17 ms·
It’s highly unlikely that a small nomadic hunter-gatherer band would have had the food surplus and hierarchical organization needed to control and keep slaves.
by jl6 2y ago
It’s highly unlikely that a small nomadic hunter-gatherer band would have had the food surplus and hierarchical organization needed to control and keep slaves.
It’s as likely that ancient humans outcompeted Neanderthals for resources as killed them off directly.
- kleton 2y agoThe Uralic word for slave is very archaic and dates to well before they became sedentary. The Uralic tribes came into contact with the Aryas people on the steppes, and won battles with them enough to take captives as slaves, calling them orjat.
- numbsafari 2y agoThis is not true, as evidenced by the slave taking exhibited by nomadic peoples in North America. It was a pretty routine practice, well documented in history. Losers in battles would often be assimilated by the winner as slaves.
- jl6 2y agoI think you are talking about a far more modern period, in a much more complex, socially stratified society. The Neanderthal period was 50k-100k years ago.
- BurningFrog 2y agoAFAIK, we know pretty much nothing about human or neanderthal societies 50k-100k years ago.
- notfromhere 2y agoSurplus? The captives are there for labor and exploitation. They’re not house pets