I've been reading Mark Nathan Cohen's Health and the Rise of Civilization recently.  A couple of passages were interesting:

"In game-rich environments or when large animals are available, hunters may average 10,000 to 15,000 kilocalories or more per hour of work even with relatively simple weapons....  The only other wild resource that can be harvested at a rate competitive with large game animals are some varieties of nuts (which still require much more time-consuming preparation) and anadromous (migratory) fish that can be caught en masse in nets or traps.  The choicest of vegetable resources (other than nuts) may be harvestable at rates of 5,000 to 6,000 kilocalories per hour ... in contrast to the figures just provided, subsistence cultivation in various parts of the world (most of whom now use metal tools) seems to average 3,000 to 5,000 kilocalories per hour of work."  (p. 56)

That tends to confirm the idea that gathering is likely of less importance when there are large animals to be hunted, such as in the paleolithic, rather than only smaller animals, as is more common with modern hunter gatherers.

Also:

"Comparison of the efficiency of spear hunting, bow hunting, net hunting, and blowgun hunting seem to suggest that spear hunting of large animals is more efficient than obtaining small animals by any of the other methods; in addition, the spear may be the weapon of choice when large animals are available."  (p. 169)

That suggests that neanderthals' lack of bows and arrows may not have been because of technological backwardness, but simply lack of need.

How about gathering bugs, grubs, ants, shells, crabs?  Those are super easy.
Maybe the scientists need to factor those foods in.

That suggests that neanderthals' lack of bows and arrows may not have been because of technological backwardness, but simply lack of need.

I agree. Neanderthals were strong so that, for them, spears would have been a good weapon for taking down large game. Severals spears can do a good deal of damage.

The energy efficiency argument for larger prey is self explanatory.

Quote from: avelin on August 26, 2010, 02:51:07 PM

Quote

That suggests that neanderthals' lack of bows and arrows may not have been because of technological backwardness, but simply lack of need.

The energy efficiency argument for larger prey is self explanatory.

Definitely, but it is great to see the numbers laid out in black and white.

At the same time, why get close to a large dangerous animal if you can kill it from further away? Killing the animal from further away has the advantage of reducing the possibility of getting injured during the hunt. I am not talking about bows and arrows, but about throwing spears, which as far as I am aware the neanderthals didn't use (they only used close range spears, right?).

I'm sure Early Modern Humans had devised some pretty innovative hunting techniques that went beyond the stereotypical "run & stab" method of hunting.

Pit traps--a small group would dig a trench, cover it with foliage, and direct a herd towards it. Any animal that fell in would be quickly dispatched--Moderate to high energy expenditure (digging would have been made easier with more people, and they could surround a herd and drive it in short spurts).

Noose traps--set with a tree, bait, and wait. Minimal energy expenditure.

Gathering eggs, shellfish and bugs--already mentioned. Minimal.

Throwing spears (used in the Paleolithic era) would allow for greater distance between the hunter and prey--moderate to high (if one had to chase their prey).

Sling--used to hunt small game. Minimal to moderate depending on tracking and chasing.

Fishing with nets & hooks--minimal to moderate.

http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo2/mod_homo_5.htm

I would also hesitate to compare Neaderthals with EMH's, simply because we are not descended from them. Our mutual ancestors diverged, one branch evolving into us, and the other branch the dead-end of the Neaderthals. A lot would have happened concerning our diet from Homo heidelbergensis (mutual ancestor) to Homo sapiens. Also, Neaderthals developed diets specific to the cold European climate, whereas Homo sapiens came from Africa and spread into the European region halfway through the reign of Neaderthals.