well yes - I didn't mean to leave that out. but it was the increased food production, and developing the skills of animal husbandry (funny word that, really) that allowed specialisation to develop. you see - there was more time to begin to develop different social models, including hierarchies. Prior to this knowledge belonged to the elders. they were old, wise, had lived a long time, and passed knowledge on. There may have been a special person who had some special role - the shaman/witch doctor - but in hunter gatherer societies this was not necessarily always the case. Women also - although their knowledge may have been different from that of men - were able to be 'elders'. A sedentary lifestyle allowed the specialisation into this role, and also allowed room for 'the elders' to include younger men with time on their hands due to the yields of their households. One of the factors that may have reduced women's position was that higher calorie intake increased fertility - and as a result female life expectancy probably reduced, leaving less female elders. To be honest I think this is about the time where the original stories that became genesis began - you know - the 'go forth and multiply' sort. Also, this would have lead to the desire to accumulate more workers to increase yields further. These yields enabled the storage of food, which was important, but also became something that had a future value and required protection. Exchange had long existed in societies - hunter gatherer societies had exchanged objects for millenia - but this was something different.

All of these factors created social structures that required specialisation. In simple agrarian societies the degree of specialisation isn't great - most players possess a good range of skills, with some developing particular specialisations - but as society develops and becomes more hierarchical, the degree of specialisation increases.

hmmm - I guess its not exactly a linear model of societal development. It seems that a small bit of specialisation here, mixed with a couple of wives here, for practical purposes, not about power/control/exploitation of women, the introduction of additional temporary/bonded labour - whether spoils of war, via an agreement with a neighbouring family or a traveller passing through and picking up and sharing knowledge and skills he has learnt elsewhere, small changes in technology - sometimes also acquired via trading knowledge from other peoples - and a few good harvests and we move to the next step - until eventually we get to those magnificent kingdoms of the ancient world, and highly intellectual leaders who desire to create 'good' societies - such as Hammurabi.

When we get to this level we begin to see legislation coming in to determine how we relate to each other, we see that roles in society, including how we treat our servants, slaves and the poor becomes 'legislated' and more formalised.

If we compare the beginnings of such societies, under such rulers, we see a lot of good in the way people are regarded. We can also see negatives, especially to our modern eyes. It is hard to say how much of an improvement all this is for any group. certainly if we look at the position of women among the !kung, or the Australian aborigines - it wasn't as bad as what we have seen in some more 'advanced' societies. And I think this is interesting.

My suspicion is that the position of women becomes worse under a 'failed' society, than one which has never 'advanced' to that level. I haven't really looked into it, but virtually every instance I have come across where the position of women is poor, it seems as if a civilisation has crashed in one way or another, or that people have been coopted into a dominant society, as a second class/colonised group. Just a theory, however cross cultural studies on domestic violence show that tribal people who move into shanty towns as a result of land takeovers generally start the cycle of violence, even where this was unknown in their traditional cultures. It is a long shot I know - but I think poor treatment of our fellow human beings is generally symptomatic of some pathological, rather than normal state.

Anthropologists who have studied chimpanzees living near refugee camps over several decades have seen similar increases in violent behaviour.

yes. I will get there soon. but right now I'm only becoming Dark Age Daisy