Re: An alternative to ST and AAT
chessonp@aol.com
9 Dec 1996 19:42:05 GMT
In article <01bbe572$bd1011c0$0f2470c2@jdwaters.dircon.co.uk>, "John
Waters" <jdwaters@dircon.co.uk> writes:
>chessonp@aol.com wrote in article
><19961206143600.JAA21071@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
>> In article
><01bbe1d3$199eb0c0$062470c2@jdwaters.dircon.co.uk>, "John
>> Waters" <jdwaters@dircon.co.uk> writes:
>>
>> >Most modern humans have an ancestral background in which
>> >polygamic mating systems were normal. These tend to
>produce
>> >sexual dimorphism, which explains why it still exists
>> >today. The impact of two thousand years of Christian
>> >monogamy haven't made much impact yet.
>>
>> Since monogamy seems to be a practice in lots of
>non-Christian areas of
>> the world, you have a lot of data to explain away.
>
>JW: I'm not sure I fully understand your comment here. Are
>you suggesting that there is no sexual dimorphism in the
>world today?
>
>My comments on polygamic mating systems concerned the
>ancestors of present day humans. By this I meant people
>living 5 to 50 kyrs BP. As I understand it, most such
>people either hunted herding animals, or herded such
>animals. Herding environments tend to encourage polygamic
>mating systems in the herding animals, and sometimes their
>predators.
>
>John.
>
>
Why mention two thousand years of Christianity if your real point
concerned people 5 to 50 thousand years ago?
For your speculation regarding pastoralists, do present day herding
societies -- such as the Lapps -- have a polygamic mating system? Perhaps
you contend that the critical factor to produce monogamy is residence in
Europe. After all I think most researchers believe that the
Indo-Europeans were pastoralists (and according to you polygamists) before
they conquered Europe. But then why weren't the Persians polygamists?
|