Re: Skull binding and Neandertals

Philip (
18 Nov 1995 04:29:46 GMT

But the circumcism differs from head and foot binding
in physically and functionally.

The physical difference is that circumcision can be
easily performed at any age to achieve similar result.
In addition its not likely to be noticed except in very
close company.

Functionally circumcism was done as an act of unity and
social preservation as you mentioned and as is
documented in the old testiment. However, head binding
would have been done to segregate elements in society.

I think the motivations for prevention of upwelling
must be of two types:
Socially driven and Genetic fitness driven (animistic).

>From what I understand of mesoamerican culture the
labor class was not derived genetically from the same
culture as the ruling class (according to my readings
the ruling classes gained power by consolidating under
their rule outlying cultures); therefore, the ruling
class may have disuaded upwelling as to keep the masses
separate and allowing them to take advantage of the
great amount of social resources, giving this class
reproductive advantage.

As for the social reasons I think you hit them on mark.
But I should add that this may have been tolerated by
the workers because they also saw their population
climb and may have been entrenched in the advantages of
the increasingly larger civilizations, otherwise they
could simply just leave and live as hunter gatherers.
In addition, its concievable that the masses desired to
remain separate form the leaders for cultural reasons.
The head binding would have kept uncomfortable
situations from developing.