This story from the Economist magazine’s online version titled Homo economicus (can you think of a stranger title for an article? come on!) claims that homo sapiens probably caused the homo neanderthalensis to go extinct because the sapiens were good at economics. Specifically, they were good at division of labor. The ones who got their rocks off hunting, hunted. Those who liked picking the low-hanging fruit, picked it. Those who watched the hunters and fruit pickers work and told them better ways to do the job they were doing became managers.

The article further posits that the Neanderthals died from the sapiens turning specialization into an advantage. The sapien hunters got all the meat, the fruit picker got the most fruit, the sapiens were healthier, if not cleaner and better groomed, had more sex and generally had a good time. The Neanderthals got less meat or had to work harder at it, had to climb higher into the trees to get their fruit, and because they had to work so hard to eat, had less sex, meaning fewer Neanderthals. Malnutrition probably didn’t help either.

I don’t believe that the article ever mentioned “sex” directly, but refers to fertility that was driven by more meat. I have always found that being around a “meat market” increased my virility, if not my fertility. I have fortunately never tested the fertility part while at the meat market.

I don’t know that I buy all of this, but it is interesting from an anthropology point of view. They say that they found stone tools from long distances away. To them, this is an indication of trade. Some think that it may have been better sapien tools and weapons. Personally, if one believes in any of this evolutionary theory at all, I believe that it would have been a factor of all of these. Trade is good, division of labor is good, but when scare resources are threatened, war results. It may have been primitive war that occured over the body of an animal that was just killed, or it could have been a mob of people from the village attacking another village. Better tools and weapons quite visibly help here–if you kill off those trying to take your meat, food or women, then you are better off. This is the same whether in defense or offense. Division of labor would help again, because the hunters may or may not be the best warriors too.

All in all, it was an interesting article. At least it did not go into using yams as coinage.