Table of Contents
Challenging Stereotypes: Research Indicates Women Also Engaged in Hunting in Prehistoric Times
Sarah Lacy, an anthropology professor at the University of Delaware, has put forth a revolutionary theory that contradicts the widely accepted narrative that ancient labor roles were determined by gender—men as hunters and women as gatherers.
The study found scant evidence to corroborate the notion that tasks were explicitly distributed based on sex.
The pervasive belief that men were hunters and women were gatherers in prehistoric times has been entrenched in societal thought. The common argument suggests that women were anatomically unfit for hunting, a task which thereby shaped human evolution through male endeavors.
Contrary to this widely-held belief, recent scholarly work by Sarah Lacy, published in Scientific American and in two editions of the American Anthropologist journal, refutes these claims.
In a collaborative effort, Lacy and Cara Ocobock of the University of Notre Dame scrutinized the division of labor by sex during the Paleolithic period, roughly spanning 2.5 million to 12,000 years ago. Their comprehensive review of existing archaeological data and academic literature found minimal substantiation for the idea that roles were specifically assigned based on sex. Moreover, their investigation into female physiology demonstrated that women were not only fully capable of hunting but also that insufficient evidence exists to suggest otherwise.
Addressing Gender Bias in Archaeological Interpretations
Both Lacy, a biological anthropologist focusing on early human health, and Ocobock, a physiologist drawing parallels between contemporary life and the fossil record, teamed up after questioning the conventional wisdom around gender-based roles in prehistoric times. “Why is it default to assume that prehistoric men exclusively hunted while women gathered? The evidence doesn’t support this,” stated Lacy.
Their research revealed signs of gender equality in a variety of domains, including ancient tools, diet, art, burial practices, and even anatomical characteristics.
“In the past, findings were often automatically attributed to males, ignoring the fact that both sexes left similar traces, whether in skeletal remains or in artifacts placed in burial sites,” Lacy noted. “Given the available evidence, it is nearly impossible to assert any significant gender-based differences in roles.”
Physiological and Anatomical Considerations
Additionally, the team explored whether anatomical and physiological variances between the sexes inhibited women from hunting. While they acknowledged that men generally excel in activities demanding speed and power, they highlighted that women have an edge in endurance activities. Both types of activities would have been critical for hunting in antiquity.
The hormone estrogen, more prevalent in women, was identified as a crucial factor that could confer advantages like increased fat metabolism and muscle preservation. Estrogen receptors, which guide the hormone to its functional location within the body, can be traced back as far as 600 million years.
“There is no discernible difference in trauma patterns between males and females in ancient skeletal remains, implying similar activities for both,” added Lacy.
Understanding Paleolithic Social Structures
Lacy argued that in small Paleolithic communities, role flexibility would have been imperative. “It is illogical to think that only a subset of such small societies would engage in hunting,” she remarked.
Origin of the Gender-Based Theory
The “man the hunter” hypothesis gained traction in 1968, when anthropologists Richard B. Lee and Irven DeVore published a collection of papers positing that hunting, presumably by males, propelled human evolution. This bias led to the widespread acceptance of this theory in academia and popular culture alike, often sidelining opposing views, particularly those presented by female scholars.
Rethinking Gender Norms in Prehistory
Lacy contends that the dated theory continues to impact the field. She calls for a more nuanced understanding of prehistoric life, emphasizing the communal nature of subsistence activities. “For approximately 3 million years, both sexes were involved in gathering and hunting, which mutually influenced human evolution,” she concluded.
Reference: “Woman the Hunter: The Archaeological Evidence” by Sarah Lacy and Cara Ocobock, 4 September 2023, American Anthropologist.
DOI: 10.1111/aman.13914
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Prehistoric Gender Roles
What is the main argument of the article?
The article presents a groundbreaking theory that challenges the widely-accepted belief that in prehistoric times, men were exclusively hunters and women were gatherers. Based on archaeological and physiological evidence, the study argues that women were also capable of hunting, and that the division of labor was not strictly gender-based.
Who are the main researchers involved in this study?
The primary researchers involved are Sarah Lacy, an anthropology professor at the University of Delaware, and Cara Ocobock from the University of Notre Dame.
What time period does the study focus on?
The study focuses on the Paleolithic era, which spans approximately 2.5 million to 12,000 years ago.
What kinds of evidence were examined to support the theory?
A wide array of evidence was examined, including existing archaeological data, academic literature, ancient tools, diet, art, and burial practices. The study also investigated anatomical and physiological differences between men and women.
What does the study reveal about gender biases in previous archaeological interpretations?
The study points out that many earlier archaeological findings were automatically attributed to males, often ignoring evidence that suggested women might have performed similar roles. This reflects a longstanding gender bias in the interpretation of archaeological data.
Does the study suggest that men and women had equal physiological capabilities for hunting?
While the study acknowledges that men generally excel in activities requiring speed and power, it points out that women have advantages in activities requiring endurance. Both sets of skills would have been important for hunting in ancient times.
How does the study address the role of hormones like estrogen?
The study highlights that estrogen, more prevalent in women, has several functions such as increasing fat metabolism and regulating muscle breakdown, which could provide advantages in endurance-based activities essential for hunting.
What is the origin of the widely-accepted “man the hunter” theory?
The “man the hunter” hypothesis gained prominence in 1968 when anthropologists Richard B. Lee and Irven DeVore published a collection of papers. This biased viewpoint then became widely accepted in both academia and popular culture.
What is the future research direction proposed by the study?
The study calls for a more nuanced approach to understanding prehistoric life and emphasizes that further research is needed, especially concerning the roles of women. It advocates for a reevaluation of labor division among prehistoric humans based on new evidence.
How does this research impact our understanding of human evolution?
The study posits that both men and women contributed to subsistence activities, including hunting, for approximately 3 million years. This challenges the notion that male behavior solely drove human evolution, emphasizing a more communal and egalitarian view.
More about Prehistoric Gender Roles
- Sarah Lacy and Cara Ocobock’s Original Paper in American Anthropologist
- Scientific American Article on the Study
- Richard B. Lee and Irven DeVore’s Man the Hunter
- Gender Bias in Archaeology
- Physiological Differences Between Men and Women
- Estrogen Receptors Evolution
- Archaeological Methods and Gender Bias
- Paleolithic Era Overview
