Eusociality: From the First Foragers to the First States
- 632 Downloads
People have always been social. Ethnographic evidence suggests that transfers of food and labor are common among contemporary hunter-gatherers, and they probably were common in Paleolithic groups. Archaeological evidence suggests that cooperative breeding went up as we settled down: as territory defenders became more successful breeders, their helpers’ fertility would have been delayed or depressed. And written evidence from the Neolithic suggests that the first civilizations were often eusocial; emperors fathered hundreds of children, who were provided for and protected by workers in sterile castes. Papers in this issue of Human Nature look at helpers and workers across the eusociality continuum—from hardworking grandmothers and grandfathers, to celibate sisters and brothers, to castrated civil servants—from the first foragers to the first states.
KeywordsEusociality Cooperative breeding Human evolution Reproductive variance
Thanks to Karen Kramer for intelligent comments, and to all contributors for important papers on an important subject. I am forever indebted to Jane Lancaster for making this special issue possible, and to Sarah Blaffer Hrdy for encouragement throughout.
- Batra, S. (1966). Nests and social behavior of halictine bees of India. Indian Journal of Entomology, 28, 375–93.Google Scholar
- Betzig, L. (2013). Darwin’s question: How can sterility evolve? In K. Summers & B. J. Crespi (Eds.), Human social evolution: The foundational works of Richard Alexander (pp. 365–374). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Betzig, L. (2014). Eusociality in history. Human Nature, 25(1), in press. doi: 10.1007/s12110-013-9186-8.
- Childe, V. G. (1936). Man makes himself. London: Watts & Co.Google Scholar
- Crespi, B. (2005). Social sophistry: logos and mythos in the forms of cooperation. Annales Zoologici Fennici, 42, 569–71.Google Scholar
- Crespi, B. (2014). The insectan apes. Human Nature, 25(1), in press. doi: 10.1007/s12110-013-9185-9.
- Halpern, B. (1988). The first historians: The Hebrew Bible and history. San Francisco: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
- Hawkes, K. (2014). Primate sociality to human cooperation: why us and not them? Human Nature, 25(1), in press. doi: 10.1007/s12110-013-9184-x.
- Hölldobler, B., & Wilson, E. O. (2009). Superorganism. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
- Hrdy, S. B. (2009). Mothers and others. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Ji, T., Xu, J.-J., Mace, R. (2014). Intergenerational and sibling conflict under patrilocality: a model of reproductive skew applied to kinship. Human Nature, 25(1), in press. doi: 10.1007/s12110-013-9188-6.
- Kelly, R. (2013). The foraging spectrum (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Kramer, K. L. (2014). Why what juveniles do matters in the evolution of cooperative breeding. Human Nature, 25(1), in press. doi: 10.1007/s12110-013-9189-5.
- Lee, R. B. (1979). The !Kung San. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Mellars, C., Boyle, K., Bar-Yosef, O., & Stringer, C. (2007). Rethinking the human revolution. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
- Schmandt-Besserat, D. (1996). How writing came about. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
- Smith, T. M. (2013). Teeth and human life history evolution. Annual Review of Anthropology, 42, in press.Google Scholar
- Turke, P. W. (1988). Helpers at the nest: Childcare networks on Ifaluk. In L. Betzig, M. Borgerhoff Mulder, & P. Turke (Eds.), Human reproductive behaviour: A Darwinian perspective (pp. 173–88). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Wilson, E. O. (1971). The insect societies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Wilson, E. O. (1975). Sociobiology: The new synthesis. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar