Ethnographic and Modeled Costs of Long-Distance, Big-Game Hunting

Abstract

Evolutionary ecology provides a rich pool of models from which archaeologists derive expectations about prehistoric human behavior. Signaling Theory (ST) has been applied successfully in ethnographic and certain archaeological contexts. Other applications have fallen prey to post-hoc explanation of aberrant archaeological patterns. This paper evaluates the claim that big-game hunting was a costly foraging behavior when traveling great distances, and therefore was undertaken as a form of costly signaling. The central place foraging model is used in conjunction with caloric expenditure formulae, derived from human energetics and locomotion research, to evaluate the cost of travel and transport versus the returns for large and small prey items. It is shown that big game continues to yield significant energetic returns even in situations where travel costs are comparatively high (i.e., 100-200 km round-trip). Small game hunting becomes energetically costly when a forager makes a procurement round-trip of more than ca.10 km. Large game animals are the highest return prey items even when procurement distances are comparatively great because humans are physiologically well-adapted for carrying objects over long distances. While the capture of big game animals may have bestowed prestige upon prehistoric hunters or served as some other signal of individual quality, these prey animals were not overly costly in terms of energetic efficiency—even under increased travel costs. These results emphasize the difficulty of separating social prestige from optimal foraging as the basis for big-game hunting in archaeological contexts.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 40 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.