• rurb
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Not if they wanted loyal tribesmen companions. And not if they wanted to avoid being killed in their sleep.

    • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Then what’s stopping post-agricultural people from being disloyal to the rich and killing them in their sleep? What makes you think the same tactics could not be used by pre-agriculture tribal chiefs to ensure loyalty among the tribesmen they abused?

      • rurb
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Damn dude, who beat the shit out of you, took all your stuff and banged “your” women?

      • BigNote@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        How is that going to work when you live in a group of around 30 to 50 people, all of whom are closely related either through blood or marriage, and all of whom have known you for your entire life?

        What we see in all of the ethnographic literature on small-scale hunting and gathering societies is that you absolutely cannot rise to a position of power and influence simply on the basis of strength. To the contrary, the way you gain power and influence is by being a good and wise and generous provider for the group, not by beating your fellow tribe-mates down.

        If you know of an example that demonstrates your idea, please do tell, since I am unaware of any such case in the existing anthropological literature.