4 ms·
My prior would've been hunters slaughtering farmers. How could these stone cold hunters let a bunch farmers get the drop on them???
by optimalsolver 3y ago
My prior would've been hunters slaughtering farmers.
How could these stone cold hunters let a bunch farmers get the drop on them???
- thaumasiotes 3y agoThis has been known for quite some time. The farmers always win because there are more of them. Hunters have very low population densities.
- nradov 3y agoIt turns out that hunting isn't very good training for mass warfare. What matters is discipline, organization, and technology.
- TulliusCicero 3y agoCivilization presents a number of advantages, especially in numbers.
- xboxnolifes 3y agoFarming = more/stable food = higher population = standing army.
- euroderf 3y agoand time and tools to tinker with tech ?
- optimalsolver 3y agoHunter gatherers have far more free time than agriculturalists.
- euroderf 3y agoDepends on the local climate ? Can't be easy to be a H/G and not have a surplus for the winter.
- raoulkent 3y agoThis was a time before armies in Scandinavia.
- anon84873628 3y agoAcoup, which seems to be an HN favorite, has a series basically about this. It describes why/how the Roman state became so successful at warfare and conquest: https://acoup.blog/2020/01/17/collections-the-fremen-mirage-part-i-war-at-the-dawn-of-civilization/ https://acoup.blog/2020/01/17/collections-the-fremen-mirage-...