Hunting hypothesis

In <a href="/facts/Paleoanthropology/Umjg0sUn">paleoanthropology</a>, the hunting hypothesis is the hypothesis that <a href="/facts/Human_evolution/DNzlDyKe">human evolution</a> was primarily influenced by the activity of <a href="/facts/Hunting/z1XhJdB2">hunting</a> for relatively large and fast animals, and that the activity of hunting distinguished human ancestors from other <a href="/facts/Hominins/SflaMavS">hominins</a>.
While it is undisputed that early humans were hunters, the importance of this fact for the final steps in the emergence of the genus <a href="/facts/Homo_(genus)/qvJtEBr2">Homo</a> out of earlier <a href="/facts/Australopithecines/25g1CUJG">australopithecines</a>, with its <a href="/facts/Bipedalism/tvLMG77t">bipedalism</a> and production of <a href="/facts/Stone_tool/JQxItKEm">stone tools</a> (from about 2.5 million years ago), and eventually also <a href="/facts/Control_of_fire/fkuAeEAV">control of fire</a> (from about 1.5 million years ago), is emphasized in the "hunting hypothesis", and de-emphasized in scenarios that stress the <a href="/facts/Omnivore/b8zcsuJF">omnivore</a> status of humans as their recipe for success, and <a href="/facts/Social_interaction/DU3HW2Ah">social interaction</a>, including <a href="/facts/Mating/o2voslGF">mating behaviour</a> as essential in the emergence of language and culture.
Advocates of the hunting hypothesis tend to believe that <a href="/facts/Tool/KhhEHz1I">tool</a> use and toolmaking essential to effective hunting were an extremely important part of human evolution, and trace the <a href="/facts/Origin_of_language/j8QkTM86">origin of language</a> and <a href="/facts/Prehistoric_religion/Y6V3agtm">religion</a> to a hunting context.
As societal evidence <a href="/facts/David_Buss/po4KfPMr">David Buss</a> cites that modern tribal population deploy hunting as their primary way of acquiring food. The <a href="/facts/Aka_people/GqSbAzAt">Aka pygmies</a> in the <a href="/facts/Central_African_Republic/TKMWWr57">Central African Republic</a> spend 56% of their quest for nourishment hunting, 27% gathering, and 17% processing food. Additionally, the <a href="/facts/!Kung/w6oDgKYs">!Kung</a> in Botswana retain 40% of their calories from hunting and this percentage varies from 20% to 90% depending on the season. For physical evidence Buss first looks to the guts of humans and apes. The human gut consists mainly of the small <a href="/facts/Intestines/nK2zwqBS">intestines</a>, which are responsible for the rapid breakdown of proteins and absorption of nutrients. The ape's gut is primarily <a href="/facts/Colon_(anatomy)/vQtlNBv9">colon</a>, which indicates a vegetarian diet. This structural difference supports the hunting hypothesis in being an evolutionary branching point between modern humans and modern primates. Buss also cites human teeth in that fossilized human teeth have a thin enamel coating with very little heavy wear and tear that would result from a plant diet. The absence of thick enamel also indicates that historically humans have maintained a meat-heavy diet. Buss notes that the bones of animals human ancestors killed found at Olduvai Gorge have cut marks at strategic points on the bones that indicate tool usage and provide evidence for ancestral butchers.
Women are theorized to have participated in hunting, either on their own or as a collective group effort. It is suggested that in the past, women targeted low but guaranteed food, whereas men targeted higher risk higher reward food. The <a href="/facts/Gathering_hypothesis/XC6w0444">Gathering Hypothesis</a> is a view that states men provided the evolution of the current human through hunting while women contributed via gathering. Though criticized by many, it provides clues that both hunting and gathering were patterns of acquiring food and resources.

Hunting hypothesis open-in-new

Hunting hypothesis