MR Chapter 3: This Cold and Capricious Place (Social Complexity)1

Marcelo’s Demise (Scene 3)
B/c Marcelo Perez was captain of the rugby team and organized the trip to Chile, heassumed the leadership role of the group after the crash
Well-liked and respected by his peers so the group looked to him for guidance
Felt personally responsible for the group being in this situation (he hired the pilots, planned the trip, etc.) – felt he needed to step up as the leader
Deeply religious, guided by his Catholic faith – but when rescuers didn’t come and it seemed as though the world and God turned their backs on them, Marcelo was devastated
Didn’t make sense to him b/c he believed in such an orderly world
Led to increased feelings of guilt –affected his ability to lead  fell into a depression
Food was becoming scarce and talks of eating their dead friends increased, Marcelo wondered: why would God demand that they do such a thing?
Others not interested in wondering why – more concerned about ensuring their survival
Modern Minds Need to Know
More “civilized” our world becomes, the more shocking we find the unexpected
Demand reasons for the slightest deviation from the norm
Modern societies encase themselves in layers of material and social infrastructure (Ex: roof to keep out rain, heating to lessen the cold)
Society set up in such a way that we keep danger at a safe distance so we look for an explanation when chaos occurs – who was at fault? Where did the system fail? (Ex: levees breaking during Katrina)
In our uncivilized past, our ancestors did not focus on these issues = “that’s just the way the world is”
Doesn’t mean they didn’t look for explanations but coping and survival took precedence
The Myth of a Rationally Ordered World
Marcelo and his fellow Old Christians were products of a Judeo-Christian culture
Central to this worldview = idea of a rationally ordered world– meant to be comprehensible to us in thatwe have a divinely mandated purpose for existing seen in the Genesis creation myth
Although Genesis shares certain elements w/ creation myths worldwide, the Genesis story has a comprehensive theme that’s in sharp contrast w/ the cultural background from which it emerged
Genesis creation myth
Origins date back to 7th century BCE during the Babylonian exile
Majority of Israelite population exiled to Babylon – struggled to maintain cultural identity
Jewish scribes compiled essentials of the creation story – drew on the various oral and written traditions of Jewish and non-Jewish scribes
Emphasized how their view of God and the universe differed from their captors
Babylonian creation myth (the EnumaElish)
Attempted murder gone wrong
Apsu, the father god, planned to kill the lesser gods but Tiamat, his wife, tricked him and put him into a deep sleep and killed him
Other gods convinced Tiamat to avenge her husband’s death by killing Marduk, the leader of the lesser gods – Marduk won, split Tiamat’s body in two – using the parts to create the earth and sky
He then killedTiamat’s new husband, whose blood dripped on the earth, creating humans
Marduk then declared that humans must work for the gods
The World According to the EnumaElish
Contains a number of themes distasteful to Jewish scholars: creation as an accidental and flawed afterthought, dismemberment as a source of creation, gods as violent and vengeful, and humans and their concerns as trivial
However, these themes are seen in many creation stories around the world
1st common theme = corrupting activity of a trickster/devil who thwarts the creator’s best intentions
Trickster = serves an imp purpose in creation myths b/c he helps explain the flaws in both creation and human nature
2nd common theme = using body parts or fluids as the main material of creation
Use of body parts and fluids as creative material serves three purposes:
Connects current creation w/ an earlier, more chaotic stage
The force behind that chaos is still present, but it has been divided and controlled so life and nature can exist
Creates an intimacy b/w creation and the gods, whose substance permeates creation itself
Creation shares the gods’ nature, including their unpredictable, irrational tendencies – it can be cajoled (through sacrifice) or angered (by breaking taboos) – but never fully understood
Connects the present world w/ the childlike drive to create
Children often take pleasure in creating something separate from themselves using bodily fluids or excrement
As serious is the world is to us, for the gods it’s merely a plaything that they sometimes excreted or toyed with
Other creation myths confront the gods’ nonchalant attitude toward their creation more directly
Life, death, and soul (imp to humans) – typically treated casually by the gods
The Genesis Difference
Believe creation was the intentional act of a loving God and reflected in his divine law – resulted in perfect order and reason from chaos
Notion of an orderly worldconsidered fundamental to the emergence of Western science
Creation stories both reflect and inform a culture’s worldview
Genesis creation story not alone in positing ex nihilo (out of nothing), order out of chaos, or creation arising from divine thought
No other creation account w/ these elements had such an influence of human history
Encourages humans to expect intelligibility from the natural world = can ask questions and anticipate reasonable answers
Order and understanding was not a common expectation for our ancestors
Life much more dangerous and unpredictable – less power to control own destiny
Creation myths = mirrored experience
Expecting life to make sense = a far more modern preoccupation
Survivors of the crash not used to the brutally cold weather – now they’re 11K ft high on a glacier
This way of life not familiar to most of us but was to our ancestors
Survivors got into diff mindset  thinking, behaving, and organizing like our ancestors
The Cousins Take Over (Scene 4)
Surrounded by water, the survivors can’t continue getting water from the snow; it provides temporary relief but you need much more; your hands, lips, and tongue become frozen
Adolfo Strauch (“Fito”) came up with the idea of using the seat covers to make a basin-like shape to hold snow  put in the sun = water!
Gave everyone hope that maybe Fito had more great ideas
Eduardo Strauch, one of Marcelo’s closest friends, could not even help Marcelo
Marcelo’s need for rationalization led him to believe that he was to blame for their situation
When they heard the rescue efforts had been abandoned – things got worse for Marcelo
Group became leaderless – didn’t stay this way for long
Group looked up toFito since he proved himself with the water-making system – also created makeshift snowshoes for the expeditionaries
Fito was an unlikely leader – shy by nature, uncomfortable w/ public attention or adoration
Had support from his 2 close friends (also his cousins) – Eduardo and Daniel Fernandez
3 of them were older than most of the others – everyone tended to look up to them
Close psychological bond of kinship gave them strength – advantage over all other potential cliques among the survivors – their family bond gave the group a social center of gravity
When Marcelo died in the avalanche, “cousins” took over just like kin and clans had done so through human evolutionary history
A Complex Social System
Two types of hunter-gatherers:
Egalitarian
Regularly on the move in search of resources
“Own” only what they carry, which isn’t much: hunting equipment, digging sticks, materials for building shelter, and their vast knowledge of their desert home
Ex: !Kung San of Africa – “property” and “ownership” are irrelevant so there is no economic stratification, no rich and poor; sharing is mandatory (whoever kills a giraffe gladly divides it among the group members)
Bragging, claiming special privileges – met w/ ridicule, other social humiliation
Can be ruthless in enforcing their way of life
No headman or chief – all decisions made by consensus – even if certain members have more influence, they do so modestly
Aggressive egalitarianism understandable since resources are scarce and widely dispersed – no opportunities for accumulatingany sort of “property”
Can’t eat a whole giraffe by yourself – makes sense to share w/ the group now and they’ll return the favor
Complex (transegalitarian)
Exist where ecological conditions and more sophisticated procurement technologies allow for more sedentary lifestyles and allow a surplus of resources
Ex: Tlingit tribe uses large fishing traps to catch salmon– allows harvesting of more fish which leads to a surplus = can stay in one place longer and leads to social stratification
Social stratification is usually based on certain families in the group who claim a special connection to the resource-rich territories (Ex: long-dead relative first to make camp there or died there or led there in a dream)
The family’s ancestors are thought to be supernatural guardians of the territory, andthe territory’s continuous fertility and productivity is necessary for the tribe’s success so the tribal leaders are drawn from this elite clan
Successfully exploiting a resource like the running salmon requires teamwork and extensive labor
Traps must be made, monitored, and tended while fish are sliced, smoked, dried, and stored
Tribal elites make the decisions of where to set traps and for how long and the “commoners” do most of the labor
Creating a surplus of resources  use the surplus as a trading commodity w/ neighboring groups to acquire rare and valued items
Socioeconomic stratification also leads to ritual stratification
Elite families have private rituals to strengthen and intensify their connection w/ powerful ancestors
Ex: among the Chumash of the California coast, private rituals expand into “secret societies” in which elite families combine religious rituals w/ political strategizing
Complex society contains the beginning of social specialization, in which diff strata have diff responsibilities – includes ritual specialization as well
Ex: Egalitarian societies, such as the !Kung San, have many shamans but among complex hunter-gatherers, private rituals require special shamans from the elite class, whose authority is seen as greater than “ordinary” shamans
The Evolution of Social Complexity
Most likely inherited from common ancestor; social hierarchy is a common trait of all great apes
However, egalitarianism is a universal trait of simple hunter-gatherers
Something must have happened during hominin evolution that disrupted the normal ape social dominance pattern allowing egalitarianism to take its place
U-shaped curve (p. 70 in Mortal Rituals)
At first, hominins lived in fairly strict social hierarchies similar to those of chimps
Males challenge one another for dominance  winner gets alpha status
Females same hierarchy  both get greater access to resources for offspring
Over the next few million years, this hierarchy steadily undermined  more egalitarian
Factors contributing to this:
Apes = capable of forming coalitions (teaming up against an alpha male) capacity for joint cooperative activity already present  able to weaken the dictator
Became hairless (3.5-1.2 MYBP) = this combined w/ bipedalism meant mothers had to carry their young but be put down when mothers foraged  led to obligate cooperative foraging = hominin mothers had to forage cooperatively w/ other females in order to look over the infants, guard against predators while gathering enough resources for the group
Stone tool production (2.6 MYP) = allowed access to wider array of resources, leading to greater amounts of scavenged and hunted game
Hunting and scavenging large prey required group cooperation
At first, stick-and-stone throwing to chase away competitors from carcass
As hominins grew larger and hunting tools became more lethal, scavenging led to cooperative hunting
Strictly enforced egalitarianism (bottom of U) = 400,000 YBP
Throwing ability = as we became better, throwing became a formidable means of social leveling
If a bullying alpha male could be taken down at a distance, it would make them think twice about forcing this on the others
Why did egalitarianism fade? Collapsed suddenly
Another example of reemergence of ancient ways
Unless strong cultural constraints are in place and actively enforced, humans easily and naturally “slide back” to an ancestral form of thinking and behaving, which is what happened 30,000 years ago
Elaborate Burials – evidence of complex social system
Three different burial sites (Sungir in Russia – 28,000 YBP, DolniVestonice in Czech Republic, and Saint-Germain-la-Riviere in France) containing elaborately adorned bodies w/ fine ivory beads, necklaces, pendants, and bracelets – ivory spears, carvings, and other artifacts also buried w/ bodies
Would have taken thousands of labor hours per body to make these pieces
Not the oldest sites (others date back 100,000 YBP) but among the first to include elaborate grave goods – first evidence of social stratification
Among present-day traditional societies, these burials are reserved for elites who are meant to take their place as powerful ancestors
Many elaborate burial sites along w/ sites containing famous Upper Paleolithic art and artistic artifacts are located in prominent river valleys where seasonally abundant resources would have been available
Sungir – located along Klyazma River
Lascaux – most famous cave containing art – located in France’s Dordogne valley = rivers imp source for fish but valley served as migration route for grazing animals  more chances for harvesting food
25,000YBP in Eurasia – first evidence of storage pits for preserving perishables
First (indirect) evidence of hunting technologies (traps, snares, weirs) capable of obtaining surplus quantities of resources
10,000YBP – stratified social systems were thought to have arisen in association w/ the agricultural revolution
Settled agriculture gave humans even greater means of producing surplus resources  intensified social complexity and stratification
Humans “ancestralize” their social world = more in line w/ primate heritage
The Mountain Society– complex social system not egalitarian
Why? Once they decided to use their dead friends as food, an abundant resource became available and a stratified society emerged around that resource
Multi-tiered – w/ diff groups having diff rights, responsibilities, and specializations
The Cousins (FitoStrauch, Eduardo Strauch, & Daniel Fernandez)
Although Marcelo was a “natural” leader when it came to the rugby team, the “cousins” were a more natural form of leadership in terms of human evolution
Family units = core of any hunter-gatherer band as well as the social infrastructure
When stressed, these bonds are the toughest and most enduring – not surprising the crash survivors’ social system stabilized around a kin group
Their closeness gave inner strength and psychological protection others lacked
Gave the group hope when nothing else could
Kinship ties provide an adaptive function (seen throughout human evolutionary history) – we naturally turn to kin groups for support & guidance
Eduardo and Fito were close but had distinct personalities
Eduardo = older but smaller, had a more cultured, sophisticated demeanor, he was calm, thoughtful, and passionate about things (esp architecture)
Fito = untraveled, introverted, less decisive, but no less determined or clever than his cousin or anyone else on the mountain
Daniel = oldest of the 3, calm, and mature
Exerted an essential centripetal force on the group – keptgroup from breaking out into bickering cliques – however, this brought on much responsibility
Since it was a near impossible job, the cousins assumed the task of butchering the meat after the bodies were dug out of the snow and thawed in the sun
2nd group would cut the larger portions into smaller ones
Cousins would supervise the rationing of food to all survivors (handful or ½ lb.) but those who worked harder received more, and expeditionaries received even more
The Lieutenants (CarlitosPaez, Gustavo Zerbino, & Pedro Algorta)
Slightly younger boys who saw the advantage to being closely associated w/ the cousins
Stayed close to the cousins, conveyed orders down the chain to rest of the group, did favors, and ran errands for the “superiors”
Paez = wanted to be an expeditionary
Due to some skepticism about his mentality, he went with others for a trial run and almost didn’t come back, but this made him even more determined – made effort to be more responsible
Most imp contribution = could make people laugh and provided comic relief
Group’s ritual