Cross Cultural Perspective Of Polygyny and Human Evolution

Summary on the subject: Cross Cultural Perspective Of Polygyny and Human Evolution

CROSS CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE OF POLYGYNY AND HUMAN EVOLUTION

A Cross Cultural Perspective of Polygyny As an institution, polygyny, the social arrangement that permits a man to have more than one wife at the same time, exists in all parts of the world. From our present knowledge, there are very few primitive tribes in which a man is not allowed to enter into more than one union. In fact, ethologists now believe that only one to two percent of all species may be monogamous (Tucker).

None of the simian species are strictly monogamous; our closest relatives, the chimpanzees, practice a form of group marriage. Among the 849 human societies examined by the anthropologist Murdock (1957), 75% practiced polygyny. Many peoples have been said to be monogamous, but it is difficult to infer from the data at our disposal whether monogamy is the prevalent practice, the moral ideal, or an institution safeguarded by sanctions (Malinowski 1962).

Historically, polygyny was a feature of the ancient Hebrews, the traditional Chinese, and the nineteenth-century Mormons in the United States, but the modern practice of polygyny is concentrated in Africa, the Middle East, India, Thailand, and Indonesia. The extent to which men are able to acquire multiple wives depends on many factors, including the economic prosperity of the man's family, the prevailing bride price, the differential availability of marriageable females, the need and desire for additional offspring, and the availability of productive roles for subsequent wives. Even in societies that permit polygyny, the conditions of life for the masses make monogamy the most common form of marriage.

The two variations of polygyny are sororal (the cowives are sisters) and nonsororal (the cowives are not sisters). Some societies also observe the custom of levirate, making it compulsory for a man to marry his brother's widow. It must be remembered that any form of polygyny is never practiced throughout the entire community: there cannot exist a community in which every man would have several wives because this would entail a huge surplus of females over males (Malinowski 1962). Another important point is that in reality it is not so much a form of marriage fundamentally distinct from monogamy as rather a multiple monogamy. It is always in fact the repetition of marriage contract, entered individually with each wife, establishing an individual relationship between the man and each of his consorts (Benson 1971). Where each wife has her separate household and the husband visits them in turn, polygynous marriage resembles very closely a temporarily interrupted monogamy. In such cases, there is a series of individual marriages in which domestic arrangements, economics, parenthood, as well as legal and religious elements do not seriously encroach on each other.

The polygyny with separate households is more universally prevalent. Among the great majority of the Bantu and Hamitic peoples of Africa, where the number of wives, especially in the case of chiefs, is often considerable, each wife commonly occupies a separate hut with her children, and manages an independent household with well-defined legal and economic rights (Pasternak 1976).

Where, on the other hand, as among many N. American tribes, two or more wives share the same household, polygyny affects the institution of matrimonial life much more deeply. Unlike wives in many other African groups who live in their own huts, Ijaw wives have apartments within one large structure and our brought into much more frequent contact with their co-wives (Rosaldo 1974). Various theories have been advanced to explain the cultural endorsement of polygyny. One of the earliest explanations was based on the notion that men have a greater disposition for variety in sexual partners than do women (Tucker). Many ethologists believe that there is a sociobiological imperative for men to have as many sexual partners as possible (Sayers).

While this theory is of historical interest, there exists no empirical support for the greater sex drive of the male, nor is there any reason to expect the male sex drive to vary from one culture to another. Women are just as naturally interested in sex, perhaps even more so. Women can be multi- orgasmic and have a much broader range of sexual stimulation than men. Non-monogamy is reproductively savvy for males in order to spread their genes, and for females in order to improve the hardiness and genetic variety of their offspring (Benson). It has also been suggested that polygyny as a marriage form evolved in response to lengthy postpartum sex taboos because polygyny provides a legitimate sexual outlet for the husband during this period of taboo (Whiting). Whiting discovered that societies dependent on root and tree crops (presumably low protein societies) are more likely to have a long postpartum sex taboo, and there did seem to be a statistical association between the presence of this taboo and a preference for polygyny. While men may seek other sexual relationships during the period of a long postpartum taboo, it is not clear why polygyny is the only possible solution to the problem, since the legitimation of sex does not depend exclusively on marriage. The problem could be alleviated by extra-marital alliances or masturbation. The existence of a low sex ratio, a scarcity of men in relation to women, has also been offered as an explanation for the origin of this practice (Pasternak 1976).

Polygyny maximizes the opportunities for females to marry in a society in which adult males are in short supply. The fact that the sex ratio at the same time of young adulthood is numerically balanced in some societies suggests that while a sex ratio imbalance may contribute to the development of polygyny in special cases, it is an incomplete explanation for the existence of polygyny in the majority of societies in the world. For example, plural marriage developed among the Mormons in Utah when, as in most of the western states of the United States, there was an excess of males.

The theory that has stimulated the most empirical investigation links the existence of polygyny to the productive value of the woman. According to this theory, the occurrence of polygyny is positively related to the extent to which women contribute to the subsistence bases of their respective societies (Pasternak 1976). However, further research suggests that the relationship between women's economic contribution and marriage form is more complex and that there exists a curvilinear relationship between women's productive value and the existence of polygyny (Rosaldo 1974). Polygyny has been found to be a feature of economic systems where potential female contribution to subsistence is high (such as in gathering and agricultural economies). In many African communities, the chief derives his wealth from the plurality of his wives, who by means of the produce of their agricultural labor enable him to exercise the lavish hospitality upon which so much of his power rests. The practice has also been found in economic systems, however, where potential female contribution is low (such as hunting and fishing economies). It has been suggested that multiple wives are valued in the first instance, for economic reasons, while in the latter instance, they are valued for reproductive reasons in that the taking of multiple wives maximizes the potential to produce sons, who in turn make an economic contribution (Malinowski 1962).

A multitude of wives, however, may increase not only a man's wealth but also his social importance, reputation and authority, apart from the influence of the number of his children. Hence, we find in many Bantu communities of Africa that the desire to have many wives is one of the leading motives in the life of every man; while the fact that in many Melanesian and Polynesian communities, polygyny is a prerogative and therefore the chief testifies to the social prestige attaching to it (Priso).

Politically or socially stratified divisions within a society also favor the emergence of polygyny, since economic rights to women can be acquired, and since marriages can be used to create political alliances between unequal groups (Rosaldo). While polygyny tends to be viewed by Western cultures as an instrument for the domination of women by men, the degree of autonomy experienced by women in polygynous unions varies within and among cultures. The degree of autonomy of each cowife is influenced by the availability of opportunities outside of the home, the degree to which she maintains contact with her family of origin, the availability of gainful employment, the degree of importance attached to the children she has produced, and her life cycle state. Benefits for the wives also include the sharing of economic and domestic responsibilities, the freedom that derives from living apart from the constant supervision of a husband, and the diminished pressure for constant sexual accessibility. For example in many African polygynous societies women gain economic autonomy through trading. Trading not only gives de facto independence from the husband's authority (and may ease tensions between cowives), but also brings women together in extra-domestic cooperative groups such as trading associations (Benson 1971).

Paradoxically, polygyny becomes attractive to both parties. For instance, in Africa a man who controls much land may marry several wives to work for him. Since he is providing only about half of their income, even a man of modest means can take several wives. In addition, women find polygyny helps lighten their work burden. In many cases, the first wife takes the initiative in suggesting that a second wife, who can take over the most tiresome jobs in the household, should be procured. In the traditional African setting, marriage is a matter of considerable importance. It is through marriage that the constituent elements of society reproduce themselves and that groups and individuals further a complex strategy. Women play a crucial role in this process, since they gather and control other women as wives and companions for brothers, sons, and husbands. A husband chooses his first wife with care, since she is responsible for training all subsequent wives and organizing them, older children, clients, wards, and, in the past slaves, into an agricultural work force. The senior wife is responsible for producing the agricultural wealth of the household, and if her warrior husband is absent or preoccupied for long periods of time, it is she who often functions as the effective head of household. Even though a husband may marry younger, more beautiful wives, he continues to regard his «big wife» with great respect and consideration (Rosaldo). In Mende, the head wife in a large polygynous household is given much religious as well as economic power. She organizes the agricultural work force, and stores and markets economic surpluses. Because of these roles, Mende head wives are seen as authority figures, and occasionally a chief's head wife will succeed him in office even though she resides virilocally in his chiefdom and has no genealogical right to rule in the village of his kin (Tucker). Jealousy, while not an inevitable consequence of polygyny, is reported in many polygynous societies. Tension is common when women are competing for goods and services from the husband and since each wife attempts to build a uterine family at the expense of her co-wives' children (Rosaldo). Among the Kanuri of Bornu (part of a centralized Muslim state), women are married very young, often to middle-aged men. A woman's ability to control a husband's dominance depends on her ability to withdraw food and sexual services. A second wife is a considerable threat to her, resulting in less attention for her as well as for her children, and she loses some of her ability to gain compliance from her husband. However, Malinowski (1962) notes that jealousy among cowives is more a rivalry to secure maximum access to resources for themselves and their offspring than sexual jealousy. To minimize this conflict among cowives, a set of rules is often established that specifies responsibilities and rights concerning sex, economics, and personal possessions. A Patani man follows a prescribed order of sleeping with each of his wives, as does the Korokorosei husband, but the women differ in the scheduling of their domestic responsibilities to him. A Patani woman cooks and cares for her husband only when it is her turn to sleep with him. A Korokorosei woman must cook for her husband every day and perform domestic tasks for him whenever he asks. The presence of associations in Patani assists a woman in coping with difficulties in her co-wife relationships. The Korokorosei woman must resolve her own problems (Priso). In group families the predominant themes is not swinging sex, however, the «swinging» label still may persist in areas where polygyny is not so common. A fundamental problem with parenting in such group's stems from the social stigma attached to «deviant» life-styles. There are obvious difficulties in raising children in a social environment so extensively criticized or condemned, especially when the parents realize that their children may grow up alienated either from them or from the mainstream culture to which they eventually will be called on to adapt (Sayres). Children in polygynous unions may be reared primarily by their mother, under the supervision of the senior co wife, or jointly with a system of rotation. Because the economic claims that many co wives make on their husbands are on behalf of their children, one of the advantages of occupying the position of senior wife is that the position carries with it preferential treatment for the offspring. The notion that mothers in polygynous unions develop extraordinary close ties with their children because of the father's absence is not supported (Tucker). Although an African husband can expect to have his wife or wives supporting themselves and working for him, he has very little claim to his children. Female farming and polygyny are nearly always coupled with «matrilineal descent,» meaning that heritage is traced only through the mother's line. Often children bear their mother's name. The result is that marriages are relatively transient and divorce is common. In African divorce, the husband obtains certain domestic and sexual services from the wife, but her other loyalties and her offspring always belong to her lineage (meaning her natal family). If there is divorce, the lineage will care for her and her children. She is not «absorbed» into her husband's lineage. In Stanleyville (the Congo), well over half of those who had been married had also been divorced. According to one calculation, Hausa women (in Nigeria) average about three marriages between puberty and menopause. Eight out of ten persons over 40 years of age in a Yao village (Nyasaland) were found to have been divorced. In the Voltaic group of the Mossi, men who have migrated to neighboring Ghana may establish households with the Ashanti women but avoid marriage because the Ashanti matrilineal descent pattern would not let them take their own children back with them. In patrilineal or «dual descent» societies, by contrast, marriages are stable. Illegitimacy is also regarded differently since children belong to the mother's line anyway. Early illegitimacy can even have a positive aspect, since it proves fertility. (Malinowski 1962) Some believe that polygyny is linked with HIV and Hepatitis C. In places like Rwanda and Burundi, polygyny decreases infection by allowing women for whom there are not enough available marriageable mates (due to war, violence, imprisonment, etc.) to be married to the few available marriageable men and be sexually fulfilled without having to find sex promiscuously or turning to prostitution to find fulfillment or support themselves. Those who keep their sexual and body fluid activities within their bonded polygynous marriages do not spread or acquire HIV. The false hope placed in condoms (which have a 20% one-out-of-five failure rate according to the FDA and our Public Health Depts.) results in far more deaths from these diseases than such deaths from polygyny (Sayres). Although antecedents to the occurrence and maintenance of polygyny vary from society to society, ideology and customs develop once polygyny is adopted that contribute to its perpetuation long after the original reason for the practice disappears. In traditional societies that have encouraged plural marriages in the past, however, the trend is moving toward monogamy. In some cases, this movement occurs in stages, and in other cases, polygyny is permitted but discouraged by recognizing the first marriage as legal and relegating additional wives to the status of concubines. The explanation most commonly advanced for this movement away from polygyny is that monogamy is more compatible with industrialization (Benson 1971). Of course, the role of ideology and the banning of polygyny must also be considered as factors contributing to the decline of the practice. Some American men take the position that monogamy protects the rights of women. However, are these men concerned with liberation movements from the suffragists of the early twentieth century to the feminists of today? The truth of the matter is that monogamy protects men, allowing them to «play around» without responsibility. Easy birth control and easy legal abortion has opened the door of illicit sex to woman and she has been lured into the so-called sexual revolution. Nevertheless, she is still the one who suffers the trauma of abortion and the side effects of the birth control methods. Taking aside the plagues of venereal diseases, herpes and AIDS, the male continues to enjoy himself free of worry. Men are the ones protected by monogamy while women continue to be victims of men's desires. Polygyny is very much opposed by the male dominated society because it forces men to face up to responsibility and fidelity. It forces them to take responsibility for their polygynous inclinations, and protects and provides for women and children. The bottom line in the marriage relationship is good morality and happiness, creating a just and cohesive society where the needs of men and women are well taken care of. The present Western society, which permits free sex between consenting adults, has give rise to an abundance of irresponsible sexual relationships, an abundance of «fatherless» children, many unmarried teenage mothers; all becoming a burden on the country's welfare system. In part, such an undesirable welfare burden has given rise to a bloated budget deficit, which even an economically powerful country like the United States cannot accommodate. We find that artificially established monogamy had become a factor in ruining the family structure, and the social, economic, and political systems in this country. Polygyny has been practiced by mankind throughout the world for thousands of years. It has been proven advantageous economically and politically for both males and females. Having other cowives lets women share the economic and domestic responsibilities of the household, it allows independence from the husband, and also the freedom from fulfilling constant sexual needs of the male. In some cases, polygyny allows women to achieve a higher status within her community that she normally could not achieve in a monogamous relationship. Polygamous relationships serve as an alternative to single loneliness, fatherless children, and increasing violence and juvenile crime in families where the father has left. Polygyny has proven itself to be an advantage to a host of societies and cultures.

CHASIDIM AND AMISH

The two groups to be examined are the Chasidim and the Old Order Amish. We will begin with a brief look at the history of each group. The Chasidim, or Hasidim, as more commonly known, are a cult within the tradition of Judaism. The word «Hasid» derives from the Hebrew word for «pious». Hasidism dates back to the early eighteenth century and originated in central and Eastern Europe. Its founder was a man named Israel ben Eliezer (c.1700-1760). He is otherwise known as the Baal Shem Tov. In Hebrew «Baal Shem» means, «master of the [good] name». It is a title given to men who are endowed with mystical powers. According to Hasidic belief, Adonai (God) chooses these men. The Baal Shem Tov taught a new way of practicing Judaism that was strikingly different than what was considered acceptable at that time. It was his contention that God was everywhere and in all things - including man. There was no need for rigorous study of Torah (the Pentateuch, or Five Books of Moses). A man's education - or lack thereof, is unimportant. Accordingly, an honest prayer from an unlearned Jew is just as powerful as a prayer made by a talmid chachem (an expert in Talmud). The Besht insisted that unity with God was possible through spontaneous prayer, ecstatic emotion, song, and dance. Jews were to embrace their raw emotions, release their passions - and not to suppress them as they might interfere with the analytic study of Judaism. This new way of worship was unlike anything that had been previously seen in Judaism. It appealed to great numbers of Jews, namely the uneducated masses. The rise of popularity of Hasidism was also aided by its timing. As Leo Rosten writes about the Baal Shem Tov in his book The Joys of Yiddish, «He brought the excitement of hope into the lives of Polish Jewry, who had been decimated during a decade of savage Cossack progroms.» Despite the renewed enthusiasm it engendered, it also found strong opposition, namely from the misnagdim. For the misnagdim, study figures as the supreme religious act. This is not so for the Hasidim. The teachings of the Besht place an emphasis on the doing of mitzvahs. The literal translation of this Hebrew word is «commandment» but when used commonly «mitzvah» refers to any virtuous deed. The Talmud-studying community considered the Baal Shem Tov outrageous and heretical. However, this did not appear to bother the Besht over-much as he «…derided the learned Talmudists, branding them sterile pedants who «through sheer study of the Law have no time to think about God.»« Despite the opposition the Hasidim grew to include approximately 10,000 Jews. After the death of the Baal Shem Tov in 1760, Rabbi Dov Baer took over as the leader of the Hasidim. It was during his leadership that the teachings of the Baal Shem Tov were organized into a set doctrine. Hasidim membership grew during this period, causing Jewish authorities to grow concerned and subsequently to impose a ban on Hasidim. Nevertheless, Hasidism continued to thrive in Europe until the rise of the third Reich. It was after the devastation of the Holocaust that the Hasidim immigrated to the United States. The decision to leave Europe for America did not come easily, «Many Hasidim feared that the religious and political freedoms of the United States would finish the job that Hitler could not finish in the ovens of Auschwitz.». Like the Hasidim, the Amish descended from a larger religion. In their case, the Amish stem from the Anabaptists. The Anabaptists were a sixteenth century religious group. Anabaptist beliefs included adult baptism and worship held in the home and not at a church. These are beliefs that the present-day Amish hold. The Anabaptists suffered a split as a result of disagreements over basic religious practices. Menno Simons, a Dutch Anabaptist, founded one of the splits. His followers were known as the Mennonites. This group faced heavy persecution and eventually fled to Switzerland. It is from the Mennonites that the Amish descend; Jakob Amman, a Mennonite preacher, founded his own branch which came to be known as the Amish. Jakob Amman's main reason for starting his own sect had to do with the practice of Meindung. The Meindung is the practice of shunning members who do not conform. Absolutely all contact is stopped, to the extreme that even the non-conforming member's spouse must have no further contact with him or her. Amman felt that the Meindung was not being upheld - this is what precipitated his leaving the Mennonite movement and creating his own group, a movement in which the Meindung played a most important role. «…it would be no exaggeration to say that the Meindung is the heart of the Amish system of social control.» Despite the fact that they owe their very existence to Jakob Amman, Old Order Amish do not admire the personality qualities he is said to have had, qualities which made him such a powerful leader. «The Old Order Amish are devout believers in humility, brotherly love….they are suspicious of those with leadership aspirations.» The Hasidim and the Old Order Amish are alike in that both groups formed in Europe and then migrated to America. What needs to be further examined then, is the Revitalization movement that each experienced and how it the migration to America played a role in certain aspects of it. The first and second substages of the Revitalization movement deal with the code by which the group lives. The first substage of the Revitalization movement is the formulation of a code. For both the Hasidim and the Old Order Amish, this took place previous to their arrival in America. As previously mentioned, for the Hasidim, their dogma was formalized in the period during which Rabbi Dov Baer led the movement. Jakob Amman was responsible for formulating the code by which the Amish would live. Granted, Old Order Amish do not live in accordance to forceful leadership. Nevertheless, they do practice the Meindung and thus live by the code set down by Amman. The second substage has to do with the communication of the code to make converts. In this respect the Hasidim and the Amish are again similar in that neither group seeks out converts. Instead, the group creates its own members by having children and passing their beliefs down to the next generation. However, this method is not without its setbacks. One such setback is inbreeding. An example of this can be found among the Lancaster Amish of PA. This population of Amish descends from approximately two hundred Amish who arrived in Pennsylvania during the early 1700's. This small number of possible mates created a relatively small gene pool. Genetic mutations - which are present in every ethnic group - began to surface as a result of intermarriage. Among the genetic disorders manifested by these Amish is mental retardation and dwarfism. The third substage of Revitalization is the organization of converts into disciples and followers. This too occurred in Europe for both groups. Also, it occurred when the each movement was relatively new - to emphasize once again - neither the Hasidim nor the Amish are today known for attempting to convert non-believers. The fourth substage of Revitalization is the adaptation of each movement to hostile conditions. Both groups have succeeded at this.

One way of adapting has been to flee the hostile environment if possible. The Mennonites from which the Amish descended fled to Switzerland when persecuted. The most hostile conditions faced by the Hasidim have to be those of Europe during Hitler's reign. For the most part, the Hasidim who survived the Holocaust fled the region. Both groups have also been successful at adapting to the conditions found in America. Given, the conditions are not hostile by definition. However, the most vulnerable members of the group, the children, may experience hostility. One way that this possible hostility is avoided is by the insistence by both groups that their children attend their schools. Not only does this ensure that the code of the movement is taught and that undesirable subjects be omitted, it also serves as one additional buffer between the group and a potentially hostile outside world. The last two substages of Revitalization are the cultural transformation of the society and the routinization of the movement. These also took place in Europe for both the Old Order Amish and the Hasidim. Once achieved, the substages lead to the New Steady State, in which «Individuals may achieve a «resynthesis of values and beliefs,» while long-term changes continue under the guidance of the new value structure. (cf. Wallace 1970: 191-197)». This best describes the experiences of both groups in the America. Both groups have prospered here and their populations are increasing - both the Amish and the Hasidim average seven children borne to a household. These groups are feeling long-term changes. One long-term change the Hasidim are experiencing is caused by the growth of their population. It concerns the Rebbe. The Rebbe is the leader of the hasidic group. A man becomes Rebbe by inheriting the position from his father or by being appointed Rebbe. The relationship of the sect with their Rebbe is of extreme importance as he is thought to be in direct communication with God. «[The Rebbe] is often the subject of veneration that gives rise to stories of mystical abilities» The relationship between a Rebbe and his followers is direct and personal. Because of the growing population, more Rebbes will have to be appointed in order for the Hasidim to not feel cheated out of a personal relationship with their leader. This will bring about a diffusion of hasidic sects; «Diffusion would, in all probability, foster some change in the Hasidic way of life».

HUMAN EVOLUTION. ROLE OF TOOLS IN HUMAN EVOLUTION

According to archeological and physical record, tool use has had an enormous effect in the transformation of proto humans into modern humans. What stimulated tool use was the proto humans intrest in new and easier ways to do things. With the introduction of tools, body morphology changed and reproductive fitness increased. Evolution did not happened over night. It took 4.5 million years for humans to get where they are today. Scientists have concluded that about 3.5 million years ago, there was the first proto human. A proto human resembles extinct hominid populations that had some but not all the features of a modern homo sapien. Such features were prolonged moments of bipedality, change in the pelvis and the reduction of the sagittal crest. (Diamond 1992 pg 34) In order for this proto human to evolve into a human, it needed tools. Some of the tools might have been discovered by accident or by early creative geniuses? The way they discovered the tools is unknown, but the changes the tools made were to the physical morphology and the body behavior. They began to walk upright, gathered supplies, cut food, and used weapons.(Diamond 1992 pg. 40) About 3 million years ago, after generations of learning how to use these tools, the hominid came out of the trees, and stayed mostly on the ground. The animal had an abundance of food and water and lived in a population of; on the ground proto-human animals. Some adapted to ground life and started to become bipedal, but more than half of them stayed on all fours. The bipedal hominids vision increased, making it able to see and do more. It obtained the ability to use weapons more effectively and efficiently because it had arms with agility. It found all the good meat and valued resources then eventually took over the whole community. Soon after the bipedal creatures gained control the hominids on four legs die off, precisely because they could not evolve quickly enough and produce healthy, if any, offspring. The bipedal community grew into the hundreds and thousands. Tough, healthy, and agile hominids, the strong survived and the females produced healthy offspring which is called reproductive fitness. The mouth became smaller and the brain increased in size. More brains equaled better tools, which lead to a faster, more efficient evolution.(Diamond 1992 pg 12) According to the bone and fossil evidence that I have learned, this is my interpretation how evolution might have happened. When a species develops tools, many things can a will change. The definition of a tool is, performing or facilitating mechanical operations. (Webster's Ninth New Dictionary) Take for instance a hominid that walks on all four limbs. How easy would it be for a hominid, without agile arms, to mechanically operate a tool? It would be very difficult. This type of arboreal hominid, probably lives in a tree, swings from the branches, vision is not great, and is mostly a vegetarian. After the proto human began to walk on two feet there hands became free and moveable. Now give this hominid a sharp stick or a blunt object, practice as how to properly use it and pg 3 maybe arm agility. Then over time (about 3 to 2.5 mya) the animal becomes a hunter, being able to strike a predator, protect, and gain control over resources. In the movie 2001 Space Odyssey, (Anthropology 100 9/5/97) Stanley Kubrick gives his interpretation on how we evolve. The movie shows groups of stem-primate type creatures who represent early proto-human communities. The creatures begin to explore their environment finding resources and developing new ways to do things. The communities battled other primate communities for the natural resources in their environment. One of the primates begins to break some objects with a bone it picked up. The primate then realizes that this bone can do major damage. When one community learns to use bones as weapons, then that group can take over the resources in a certain area and be selected for, which increases reproductive fitness. This scenario could have happened but the truth is nobody knows exactly how and why things turned out the way they did. Not just hominids use tools. Wood-peckers, vultures and sea otters are among the other animal species that evolved by using tools to capture food, but these creatures are not as heavily dependant as we are.(Diamond 1992 pg 36) Without tools evolution might have taken much longer. Tools had a major affect on teeth, hair, behavior, and even language.(Diamond 1992 pg 12) When developing and using tools, the species takes control over the environment and makes it work for them. One major change in the physical aspect of evolution is the morphology of the body. Proof of this came from the discovery of Lucy, the 2.5 million year old homo- pg 4 erectus, half monkey half human.(Havilland Eighth Edition pg 140-141) The head grew so the brain could expand, allowing hominids to think and create new tools. The mouth became smaller and teeth turned into herbivore teeth, enabling speech to develop. The widening of the pelvis was a major and critical change; it allowed the animal to walk on two feet. This change in the pelvis allowed all proto-humans to stand at long periods of time, making it more free and taller which increased vision. Having the features of better vision and maneuverability made it easier for the hominids to control the environment instead of letting the environment control them. Being able to control the environment leads to better food, healthier bodies, and better reproductive fitness and increases the quality of life. If you think about how primitive early hominids were and you look at modern day humans. How could a bone or stick make so much of a change in our bodies? The whole process is amazing and until science gets the whole story, we may never know the whole truth about how tools shaped our lives today. Who would have thought that a 0.1 percent difference in DNA could have made such a change? (Diamond 1992 pg 54) One thing is for sure, without tools evolution would have taken much longer. pg 5

Modernity: A transforming progression of human life Mankind is always transforming, moving progressively in a direction that modernizes the very fabric of being, ultimately impacting the socioreligious, cultural, economic and geopolitical aspects. Modernity, as a whole, is a reactive force a reaction of comparisons and contractions to that which existed before. Some institutions and values of society are carried through modernalistic changes, often those notions thought to be progressive and valuable to the new transitional society. Resistance to modernity is evident, but inevitably any resistance will end in failure. Modernity, as defined by Webster's Dictionary, is the state or quality of being modern. The human process of modernity has always been constant, if though at times subtle; examples of modernity have come in the form of such things as simple stone tools, the plow, and the stirrup. However, not until the 16th and 17th centuries did a great leap of modernization occur. Scientists do not wholly understand what caused the lead to modernity or really why it occurred in such a defining way. What is known is that it happened between the 16th and 18th centuries. What information also known is that modernity first began in the northwestern countries of Europe, mainly; England, and the Netherlands, northern France, and northern Germany. Northwestern Europe in the early 16th century, to put it nicely, was rather backward, both culturally and technologically. The countries therein absorbed most of its innovations from surrounding countries, primarily Spain and Italy. Realistically, northwestern Europe did not seem to be a region that would become the economic and modernistic leader of the rest of Europe. In the 16th century of northwestern Europe changes in religion were occurring. It was in the Protestant Reformation that modernalism was setting in to take place. Protestantism broke down the distinction between the religion and the rest of the world: between the church and the marketplace. Protestantism valued the aspect that everything man did was in sight of God, and therefore man should take a greater initiative in his work and work ethics. Work was to be pursued with a fitting seriousness and order, in a spirit of rational enterprise that eschewed waste and frivolous adventurism (Britannica.com). The Protestant reformation in a sense was the launch of modern capitalism. The Protestant Reformation can also be attributed to the underlying start of the advanced development of modern science. In this time, people began to steer away from religion and religious based thinking and looked towards science for answers. Effectively, it is in the shift from religion to science that was fuel to the leaps of modernity. Scientific methods of observation, experimentation, theory and discovery were practiced--thought, at first, not considered beyond skepticism and scrutiny by most of society. These scientific changes and advancements allowed people to expand and modernize to look out progressively. Modernity impacted all realms of society. A transformation was made in the basic core structure of modern society. Rather than the group or community, it was the individual that became most important. Where one would once have thought about the good of the village, that person might then be thinking about the better good of himself. Another change occurred in the division of labor. Which once was the main unit of production; the family (in peasant society) transformed and shifted to modern institutions that performed specific and specialized tasks. Society also underwent the establishment and impact of governing institutions. Rather than persons being guided by custom or tradition, modern general rules and regulations were implemented. The legitimacy of these rules stemming from methods and finding in science (Ibid.). Modernity, effectively led to and was in the pnumbra of the industrial movement. With industrialization, the economy took off into a self-sustaining growth. Investment, output, and growth took a drastic leap and the industrial system itself produced many technological changes.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Haviland, Anthropology Eight Edition. Harcourt Brace, 1997 2.Diamond, Jared The Third Chimpanzee. HarperPerennial. 1992 3. Various Internet sites

2. Leo Rosten. The Joys of Yiddish. (New York: Pocket Books, 1970), p.24. Leo Rosten. The Joys of Yiddish. (New York: Pocket Books, 1970). p. 24. William M. Kephart and William W. Zellner. Extraordinary Groups: An Examination of Unconventional Lifestyles. «The Hasidim». (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1998), p. 171. William M. Kephart and William W.Zellner. Extraordinary Groups: An Examination of Unconventional Lifestyles. «The Old Order Amish». (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1998), p. 6. William M. Kephart and William W. Zellner. Extraordinary Groups: An Examination of Unconventional Lifestyles. «The Old Order Amish». (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1998), p. 6. Philip K. Bock. Rethinking Psychological Anthropology. (Prospect Heights, Illinois: Waveland Press, Inc, 1999), p. 235. Leo Rosten. The Joys of Yiddish. (New York: Pocket Books, 1970), p. 307. William M. Kephart and William W. Zellner. Extraordinary Groups: An Examination of Unconventional Lifestyles. «The Hasidim». (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1998), p. 196.