I must say I cannot see how the three statements in the previous post are related in any way in argument. They are not even contradictory....
Hunter gatherers have a lot more free time than farmers, factory workers or office serfs.
very true. relation to shaving? both shaving and non shaving hunter-gatherers as well as agriculturalists, pastoral nomads etc. are known. I personally would not relate shaving to "free time". besides, free time is a modern concept that juxtaposes "work time". long debate ensues
And flint knives were sharper than anything short of surgical steel, so the technology for shaving would have been there from the mesolithic.
This is very true, even sharper than surgical steel, but
I am not sure if anyone made experiments on shaving with flint...so, Assumption: in order to shave with flint a straight, non retouched blank is needed, say a "preferential flake". Since we are discussing the cultural technique of shaving, the skill of a standardized production is needed.
To make things easy, let's say le Vallois flint technology, the Mousterian of the middle paleolithic, 250KY BP.
(in terms of lithics, the Mesolithic is known for standardized small implements and standardized blade technology that optimizes it)
the current research shows that it was the move to farming that allowed the growth on none gathering roles in the groups. With less pressure on the group to find food evry day other roles such as tanners, metal workers became possible and as specialists helped to remove pressure on other parts of the group trade of skills for food via barter grew.
very true; the development of division of labour as summed up from the Mesolithic to bronze age. some 7000 years at least....
a bit oversimplified in terms of the causality chain. Relation to intra- or intergroup differentiation through hair grooming? hm.....
I think shaving would have been required (though to what level is questionable) solely for hygiene and practice reasons.
have read this theory, derived from the shaving of body and head hair in the early antiquity (development and growth uf urbanism) and related to avoidance of hygiene problems, yet Egyptians, Hitites, Sumerians, You name it, had very elaborate beard fashions, and these can harbour lice too, as well as the hair pieces that covered the shaven heads...
I am not convinced....
I prefer the simple approach:
we do not know the phylogenetic diversity expressed in the facial hair neither from Neanderthal nor from Cromagnon.
The prevalance of facial hair in modern populations that originate from the home of the neanderthals (just to preempt a possible argument
) could seduce to the hypothesis that Neanderthals were bearded (in fact I would rather opt for the tradition of how the "primitive" hominids were portrayed, barbarians).
The absence of facial hair in modern african population could also lead to depicting the theory "out of africa II" of the home of the Cromagnon by showing them without facial hair.
Especially when wanting to juxtapose them as "different" from Neanderthal. Or more cultured, intelligent, superior, pick the racist sterotype of your choice
differing physique=different culture
not a valid equation (maybe in the 19th century)
different subsistence=different technologies=different social techniques
not a valid equation either
tasty red wine+access to internet forums?
maybe not a good idea for me