Comments on: Why Homo erectus Lived Like a Baboon

By: maita

maita — Sat, 30 Jun 2012 03:55:06 +0000

@ian
And why not, when you see how contemporary humans are socialised in this region, it’s really close to Hamadryas baboons, while they are sapiens. Without making baboonomorphisme…

By: Daan

Daan — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 09:59:07 +0000

I don’t really see how ‘In these multilevel societies females bonded with both males (and not in monogamous pairs) and one another’ is not met by the fission-fusion groups of Chimpanzees.

By: anthrosciguy

anthrosciguy — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 05:08:02 +0000

Or Tanner and Zihlman, plus Linton before them, who posited such a “multi-level” social scene and didn’t need to use an animal model which doesn’t fit in many ways. The problem is that if you have to pick and choose traits to the extent you have to to use this baboon model, you essentially don’t have an animal model. And then you should stop pretending you do.

By: Courtney Ostaff

Courtney Ostaff — Thu, 21 Jun 2012 20:18:43 +0000

I’m rather astonished that you didn’t mention Dr. Sarah Blaffer Hrdy’s or Dr. Kristin Hawkes’ work.

By: ian

ian — Thu, 21 Jun 2012 03:59:39 +0000

how then to explain the reduced sexual dimorphism in Erectus vs. other primates, such as Hamadryas Baboons? This idea that H. Erecus organised their society similar to Hamadryas Babbons is just speculation. One could argue as well that H. Erectus lived in matrilineal groups, like Elephants, who can and do inhabit desert areas. It is not a stretch to hold that H. Erectus had a relativley long infancy and childhood and would need the support of an extended family group for an extended period of time to reach adulthood. since sexual dimorphism seems to be reduced as well, it is not unreasonable to think that co-operation between males,as well as females, rather than competition was more condusive to the survival of offspring.