Wouldn t prehistoric humans have been skinny? Why is there this belief they would have been large, strong, and fit?

Question

Here is my argument:

Food was scarce in the prehistoric era and difficult to come by. Even if you were a part of a hunter-gatherer society, it is still likely it would have been hard to get food.

This is probably why many, many tribes were nomadic - you can t stay in any one place for too long due to its limited recourses.

This lack of access to food would mean pre-historic humans would not be getting the necessary nutrients required for muscular growth. To develop more muscles you have to be in a calorie surplus. The prehistoric humans probably were in calorie surpluses sometimes, but probably rarely. They probably would have only gotten just enough food to maintain muscle and minimum body fat, sometimes maybe even less.

Men and women who are fit today have access not only to specially designed gym/exercise equipment, but the right kinds of food they need to be strong.

Do you really think the average prehistoric adult human male would have been capable of consuming 3,000 calories across 6 meals EVERY. SINGLE. DAY?

I suspect prehistoric humans would have been  thin but fit , not  ripped  like today s bodybuilders.

Bret · Accepted Answer

That is probably a generally accurate assumption about Paleolithic Homo Sapiens.  There are still some primitive groups of people in the world today, and they likely have similar lifestyles and appearance to our Paleolithic ancestors, particularly the nomadic peoples.

Yet Homo Sapiens are only one species of human - there were several others, now extinct, which co-existed with each other.  Neanderthals in particular were larger and more muscular than Homo Sapiens, simply due to their genetic differences.  There is genetic evidence today that suggests inter-breeding between the different human species, and that many modern humans do have neanderthal ancestry.

At any rate, bodybuilding is a modern phenomena, and few humans would have had such muscular development previous to the last century.  For any humans spending much of their day on their feet, excess muscle mass would not only have been undesirable, but unattainable.  Ancient humans would have certainly been fit in general, and many would have been strong,  but few if any would have carried excess muscle mass.

Mr. G · Answer

They were not nomadic because food was limited, the were nomadic because they followed their food source, which occurred seasonally. Usually they would return more ore less to the same spots the next year.

Prehistoric man ate a lot of meat and given that they drove species go extinction over the course of several centuries indicates that they had no trouble finding meat.

No one never said they had the physiques of bodybuilders, which is really done through cheating by taking supplements and vitamins outside of their food.source. The very fact that you need "specially designed gyms" only renforces the cheating aspect. Man was a lot more physical back then, running around, carrying heavy loads, rowing, chopping trees withba stonecaxe and doing repetitive task would have  been enough to build some muscles.

Tim D · Answer

Cro-Magnon man was muscular, even by today's standards, and some males reached at least six and a half feet tall.

It is quite possible to judge the muscularity of a human from their skeleton.

Louie O · Answer

Survival of the fittest. The weak wouldn't of lasted long in those days.

ray o · Answer

who said they were ripped?

Wouldn t prehistoric humans have been skinny? Why is there this belief they would have been large, strong, and fit?

5 Antworten