherers were relatively flexible, although there is evidence that early human kinship in general tended to be matrilineal.

Anthropologists maintain that hunter/gatherers don't have <hl> permanent leaders <hl>; instead, the person taking the initiative at any one time depends on the task being performed. In addition to social and economic equality in hunter-gatherer societies, there is often, though not always, sexual parity as well. Hunter-gatherers are often grouped together based on kinship and band (or tribe) membership. Postmarital residence among hunter-gatherers tends to be matrilocal, at least initially. Young mothers can enjoy childcare support from their own mothers, who continue living nearby in the same camp. The systems of kinship and descent among human hunter-gatherers were relatively flexible, although there is evidence that early human kinship in general tended to be matrilineal.

Anthropologists maintain that hunter/gatherers don't have <hl> permanent leaders <hl> ; instead, the person taking the initiative at any one time depends on the task being performed.


Question: Initiative within the group depends upon what factor?

Answer: task being performed

<hl> Anthropologists maintain that hunter/gatherers don't have permanent leaders; instead, the person taking the initiative at any one time depends on the task being performed . <hl> In addition to social and economic equality in hunter-gatherer societies, there is often, though not always, sexual parity as well. Hunter-gatherers are often grouped together based on kinship and band (or tribe) membership. Postmarital residence among hunter-gatherers tends to be matrilocal, at least initially. Young mothers can enjoy childcare support from their own mothers, who continue living nearby in the same camp. The systems of kinship and descent among human hunter-gatherers were relatively flexible, although there is evidence that early human kinship in general tended to be matrilineal.

Anthropologists maintain that hunter/gatherers don't have permanent leaders; instead, the person taking the initiative at any one time depends on the <hl> task being performed <hl>. In addition to social and economic equality in hunter-gatherer societies, there is often, though not always, sexual parity as well. Hunter-gatherers are often grouped together based on kinship and band (or tribe) membership. Postmarital residence among hunter-gatherers tends to be matrilocal, at least initially. Young mothers can enjoy childcare support from their own mothers, who continue living nearby in the same camp. The systems of kinship and descent among human hunter-gatherers were relatively flexible, although there is evidence that early human kinship in general tended to be matrilineal.

Anthropologists maintain that hunter/gatherers don't have permanent leaders; instead, the person taking the initiative at any one time depends on the <hl> task being performed <hl> .


Question: What group arrangement is usual in family authority?

Answer: matrilocal

Anthropologists maintain that hunter/gatherers don't have permanent leaders; instead, the person taking the initiative at any one time depends on the task being performed. In addition to social and economic equality in hunter-gatherer societies, there is often, though not always, sexual parity as well. Hunter-gatherers are often grouped together based on kinship and band (or tribe) membership. <hl> Postmarital residence among hunter-gatherers tends to be matrilocal , at least initially. <hl> Young mothers can enjoy childcare support from their own mothers, who continue living nearby in the same camp. The systems of kinship and descent among human hunter-gatherers were relatively flexible, although there is evidence that early human kinship in general tended to be matrilineal.

Anthropologists maintain that hunter/gatherers don't have permanent leaders; instead, the person taking the initiative at any one time depends on the task being performed. In addition to social and economic equality in hunter-gatherer societies, there is often, though not always, sexual parity as well. Hunter-gatherers are often grouped together based on kinship and band (or tribe) membership. Postmarital residence among hunter-gatherers tends to be <hl> matrilocal <hl>, at least initially. Young mothers can enjoy childcare support from their own mothers, who continue living nearby in the same camp. The systems of kinship and descent among human hunter-gatherers were relatively flexible, although there is evidence that early human kinship in general tended to be matrilineal.

Postmarital residence among hunter-gatherers tends to be <hl> matrilocal <hl> , at least initially.


Question: What is the kinship and decent system among hunter-gatherers?

Answer: matrilineal

Anthropologists maintain that hunter/gatherers don't have permanent leaders; instead, the person taking the initiative at any one time depends on the task being performed. In addition to social and economic equality in hunter-gatherer societies, there is often, though not always, sexual parity as well. Hunter-gatherers are often grouped together based on kinship and band (or tribe) membership. Postmarital residence among hunter-gatherers tends to be matrilocal, at least initially. Young mothers can enjoy childcare support from their own mothers, who continue living nearby in the same camp. <hl> The systems of kinship and descent among human hunter-gatherers were relatively flexible, although there is evidence that early human kinship in general tended to be matrilineal . <hl>

Anthropologists maintain that hunter/gatherers don't have permanent leaders; instead, the person taking the initiative at any one time depends on the task being performed. In addition to social and economic equality in hunter-gatherer societies, there is often, though not always, sexual parity as well. Hunter-gatherers are often grouped together based on kinship and band (or tribe) membership. Postmarital residence among hunter-gatherers tends to be matrilocal, at least initially. Young mothers can enjoy childcare support from their own mothers, who continue living nearby in the same camp. The systems of kinship and descent among human hunter-gatherers were relatively flexible, although there is evidence that early human kinship in general tended to be <hl> matrilineal <hl>.

The systems of kinship and descent among human hunter-gatherers were relatively flexible, although there is evidence that early human kinship in general tended to be <hl> matrilineal <hl> .


Question: What value system do Western scholars tend to use in analyzing societies?

It is easy for Western-educated scholars to fall into the trap of viewing hunter-gatherer social and sexual arrangements in the light of Western values.[editorializing] One common arrangement is the sexual division of labour, with women doing most of the gathering, while men concentrate on big game hunting. It might be imagined that this arrangement oppresses women, keeping them in the domestic sphere. However, according to some observers, hunter-gatherer women would not understand this interpretation. Since childcare is collective, with every baby having multiple mothers and male carers, the domestic sphere is not atomised or privatised but an empowering place to be.[citation needed] In all hunter-gatherer societies, women appreciate the meat brought back to camp by men. An illustrative account is Megan Biesele's study of the southern African Ju/'hoan, 'Women Like Meat'. Recent archaeological research suggests that the sexual division of labor was the fundamental organisational innovation that gave Homo sapiens the edge over the Neanderthals, allowing our ancestors to migrate from Africa and spread across the globe.

Answer: Western values

<hl> It is easy for Western-educated scholars to fall into the trap of viewing hunter-gatherer social and sexual arrangements in the light of Western values .[editorializing] One common arrangement is the sexual division of labour, with women doing most of the gathering, while men concentrate on big game hunting. <hl> It might be imagined that this arrangement oppresses women, keeping them in the domestic sphere. However, according to some observers, hunter-gatherer women would not understand this interpretation. Since childcare is collective, with every baby having multiple mothers and male carers, the domestic sphere is not atomised or privatised but an empowering place to be.[citation needed] In all hunter-gatherer societies, women appreciate the meat brought back to camp by men. An illustrative account is Megan Biesele's study of the southern African Ju/'hoan, 'Women Like Meat'. Recent archaeological research suggests that the sexual division of labor was the fundamental organisational innovation that gave Homo sapiens the edge over the Neanderthals, allowing our ancestors to migrate from Africa and spread across the globe.

It is easy for Western-educated scholars to fall into the trap of viewing hunter-gatherer social and sexual arrangements in the light of <hl> Western values <hl>.[editorializing] One common arrangement is the sexual division of labour, with women doing most of the gathering, while men concentrate on big game hunting. It might be imagined that this arrangement oppresses women, keeping them in the domestic sphere. However, according to some observers, hunter-gatherer women would not understand this interpretation. Since childcare is collective, with every baby having multiple mothers and male carers, the domestic sphere is not atomised or privatised but an empowering place to be.[citation needed] In all hunter-gatherer societies, women appreciate the meat brought back to camp by men. An illustrative account is Megan Biesele's study of the southern African Ju/'hoan, 'Women Like Meat'. Recent archaeological research suggests that the sexual division of labor was the fundamental organisational innovation that gave Homo sapiens the edge over the Neanderthals, allowing our ancestors to migrate from Africa and spread across the globe.

It is easy for Western-educated scholars to fall into the trap of viewing hunter-gatherer social and sexual arrangements in the light of <hl> Western values <hl> .[editorializing] One common arrangement is the sexual division of labour, with women doing most of the gathering, while men concentrate on big game hunting.


Question: Who does most of the gathering in a hunter-gatherer society?

Answer: women

<hl> It is easy for Western-educated scholars to fall into the trap of viewing hunter-gatherer social and sexual arrangements in the light of Western values.[editorializing] One common arrangement is the sexual division of labour, with women doing most of the gathering, while men concentrate on big game hunting. <hl> It might be imagined that this arrangement oppresses women, keeping them in the domestic sphere. However, according to some observers, hunter-gatherer women would not understand this interpretation. Since childcare is collective, with every baby having multiple mothers and male carers, the domestic sphere is not atomised or privatised but an empowering place to be.[citation needed] In all hunter-gatherer societies, women appreciate the meat brought back to camp by men. An illustrative account is Megan Biesele's study of the southern African Ju/'hoan, 'Women Like Meat'. Recent archaeological research suggests that the sexual division of labor was the fundamental organisational innovation that gave Homo sapiens the edge over the Neanderthals, allowing our ancestors to migrate from Africa and spread across the globe.

It is easy for Western-educated scholars to fall into the trap of viewing hunter-gatherer social and sexual arrangements in the light of Western values.[editorializing] One common arrangement is the sexual division of labour, with <hl> women <hl> doing most of the gathering, while men concentrate on big game hunting. It might be imagined that this arrangement oppresses women, keeping them in the domestic sphere. However, according to some observers, hunter-gatherer women would not understand this interpretation. Since childcare is collective, with every baby having multiple mothers and male carers, the domestic sphere is not atomised or privatised but an empowering place to be.[citation needed] In all hunter-gatherer societies, women appreciate the meat brought back to camp by men. An illustrative account is Megan Biesele's study of the southern African Ju/'hoan, 'Women Like Meat'. Recent archaeological research suggests that the sexual division of labor was the fundamental organisational innovation that gave Homo sapiens the edge over the Neanderthals, allowing our ancestors to migrate from Africa and spread across the globe.


Question: What group members are the big game hunters?

Answer: men

<hl> It is easy for Western-educated scholars to fall into the trap of viewing hunter-gatherer social and sexual arrange men ts in the light of Western values.[editorializing] One common arrangement is the sexual division of labour, with women doing most of the gathering, while men concentrate on big game hunting. <hl> It might be imagined that this arrangement oppresses women, keeping them in the domestic sphere. However, according to some observers, hunter-gatherer women would not understand this interpretation. Since childcare is collective, with every baby having multiple mothers and male carers, the domestic sphere is not atomised or privatised but an empowering place to be.[citation needed] In all hunter-gatherer societies, women appreciate the meat brought back to camp by men. An illustrative account is Megan Biesele's study of the southern African Ju/'hoan, 'Women Like Meat'. Recent archaeological research suggests that the sexual division of labor was the fundamental organisational innovation that gave Homo sapiens the edge over the Neanderthals, allowing our ancestors to migrate from Africa and spread across the globe.

It is easy for Western-educated scholars to fall into the trap of viewing hunter-gatherer social and sexual arrange<hl> men <hl>ts in the light of Western values.[editorializing] One common arrangement is the sexual division of labour, with women doing most of the gathering, while men concentrate on big game hunting. It might be imagined that this arrangement oppresses women, keeping them in the domestic sphere. However, according to some observers, hunter-gatherer women would not understand this interpretation. Since childcare is collective, with every baby having multiple mothers and male carers, the domestic sphere is not atomised or privatised but an empowering place to be.[citation needed] In all hunter-gatherer societies, women appreciate the meat brought back to camp by men. An illustrative account is Megan Biesele's study of the southern African Ju/'hoan, 'Women Like Meat'. Recent archaeological research suggests that the sexual division of labor was the fundamental organisational innovation that gave Homo sapiens the edge over the Neanderthals, allowing our ancestors to migrate from Africa and spread across the globe.

It is easy for Western-educated scholars to fall into the trap of viewing hunter-gatherer social and sexual arrange <hl> men <hl> ts in the light of Western values.[editorializing] One common arrangement is the sexual division of labour, with women doing most of the gathering, while men concentrate on big game hunting.


Question: What does the argument over women as gathers said to produce ?

Answer: arrangement oppresses women

It is easy for Western-educated scholars to fall into the trap of viewing hunter-gatherer social and sexual arrangements in the light of Western values.[editorializing] One common arrangement is the sexual division of labour, with women doing most of the gathering, while men concentrate on big game hunting. <hl> It might be imagined that this arrangement oppresses women , keeping them in the domestic sphere. <hl> However, according to some observers, hunter-gatherer women would not understand this interpretation. Since childcare is collective, with every baby having multiple mothers and male carers, the domestic sphere is not atomised or privatised but an empowering place to be.[citation needed] In all hunter-gatherer societies, women appreciate the meat brought back to camp by men. An illustrative account is Megan Biesele's study of the southern African Ju/'hoan, 'Women Like Meat'. Recent archaeological research suggests that the sexual division of labor was the fundamental organisational innovation that gave Homo sapiens the edge over the Neanderthals, allowing our ancestors to migrate from Africa and spread across the globe.

It is easy for Western-educated scholars to fall into the trap of viewing hunter-gatherer social and sexual arrangements in the light of Western values.[editorializing] One common arrangement is the sexual division of labour, with women doing most of the gathering, while men concentrate on big game hunting. It might be imagined that this <hl> arrangement oppresses women <hl>, keeping them in the domestic sphere. However, according to some observers, hunter-gatherer women would not understand this interpretation. Since childcare is collective, with every baby having multiple mothers and male carers, the domestic sphere is not atomised or privatised but an empowering place to be.[citation needed] In all hunter-gatherer societies, women appreciate the meat brought back to camp by men. An illustrative account is Megan Biesele's study of the southern African Ju/'hoan, 'Women Like Meat'. Recent archaeological research suggests that the sexual division of labor was the fundamental organisational innovation that gave Homo sapiens the edge over the Neanderthals, allowing our ancestors to migrate from Africa and spread across the globe.

It might be imagined that this <hl> arrangement oppresses women <hl> , keeping them in the domestic sphere.


Question: How is childcare viewed in a hunter-gatherer society?

Answer: childcare is collective

It is easy for Western-educated scholars to fall into the trap of viewing hunter-gatherer social and sexual arrangements in the light of Western values.[editorializing] One common arrangement is the sexual division of labour, with women doing most of the gathering, while men concentrate on big game hunting. It might be imagined that this arrangement oppresses women, keeping them in the domestic sphere. However, according to some observers, hunter-gatherer women would not understand this interpretation. <hl> Since childcare is collective , with every baby having multiple mothers and male carers, the domestic sphere is not atomised or privatised but an empowering place to be.[citation needed] In all hunter-gatherer societies, women appreciate the meat brought back to camp by men. <hl> An illustrative account is Megan Biesele's study of the southern African Ju/'hoan, 'Women Like Meat'. Recent archaeological research suggests that the sexual division of labor was the fundamental organisational innovation that gave Homo sapiens the edge over the Neanderthals, allowing our ancestors to migrate from Africa and spread across the globe.

It is easy for Western-educated scholars to fall into the trap of viewing hunter-gatherer social and sexual arrangements in the light of Western values.[editorializing] One common arrangement is the sexual division of labour, with women doing most of the gathering, while men concentrate on big game hunting. It might be imagined that this arrangement oppresses women, keeping them in the domestic sphere. However, according to some observers, hunter-gatherer women would not understand this interpretation. Since <hl> childcare is collective <hl>, with every baby having multiple mothers and male carers, the domestic sphere is not atomised or privatised but an empowering place to be.[citation needed] In all hunter-gatherer societies, women appreciate the meat brought back to camp by men. An illustrative account is Megan Biesele's study of the southern African Ju/'hoan, 'Women Like Meat'. Recent archaeological research suggests that the sexual division of labor was the fundamental organisational innovation that gave Homo sapiens the edge over the Neanderthals, allowing our ancestors to migrate from Africa and spread across the globe.

Since <hl> childcare is collective <hl> , with every baby having multiple mothers and male carers, the domestic sphere is not atomised or privatised but an empowering place to be.[citation needed] In all hunter-gatherer societies, women appreciate the meat brought back to camp by men.


Question: How is labor often divided in these groups?

To this day, most hunter-gatherers have a symbolically structured sexual division of labour. However, it is true that in a small minority of cases, women hunt the same kind of quarry as men, sometimes doing so alongside men. The best-known example are the Aeta people of the Philippines. According to one study, "About 85% of Philippine Aeta women hunt, and they hunt the same quarry as men. Aeta women hunt in groups and with dogs, and have a 31% success rate as opposed to 17% for men. Their rates are even better when they combine forces with men: mixed hunting groups have a full 41% success rate among the Aeta." Among the Ju'/hoansi people of Namibia, women help men track down quarry. Women in the Australian Martu also primarily hunt small animals like lizards to feed their children and maintain relations with other women.

Answer: sexual division

<hl> To this day, most hunter-gatherers have a symbolically structured sexual division of labour. <hl> However, it is true that in a small minority of cases, women hunt the same kind of quarry as men, sometimes doing so alongside men. The best-known example are the Aeta people of the Philippines. According to one study, "About 85% of Philippine Aeta women hunt, and they hunt the same quarry as men. Aeta women hunt in groups and with dogs, and have a 31% success rate as opposed to 17% for men. Their rates are even better when they combine forces with men: mixed hunting groups have a full 41% success rate among the Aeta." Among the Ju'/hoansi people of Namibia, women help men track down quarry. Women in the Australian Martu also primarily hunt small animals like lizards to feed their children and maintain relations with other women.

To this day, most hunter-gatherers have a symbolically structured <hl> sexual division <hl> of labour. However, it is true that in a small minority of cases, women hunt the same kind of quarry as men, sometimes doing so alongside men. The best-known example are the Aeta people of the Philippines. According to one study, "About 85% of Philippine Aeta women hunt, and they hunt the same quarry as men. Aeta women hunt in groups and with dogs, and have a 31% success rate as opposed to 17% for men. Their rates are even better when they combine forces with men: mixed hunting groups have a full 41% success rate among the Aeta." Among the Ju'/hoansi people of Namibia, women help men track down quarry. Women in the Australian Martu also primarily hunt small animals like lizards to feed their children and maintain relations with other women.