3 ms·
> apparently migration takes a long, long time if we take a generation to be 20 years, and the grown children move 20 miles away so as not to compete for resou
by AlbertCory 3y ago
> apparently migration takes a long, long time
if we take a generation to be 20 years, and the grown children move 20 miles away so as not to compete for resources and/or find fresh ones, then we get about 1 mile per year. 1000 years == 1000 miles of migration,
- themaninthedark 3y agoWeren't people hunter-gatherers at this point in time? They would be highly mobile and actively looking for new, richer ground.
- AlbertCory 3y ago.. and so? they'd spread less than a mile per year? Or more?
- AlotOfReading 3y agoTypical mobility numbers for North American lithic and archaic groups are in the hundreds of miles/kilometers annually, generally decreasing over time. Those estimates come from groups many thousands of years after the dates being discussed here, but they're the best we have.
- AlbertCory 3y agoSo: I estimated 365 miles/year and you had "hundreds of miles/kilometers annually." I don't see anything to argue about, specifically, especially no one really knows.
- AlotOfReading 3y agoYour response above is 1 mi/year, but in any case I'm not really responding to argue. Just stating what a reasonable mobility is in North American archaeology, around ~500km/yr.
- AlbertCory 3y agoBeat me to it. It occurred to me that I had one mile per year, not per day, and I was about to delete that post.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- dmoo 3y agoAny reason to assume they would move in a consistent direction?
- AlbertCory 3y agoIf you have a settlement of 100's, some of them will move in almost every direction.