ANTH120
Derived Traits
Smaller teeth are an example of a derived trait.
Man the Hunter Hypothesis
Definition: This hypothesis suggests that hunting and tool use were the primary drivers of human evolution.
Core Idea: Early hominids migrated to the savannahs, and hunting, along with tool use, led to the development of "humanness."
Characteristics of "Humanness" as per the Hypothesis:
Bipedalism
Smaller teeth
Larger brain
Base camps
Monogamy
Division of labor
Aggressive males
Attractive and subservient females
Sexual dimorphism (larger males for protection, attractive females gaining better mates)
Problems with the Man the Hunter Hypothesis
Data Bias: The available data are heavily skewed towards hunting activities.
Bipedalism Timeline: Bipedalism predates hunting and tool use, challenging the hypothesis's sequence of events.
Oldowan Tools: These tools were primarily used for processing food, including chopping plants and meat, rather than hunting.
Dietary Evidence: Tooth wear patterns indicate that a significant portion of early hominid diets consisted of plants.
Base Camps: There is a lack of substantial evidence to support the existence of base camps.
Burdened Females Analogy: The analogy of burdened females staying in base camps is inaccurate, as they were primarily gatherers and did not remain stationary.
Monogamy: Monogamy is not unique to humans, undermining its significance in defining "humanness."
Essentialist Notion: The hypothesis relies on an essentialist view, suggesting a fixed set of traits that define humanity.
Sexist Bias:
It portrays women as passive recipients of food from males.
It reduces women to a reproductive role, solely focused on bearing and raising children.
It reflects European notions of gender roles prevalent from the mid-19th century to the late 1960s.
Hawke’s 1996 Division of Labor and Food Sharing
Female Reproductive Success:
Survival of offspring is crucial.
Passing on their genes is essential.
Dependable plant foods are a primary resource.
Females travel considerable distances to gather food.
They carry offspring with them while breastfeeding.
Male Reproductive Success:
Access to females is key.
Meat acquisition serves as costly signaling, demonstrating status.
Meat is used to elevate status within the group.
Division of Labor: The division of labor is not essentialist or strictly monogamous.
Grandmothering Hypothesis
Premise: Humans have a longer post-menopausal lifespan compared to other primates.
Grandmother Role: Grandmothers assist new mothers by gathering food for the children.
Genetic Certainty: Grandmothers primarily help their daughters (rather than sons) because they can be 100% certain that their daughters' children carry their genes.
Impact on Reproduction:
Children are weaned sooner.
They operate in habitats they otherwise could not.
A later age of maturity increases the rate of reproduction.
Offspring are more successful.
Skeletal Evidence:
Larger brain and body size.
Delayed maturity (dental eruption).
Archaeological Evidence:
Increased geographic range.
Weather changes make fruit less available, necessitating broader foraging.
Digging tools are used for gathering.
Evidence of fire use by Homo erectus.
Problem with the Theory: It largely ignores male activities and their roles.
Expensive Tissue Hypothesis (Aiello & Wheeler 1995)
Core Idea: Larger brains demand more calories.
Brain = 2\% \text{ of body weight but uses } 18\% \text{ of calories}
Stone Tools: Increase access to meat and fat, providing necessary calories.
Supporting Evidence:
Homo habilis shows a significant increase in cranial capacity (brain size) shortly after the emergence of stone tools.
Stable isotopes analysis should support this.
Dominance Status, Food Sharing, and Reproductive Success in Chimpanzees
Food Sharing Patterns:
Females share with offspring.
Males share with females.
Males share with males.
Male Reproductive Success: Being an attentive mate increases reproductive success.
Female Reproductive Success: Eating more meat enhances reproductive success.
*Evolution of human behavior is NOT necessarily Hunting but food sharing that selects for a larger brain.
Social Brain Hypothesis
Social relations, select for a larger brain.
Benefits & challenges of living in social groups.
Australopithecines
Scavengers, collectors, and sharers of plants and animals.
Not primarily hunters.
Homo Habilis
Relatively large brain.
More fruit eaters.
Bipedal.
Also spent time in trees.
Homo Ergaster (1.9 - 0.5 mya)
Larger brain and brow ridge.
Long legs, shorter arms.
More bipedal, less time in trees.
Less hair on bodies.
Less sexual dimorphism.
Perhaps the first true humans.
Acheulean industry (1.65-0.25 MYA):
Often found in river channels or dried-up lakes.
First group to use fire:
Protection from predators.
Cooking (easier to eat, more digestible, more nutritious).
First species to leave Africa:
Fire helped them live in colder places.
First species to wear clothes:
Lice DNA and clothing can show evidence of this.
Turkana Boy
Died at approximately 12 years old; 5ft 3in tall.
Olorgesailie, Kenya: "The factory of stone tools".
Homo Erectus (1.6 mya)
First remains found outside Africa in Asia.
Early version of humans outside of Africa.
Distinct brow ridge.
Long limbs.
Relatively tall.
Narrow hips.
*zhoukoudiam, china .8-.4 myaHomo erectus skull found in 1929
Using cave as a base camp
Remains of over 40 individuals
Animal bones
100,000 stone tools
Chopping tools, Feb 19th Online
Atlatal
More accurate.
More force tool.
Europe.
Later Paleolithic.
North America too
Three Models for Peopling of the Americas
Land bridge.
Coastal route (West Coast).
Solutrean route (Atlantic glacier).
First Americans
Tailored clothing (cold weather adaptation).
Boats.
Brought dogs/wolves (domesticated 35,000 years ago).
Dogs came into the Americas.
Land Bridge Theory
Viable ice bridge connecting 13,500 years ago.
Migrating birds/mammoths led people groups.
Major flyway for birds today.
Clovis people (13,500 years ago).
Problems:
Glacier desert environment.
50k \text{ wide}
Would the bridge be able to support mammoths and people groups?
How did people get down to Chile so quickly from the bridge?
Coastal Migration Hypothesis
People could have followed the "kelp highway".
Sites along the coast are now gone because of sea levels and erosion.
No coastal sites.
Better explanation for how people got to Chile.
Atlantic Ice Sheet Route
Solutrean toolkit (22,000 years ago):
A lot of similarities between tools in America and Europe:
Eastern US.
24,000 year old Solutrean point vs 14,000 Jefferson Island Maryland tool (similar tool).
Overall tool kit was manufactured differently
Solutrean
Work on only one side
Clovis Tools
Bifacial tool
More sophisticated
The Atlantic route is not widely accepted because there is no DNA evidence.
Linguistic Evidence
1987 Joseph Greenber
Number of languages across the Americas with similar routes
More developed languages have been around
Amerind Languages 600-11,000 years
Na-dene 34
mtDNA and Linguistic go hand in hand.
Mitochondrial DNA comes from the mother.
Sunrise Child Girl Site in Central Alaska
11,500 years old.
Complex set of population mixing.
When were the Americas people?
Pre-Clovis before 15,000 years ago (ya).
Clovis first after 15,000 ya.
At Least by 13,500 ya.
Tricky to get evidence.
Meadowcroft Rockshelter, SW Pennsylvania Site
1970s.
19,000-14,000 ya.
700 pieces of stone tool kits.
Dating issues with the radiocarbon dates.
Cactus Hill Site, Virginia
Dug below clovis level.
Found artifacts.
Small blade cores.
10-15 centimeters below the clovis.
18,000-10,000 ya.
Questions about the radiocarbon dating.
Page-Ladson Site, Florida
Sink hole.
Flake tools, hammerstones, mastodon tusk.
71 radiocarbon dates.
14.5 thousand years ago.
Paisley Caves, Oregon
Use of plant materials.
Poop that contains human DNA.
More than 200 samples.
Pre clovis.
3 are dated to 14.1 thousands years ago.
Monte Verde, Chile Site
14,000 ya.
Near a creek.
Great preservation.
Preserved meat.
Early Sites in Alaska
Stratified sites.
Bone tools.
Microblade technology (connections with Siberia).
Well drained lowlands.
People could have been following birds/mammoth migraaint patterns.
Sites
Swan Point:
14,300 ya.
Hunted bison.
Broken Mammoth:
13,200 ya.
Butchering, cooking.
Tool making.
Clothing.
Hunting.
Dry creek:
13,000 ya.
Small bifacial tools.
Microblades.
No longer contact with people in siberia
On your knees cave:
Oldest human remains, 10,000 ya.
Site on the coast supports coastal migration theory.
Clovis Culture
13,500 - 12,900 ya.
Distribution of clovis points:
Ton in the Eastern US.
Fewer outwest.
Big game hunters:
Eating a wide range of animals
Mammoths, mastodon, bison.
Deer.
Turkeys.
Rabbits and squirrels.
Turtles.
Wild plant foods.
Each population had a preserved stone to use to make stone tools.
Overkill Hypothesis
Humans killed off certain animals (not the best explanation).
Significant climatic changes would have had more impact.
Some hypothesis this led to the demise of clovis people
Anzick Site in Montana
1 ya clovis child found in 1968.
Stone tools.
Radiocarbon date 12,600 ya.
Only human burial for clovis culture.
DNA from child shows relation to people from europe
Native Americans.
Yucatan Cave Sites
Skeletal remains 13,000 ya.
Female 10,000 ya:
Cavities.
Trauma to her head.
Clovis descendants.
Paleoindian Sites in South America
Clovis descendants.
Post Clovis Variation in North America
Groups not as mobile.
Stone tools lose the fluteing.
Foragers:
Hunting and gathering, fishing.
Adapting to local conditions.
End of the ice age.
Kennewik Man: Ancient One
Remains found in 1996.
Native american graves protection and repatriation 1990.
9,000 year old remains.
Found on federal property.
No cultural affiliation.
Suggested that skull had european characteristic, japanese.
NAGPRA (Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act)
Gave scientist 16 days to review and study remains
Passed in 1990:
Requires repatriation by all federal entities and federally funded institutions/museums:
Human remains.
Associated funerary objects.
Items of cultural patrimony (items that belong to a group / their identity; Represented of their entire culture).
1976 first act that went into effect in Iowa.
Who has ownership of these items?
Museum instructions.
Gives ownership back to the federally recognized Tribal Nations (573 Indian Tribal Nations, Alaska Native villages, and Native Hawaiian organization).
Only applies to:
Cultural items found on federal or Tribal Nation land.
Cultural items under control of federal agencies or museums and institutions with federal fundings.
Kennewick man
Skull morphology looks similar to japanese.
Asian groups.
No ties to Europe.
Reburied in 2017
Anzick child reburied in 2014
Settlement of Australia
60,000-55,000 years ago.
Skeletal remains at Lake Mungo.
Madjedbebe:
OSL dates.
Sand.28,000 grains of sand.
Several migration events over 20,000 year.
Tasmania
Papua New Guinea → Tasmania Migration.
Rapid expansion throughout the continent.
2,000 years population grow.
25,000 years ago people were living all over australia and in the dessert.
Australian Rock Art
Walinynga (Cave Hill).
Australian Toolkits
Localized styles.
Microtechnology.
Steep edge scrapers.
Boomerangs.
Changing Landscapes~ 7,000 years ago
Rock art around 7,000 years ago depicting battle scenes (conflict).
More changes in the environment around 4,000 years ago:
Sites become larger and more abundant (becoming more sedentary).
Rising populations or more sedentary (people staying near water sources).
Budj Bim Cultural Landscape, Toolondo
Built long fish / eel traps.
Near lakes.
Lake waters would rise and fill traps with food.
Producing their own food.
Europeans Arrive in 1606
Rapid changes.
Diseases spread: Smallpox.
Ethnoarchaeology Among Indigenous Australians
How to use tools.
Watch how they use tools now to figure out how they used them in the past.
Patterns of trash disposal.
Patterns of hunting.
Listened to oral histories.
Australia
250-500 language groups across australia.
Interacting with Europeans.
Collaborative Archaeology
1998 - announced a national sorry day for people under their gov.
National reconciliation day (recognize).
Inclusion of native australians.
1984 - protected original heritage.
Cultural custodian:
Has to be with you at all times.
Knows the area.
Do not exploit their past for our benefit.
Foragers: Hunting/Gathering/Fishing
Oldest human substance strategy (99% of humans have been foragers).
Colonized the continents around the world
250,000 foragers left
Plants are over 50% of their diet (more productive and reliable than animals).
Game is important for protein
Smaller animals.
Shell fish, fish.
Do not use all of the potential resources.
Staples in their diet but wil
Foragers work 12-20 hours a week on food procurement
How do foragers live day to day
Local resources affect how often they move
Nomadic Foragers
Move much more frequently.
Move for firewood, water sources.
Move before they use up everything at one camp.
Marginal value theorem.
Move because of quarreling.
Move to meet up with other groups.
Low population density.
Few possessions, temporary shelters, minimal storage.
Land cost high.
Energy cost (human input) low.
Low risk.
Sedentary / Semi Sedentary
Live in one camp for half the year.
Higher demography.
Greater material investment in tools, houses, and storage.
land cost less than nomadic foragers.
Energy cost (human input) low.
Higher risk than nomadic foragers.
Live in resource rich areas.
Foraging
Without too much difficulty provide food for
What happens if you need more food
Expand into neighboring area
climate change = resources in your area depleting
Leads to competition with other groups
Increase quantity of resources already using
Exhausting local resources
Diversify to less desirable resources
Invent new technologies (eel traps)
Optimal Foraging (Human behavioral ecology)
People tend to perform rational
Get the most bang for their buck
Go for turkey, deers, other higher ranked meat
When they cannot get that they go for lower ranked like rabbits
Egalitarian VS. Social Complexity
When do foragers develop hierarchies
Garden of Eden
Climate/Resource Uncertainty
Population Increase
Power, Prestige, and competition for resources
Preconditions for cultural complexity among hunter-gatherers
Constraints on fissioning
Resource abundance
Storability of surplus
Settlement permanence
High population density
Who are/were complex hunter/gatherers
Collected nuts
Consequences of Complexity
Intensified land use practices.
Increased production.
Increased trade.
Decrease in Leisure time
Invest networking trade
Technological innovation
Increased fertility
Ween infants earlier
Increased nutritional stress
Increased epidemic diseases
Decrease in hygiene
Increased social strife
Northwest Coast Complex Societies
Social Stratification and cultural complexity:
Large villages
Status-related objects
Physical markers of status
The potlatch
Control of production locations
Namu Site, British Columbia
Since 9,000 ya
Intensification of shellfish collection after 4,500
Fishing technology improvement
Intensification of marine resource/new technologie
Fish weir
Salmon baton
Technology
Changes in woodworking
Adzes
Hafted adzeStorage box
Importance of Cedar
Strong, lightweight wood
Totem poles
Houses
Spears
Used the roots to make ropes, nets, baskets
Heat and waterproof baskets
Baby diapers
Plank houses: archaeological evidence to 4,000 BP
Low roofs to keep warm
One hole in the roof to let smoke out
One entrance/exit
Increased social interaction
Shell bead trade
Craft specialization
Signs of Social ranking: personal ornamentation - personal ornamentation
Labret: a pulley shaped object of stone bone or wood that would be in the mouth
Differential burial/status
Grave goods
Exoctic finely made pieces
Skull shaping as a child
Development of slavery and increasing conflict~ 1800-1500 BCE
War, conflict
Wealth and distribution
The potlatch or gift
Consequences of complexity
Southwest Asia
Kebaran (13-11,000 BCE)
End of the ice age
Wild grains
Wild emmer wheat
Nut trees
Microblades - arrowheads
Natufian (11-8,500 BCE)
Acorns
Almonds
Cold Snap
Younger dryas period: 10,800-9,500 BCE
House structures at Eynan, Israel
13-10,000BCE
House remains at ‘Ain Mallaha, Israel
10-8,200 BCE
Hilazon Tachtit, Israel~ 10,400 BCE
Göbekli Tepe (9,600 BCE)
*Abu Hureyra, Syria~ 11,00-7,500 BCEEarly circular house floors ~11 - 9,800 BCE
Reoccupied ~8800-7500BCE
*Abu Hureyra, Syria Reoccupied in 8800-7500 BCE300-400 people living here year round
Big investment in structures
Farming
High demography
Land cost is low
Even greater material investment in tools, houses, storage, ownership of land
Human cost is high
60 hour work weeks
High risk
If you have a bad year it is hard to recover food for your community
Innovations
Sickle tools, hoe tools
Storing animals
Ownership is developed more
Domestication of plants and animals
Domesticates: dependent on people for survival and reproduction
Intervene ourselves in their reproductive cycles
Breed animals
Process of domestication
Human behaviors/actions change the selective pressures on plants and animals
Leads to genetic changes
Results in physical and behavioral changes in plant or animal population
Continuum of interactions between humans and plants or humans and animals
On one end is no intervention on the other is full control
Human actions (some intentional, some unintentional) produce changes over time
Plants and animals become dependent on people
People become dependent on plants and animals
Changes:
Biological
Species and genetics
Ecological landscapes
Cultural
How we use these plants
Two big steps towards domestication:
People separate individuals from wild breeding populations
People intervene in lifecycle
Intervention of people changes conditions of selection
Intentionally
Unintentionally
Genetic Perspective
Individuals that survive and reproduce contribute genes to next generations
Human manipulation can change which forms or characteristics are beneficial
Human actions selecting for change
Harvesting combined with storage & planting
A. Wild stand: unharvested ones are the next
B. Wild stands = harvested, people eat them all -Unharvested = grow the next year
C. Domesticated stands = harvested = people eat most, store some, plant the next year
Harvest methods
A. If beat and collect you do not select for seed retention (tougher rachis) or clustering
B. If cut stalks, bundle them, and then thrash seeds, you collect the ones that are clusters and stay on plant (tougher rachis)
Storage
Dormancy vs. relaxed dormancy
(seed coat thickness)
New rules for survival and reproduction
Deliberate human management favors certain characteristics
Harvest, store, sow
Unintentional: Selection for non brittle rachis
Intentional: Planting biggest seeds
Common changes in plants
Going from disperse seeds to retained on the stalk
Branching to clustered seeds
Sequential to simultaneous ripening
Increases in seed and fruit size
Characteristics of wild relatives of early domesticates
Already important foraged food items
“Generalist” or weedy plant (does well in disturbed soils)
Adapted to growing in dense stands
Tolerable of storage conditions
High rate of mutation/genetic variation
Adaptable to new selective pressures
Domestication of plants and animals
Domesticates: dependent on people for survival and reproduction
Breeding controlled by humans
Which animals are good candidates for domestication
Not territorial
Gregarious (likes to live together in groups).
Easy to tend - not too skittish
Social hierarchy
Flexible feeding habit
“hard”/adaptable - With animals living so close to each other disease can spread
Reproduction easily controlled by humans
Fast growth rate and short birth spacing
Bad traits for domestication
Independent tendency
Territorial
Lare range and solitary
Cats are the exception
Rhinoceros
Solitary animal
One offspring every 2-4 years
Why domesticate animals
Hunting/companionship/protection/bed warmer/food supply: dog
Meat supply: sheep/goat/cow/pig
Traction: horse/donkey/camel
Secondary products
Clothing material (wool,leather)
Honey
Dung
Process of domestication
Continuum of interactions- regulate breeding
Keep more females than males
Cull younger males, older females
Burning the underbrush gives better foliage, more nutritious leave for animals
Regulation of breeding
Much easier to do for animalsSeparate males and females
Selective breeding
30 \text{ generations for impact to show up}
120 \text{ years until you see effects for larger animals}
60 \text{ years or faster for smaller animals effects}
Far more females than males in the group.
Females reproduce more
Milk
Eat the younger males
Eat older females since they can no longer reproduce
Archaeological evidence of animal domesticationReduce in size
Process of Domestication
Continuum of interactions:
Regulate breeding: --Keep more females than males, Cull younger males, older females
Archaeological evidence of animal domestication
Reduction in size:
Nutritional: Retention of juvenile characteristics: -- Smaller teeth (more selecting of juvenile behaviors of individuals)
Changes in horns (change in shape, females loose horns all together in sheeps)
Spreading outside of their native range (indication that people are directly managing animals)
Sex profiles change: more males culled at a younger age shifts in species frequencies
Shift in unregulated frequencies at NAtufian sites between 8000 and 10,000 years ago:
Changes in cultural practices: Domesticated Animals
DogsOldest burial 12,000 years agoSick puppyWolvesGoats Wool and meatSheepCattle Taurine cattle Zebu CattlePigsCatsFor rodent controlHorse Russian TarpanDonkeyCamelChicken Egg production: SilkwormsCamelidsAndesGuinea PigsRitual purposes\Origins of Agriculture or Agricultural Revolution
Agricultural RevolutionNot a single, abrupt developmentNot necessarily an improvementNot a single inventionNot agriculture: horticulture came firstWhen and where: Independent centers of domesticationNo previous experience with domesticatesFertile crescent 10-8,000 years ago Asia 8-8,500 years ago North ChinaSouth China sugar caneSub Saharan AfricaPacific rim islands coconutMesoamerica squash, gourds, corn years agoSouth america potatoes, llamas, guinea pigs, chili peppersEastern north america squash, sunflower, marshelder, chenopodEvidence for DomesticationsLook for genetic diversityNikolai Vavilov (1930s and 1940s)Look for and map wild progenitorsIdentify the wild progenitorsLook for archaeological evidenceMicroremains PollenLook for tools to process plants and animalsLook at sites themselves
Pens to keep animalsStorage places for foodWhy agriculturePositives of farmingPredictableStay in one placeControl over the food you haveStore a lot of food in one placeSet your group up when there is a droughtDrawbacks of farminggenetically modified plants and animals are less nutritious\nOasis HypothesisGordon Childe 1930sDrying climates at the end of the pleistocene in Near EastBoth humans andn animals and plants would be concentrates around water sourcesThe nuclear / natural habitat zone hypothesisRobert J. Braidwood 1950sHumans would domesticate plants and animals in areas where those species first existed in the wild (nuclear areas) as part of a gradually increasing association with humansDemographic/Population pressure theoriesLewis Binford, Ester Boserup 1960sIncreasing human populations required more food than could be obtainedResulted in intensification of food production and eventual domestication of plants and animalsCoevolutionary hypotheses
David rindos, bruce smith 1980sOnce humans start living for longer periods in one area, they create disturbed habitats that favor certain plant speciesHumans, plants, and animals in close contactUnintentional domestication of plants and animals which in turn domesticated humansSocial theories
(Barbara Bender, Brian Hayden 1980s-2000s)Expanding trade and political alliance created new social and economic pressures to produce surplusesSelf aggrandizing individuals would try to build up food surpluses to exchange for goods, services, and followersFor example, redistribution in feastMultivariate ModelsCombination of factors at play
Population growth, climate change, etcHumans manipulating the landscape to their benefitExploitation of certain resources and intentional changes to landscape lead to unintended consequences, like domestication of plants and animalsConsequences of AgriculturePopulation growthForaging/ carrying one baby at a timeIncrease sedentism and specializationProduced food starts replacing foraged foodsHealth and nutrition consequencesIncreased dependence on carbohydratesDecrease intake of animal proteinPeople are chronically undernourished AnemiaStatus higher status people get more meatGender males eat more meatInfants weened off of mother milk onto food and this does not nutritionally fulfill themMothersstress on their bodiesIncrease risk of famine DroughtFloodsTornadoSkeletal evidence
Decrease in heightEnamel hypoplasiaPorotic hyperostosisOrbitalia Lab paleoethnobotanyStudy of the interrelations between people and plants in the pastTwo main categories:Microbotanical remains: Cannot be seen with naked eye PollenStarch grainsMacrobotanical: can be seen with naked eye
HOW CAN WE get plants from archaeological sites
Desiccation - caused by dry conditions
Waterlogging - caused by wet conditions
Carbonization - caused by burning
Preservation
Biases - Items with high water content that burn to ash are underrepresented and Items with high sugar/starch that burn to unrecognizable mass are underrepresented and Small, fragile items that do not easily withstand mechanical damage
microbotanical remains
Take dirt samples; FlotationHow do we identify plants from archaeological sites?Look at fractions under microscope or with eyeModern comparisonsWhat information can we learn from food related artifacts?
Chemical analysis to determine migrationHow are plant remains introduced to archaeological sitesPaleoethnobotany Research Topics:Environmental ReconstructionSubsistence Strategies and organization: DomesticationsSeasonalityEastern woodland of USBeginning 5,000 years ago: squash Before presentSunflowers Before present Sumpweed Before present Goosefoot Before present Cultigens Centers of Domestication Consequences of AgriculturePopulation GrowthIncreased sedentism and specializationDisease risk is higherBone lesions form from the disease reaching the bonePopulation pool to make disease spread quickerDecrease in santitazion
Rodent and insects attracted and bring diseases and parasites with themHealth and nutrition consequencesEnamel hypoplasiasPorotic hyperostosisSkeletal remains
Decrease in heightCribra orbitaliaDental cariescornChanges in workloadsArthritis elbow - from grinding, lower back, toesLower in strength in generalSocial consequences agricultureChanges in attitude about land --territorialityDifferential access to resources (Inequality 4comp/violence)Surface production specialistsComplex division of laborArt, tool and craft specialists
Development of leaders