One interesting theory is about what separates our line of development from other homonids--co-evolution with another highly intelligent, highly social animal--dogs. This might lead us down other areas of inquiry, such as , if human language first devloped as gesture, did it develop with canines , with our interaction with canines? Did domestication of dogs help make us more communicatively capable?
CJ http://www.uwsp.edu/psych/s/275/Science/Coevolution03.pdf Co-evolution of Humans and Canids http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-1405262/Co-Evolution-New-evidence-suggests.html If the DNA evidence is correct, it is creatures such as these that domesticated the wolf and turned it into a dog. People may have stolen wolf pups from their dens to play with or just to keep for the enjoyment of watching them. Like the young animals that are brought home as toys by tribal hunting peoples today, most of these pups probably had short lives. As Susan Crockford argues, some may have possessed the hormonal characteristics that produced dog-like behaviour and would have adapted to life in a human camp. (5) Those that survived to adulthood and produced pups of their own may have been the first ancestors of the dogs, which have lived with humans ever since. This was a new development in biology and history. For the first time, hunting parties and camp groups composed of two distinct species began to spread across the landscapes of the world. It makes little sense to think of this process as one in which early humans "domesticated" the wolf. Aside from the human use of simple tools, there was probably little difference in the complexity of hunting patterns or social organization between early human bands and wolf packs. If humans domesticated the wolf, is it not equally probable that wolves domesticated humans? Were the changes that developed between wolf and dog any more significant than those that occurred to early humans through their constant association with canids? In a recent article in the magazine Discovering Archaeology, biologist Wolfgang Schleidt notes the apparent temporal coincidence between the emergence of humankind and of dogkind, and suggests that, "This intertwining process of hominization and caninisation suggests co-evolution." (6) Schleidt proposes a specific scenario, involving humans emulating wolves and eventually co-opting wolves in hunting the migratory reindeer of Ice Age Eurasia. Yet a much broader view of the interactions between humans and wolves, and the results of these interactions, might be envisaged. In comparing ourselves with other animals, we think of intelligence, self-awareness, the ability to conceive new ideas and foresee long-term consequences as traits that are uniquely human. In the animal world these traits are most clearly mirrored by the great apes, and in a lesser way by our other primate relatives. But are all the characteristics that we think of as making us human inherited only from our primate ancestry? What about qualities such as patience, endurance, unthinking loyalty, co-operation, devotion to family and social group? What of our abilities to organize co-operative activities based on a finely tuned sense of social hierarchy and mutual responsibilities? Wolves seem to do these things significantly better than humans, and at least as well as most non-human primates. The biologists who have made their life-work the study of wolves describe an animal that lives in a world of complex social hierarchies, with well-organized co-operative work patterns, finely tuned communication skills, and outbreaks of spontaneous joy. Together with their superior ability to scent prey, to run more swiftly and endure longer than humans, these social qualities are the basis of their successful adaptation as hunters. And these are also qualities that would have been useful in the environment that saw our early ancestors turn into true humans. Given the situation of hunting bands composed of early humans and their wolf-dog companions, animals with complementary character and abilities, can we be sure that the process of domestication acted in only one direction? The DNA evidence suggests that these animals lived and worked together for some 5000 human generations before the emergence of societies and cultures that we can describe as fully human. In the course of these generations wolves were transformed into dogs, but did their dogs also transform ancient people into humans? Would archaic humans have developed into such a successful and dominant species if we had not had the opportunity to learn from, imitate and absorb into our cultures the traits and abilities of the wolves with whom we lived? Hints of our unacknowledged debt to wolves may perhaps be found in the cultural memories of human societies. Wolves play contradictory roles in human folklore and in human emotions. On one side stands the wolf as arch-villain of the forest, the creature who tries to devour Peter, Red Ridinghood and three small pigs. On the other stands the wolf as rescuer and nurturer of lost children. Romulus, Remus and a continuing series of feral children are said to have been raised by wolves. These children are never saved and nurtured by bears or tigers, badgers or wolverines, but always by wolves. Do we assign this role to wolves as a vague recollection of our special and ancient relationship with the species, or perhaps through recognition of our common links through the dog? If so, how do we explain the fear and loathing that seem to be the central emotions that most human societies generate toward the wolf? Biologists assure us that, despite the tales of slavering packs pursuing hapless troika-drivers across the Russian steppe, or of Canadian pioneers passing winter nights in trees surrounded by leaping and snarling wolves, wolf attacks on humans are extremely rare. Bears and large cats do kill people regularly; coyotes and cougars and feral dogs kill many more livestock than do wolves; yet it is the wolf that attracts our hatred and our fear. Can we see in this another hint of our special ties to the wolf? As loathed villain and as rescuer of lost children, the wolf stands apart from all other animals in human consciousness, and perhaps in this we may detect a deeply felt knowledge of our ancient kinship. The contradictory roles of wolves in folklore continue to be played Out in our dealings with actual wolves. Our society develops rules to control human impacts on other animals. We limit hunting, trapping and habitat destruction in order to preserve most of the animals that share our environment. But aside from the inadvertent and limited protection offered by a few wilderness parks, in most jurisdictions wolves are fair game for humans who wish to trap them, snare them, poison them, shoot them or run them down with snowmobiles. Folklore has a powerful hold over our beliefs and our actions. _______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list [email protected] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
