Reconstructing prehistoric demography: What role for extant hunter‐gatherers?

Reconstructing prehistoric demography: What role for extant hunter‐gatherers? Abigail E. Page  Jennifer C. French. Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews, October 26 2020. https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.21869

Abstract: Demography is central to biological, behavioral, and cultural evolution. Knowledge of the demography of prehistoric populations of both Homo sapiens and earlier members of the genus Homo is, therefore, key to the study of human evolution. Unfortunately, demographic processes (fertility, mortality, migration) leave little mark on the archeological and paleoanthropological records. One common solution to this issue is the application of demographic data from extant hunter‐gatherers to prehistory. With the aim of strengthening this line of enquiry, here we outline some pitfalls and their interpretative implications. In doing so, we provide recommendations about the application of hunter‐gatherer data to the study of demographic trends throughout human evolution. We use published demographic data from extant hunter‐gatherers to show that it is the diversity seen among extant hunter‐gatherers—both intra‐ and inter‐population variability—that is most relevant and useful for understanding past hunter‐gatherer demography.

pitfall one: not recognizing the limitations of hunter‐gatherer demographic data

pitfall two: the incorrect interpretation of demographic parameters

pitfall three: overlooking the differences in demographic scales in prehistoric and extant hunter‐gatherers

pitfall four: uncritically applying demographic uniformitarianism to archaic hominins

pitfall five: assuming there is such a thing as “the” hunter‐gatherer demography

7 CONCLUSIONS

We have highlighted five key pitfalls faced by researchers seeking to apply demographic data from extant hunter‐gatherers to prehistoric contexts. These pitfalls have varying methodological and theoretical implications but share two common elements: (a) they are often caused by poor communication between those studying past and present hunter‐gatherers; (b) they mask variation in the demography of hunter‐gatherer groups, past and present.

Given the sparse nature of the prehistoric database and the limited range of demographic variables on which it directly informs, data from extant hunter‐gatherers will always play a key role in reconstructing prehistoric demography. The specifics of this role will vary depending on the research questions being asked, and whether demography is central or peripheral to these. However, in all cases, it is vital to avoid using demographic data from recent foragers in ways which reproduce a limited view of the present (based on single groups or average values) in the past. Using the example of TFR we have underlined the usefulness of HBE as a framework, which minimizes the risk of using ethnographic data in this way. HBE seeks to understand the patterning and the reasoning behind human diversity, following the premise that individuals optimize behavioral strategies to particular ecological contexts.25, 134 Hunter‐gatherers worldwide still make allocation decisions based on their mode of subsistence, degree of mobility, and social structures,39 pressures which likely have parallels in prehistory. The recommendation of the use of HBE in prehistoric hunter‐gatherer studies is not new,39 but is of clear theoretical benefit,135 particularly for research areas such as demography with a fundamentally biological basis. Exploring how hunter‐gatherers today respond to different environmental pressures allows us to hypothesize about, and reconstruct elements of, prehistoric demography without relying on assumptions from a few recent foraging populations or on average values, which obscure diversity. Instead, HBE leverages this diversity to understand what predicts it, adding new pathways of investigation, and allowing for a range of possible values to be explored, and their relevance to the prehistoric case assessed. To better understand the demography of hunter‐gatherers, past and present, those of us who work with extant hunter‐gatherers should aim to improve our datasets by systematically exploring the relationship(s) and patterning of demographic parameters across a range of behavioral variables at the intra‐ and inter‐population level. Concomitantly, archeologists and paleoanthropologists should ensure that they combine an understanding of the limitations and possibilities of demographic data from recent foragers with their expertise on their own paleodemographic methods. We hope that this work presented in this manuscript is a good first step in that direction.