Slightly modified, the title is taken from a private letter in which Mari-Jos Amerlinck and Juan Fernando Bontempo are referring to the above Current Anthropology-reply.
In the iconically rich transitional field between predynastic village cultures, regional clusters and early empire formation in Ancient Egypt (and Mesopotamia) the territorial implications of 'nuclear demarcation' can be reconstructed in the framework of 'settlement core complexes' evolving to higher levels with territorial, social and constitutional (theocratical) hierarchies (H. Kees 1956, Andrae 1930, 1933, Heinrich 1934, 1957, Bollnow 1963).With this model the mesolithic processes of increasingly sedentary communities and their neolithic culmination in agrarian village cultures can fairly easily be understood if one assumes that the dominantly functional type of 'fibroconstructive nuclear demarcation' in a system of polar categorical analogies increasingly acquires ontological values which secure the territories among different groups now on the higher level of a social value system. Thus, the answer to the question "Why did nests become reusable and long-lasting?" must presuppose a structuro-evolutionary line which parallels (and precedes) that of the hut (domestic architecture). Architectural anthropology calls it 'semantic architecture' (ethno/pre/historically: fetish/ maypole/ life-tree/ tree of cognition/ tectiformes-complex; Egenter 1986). The basic function of this 'semantic architecture' is focussed on territorial demarcation. It thus prepares the grounds for domestic and sedentary architecture being "reusable" and "long-lasting"!
The female with her baby is securely placed in the centre of the camp in a tree nest. All others build their ground nests on points of a pentagon. Very likely the dominant male secures the access path to the temporary dwelling space. If this were the case we could recognise this camp as a spatial pattern which is dominant throughout human architecture (access-place scheme; Egenter 1983).
For the terms 'micro- and macrotheoretical' see the chapter "Micro- and Macrotheories" in Egenter 1992.
Such 'innovations', however, were observed in the wild of present apes, for example tearing off grasses, transporting them to a heaped siesta nest. Savage-Rumbaugh et al. (1996) reported about Bonobos sticking branches into the earth (about 8 cm) to vertically stabilise them as 'traffic signs' for following Bonobo-groups. Thus the full range of dispositions for an architectural evolution can be observed among present apes in the wild, but they are not 'developed'.
McGrew (1929) critically discusses the term culture quite extensively, but ends up favouring its 'biologisation' with a point-program of several criteria. Evidently establishing a connex between the huge modern container called 'culture' and its most heterogeneous contents and the fairly simple 'culture' of 'nutcracking' and 'ant fishing' etc. is difficult! Certainly, McGrew does not provide enough support for an AHA-experience in view of 'culture'! Probably the nuclear impetus of culture would have to be assumed as something obviously 'primitive' on one hand, but something with a high potential for complexity. The Yerkesian definition of 'constructivity' includes this potential. In our view the nest as 'constructivity' forms the gateway to what we call 'nuclear demarcation' as a general term, covering phaseological types like subhuman, semantic, domestic and sedentary types of demarcation in the framework of a 'habitat anthropology' focussed on the evolution of a complex human settlement structure called 'settlement core complex'. (Egenter 1994 :249)
Except in the case of von Frisch (1974)! See in this context Pallasmaa's (1995) marvellously illustrated 'architectural' contribution to zoology! This lack of structural perception is also expressed in the tense practice of recent primatology to present results in schematic listings. Groves/Sabater Pi (1985) did not use even one of the rich illustrations on nest building provided by former observers in the field (Egenter 1983).
Response to nesting materials of wild born and captive born chimpanzees. In Animal Behaviour, 10, 1-6
A comparison of nesting patterns among the three great apes. In G. H. Bourne (ed.) The Chimpanzee. I, :393-402,Karger, Basel
Bollnow, O. W.
Mensch und Raum. Stuttgart
Nest building of the Pongidae - a form of subhuman constructivity? Paper read at the Symposium ÔPrimatology: Evolutionary processes'; American Association, Annual meeting 4. - 7. Dec.,Washington
Affen-Architekten (Ape architects; the nest building traditions of the higher apes, an architectural anthropological survey). In: Umriss 2/1983 :2-9, Vienna 1986
Software for a soft prehistory; structural history and structural ergology as applied to a type of universally distributed 'soft industry': sacred territorial demarcation signs made of non durable organic materials. The World Archaeological Congress, (precirculated papers). Southampton and London
Foundation for an Anthropological Theory of Architecture - What has the Nest building Behaviour of the Higher Apes to do with Post-Modern Architecture? (English and Japanese). In: Architecture and urbanism (A&U) Feb. , No 197, Tokyo
Evolutionary architecture: Nest building among Higher Apes. In: International Semiotic Spectrum, A Publication of the Toronto Semiotic Circle, Nr. 14, Sept.
Rivestimento - Incrostazione - Metabolismodella Forma nell'opera die Gottfried Semper e Applicazione della sua Tesiprincipale nella recente Ricerca anthropologica architectturale (Clothing,Incrustation, Metabolism of Form in the work of Gottfried Semper and the Application of his basic Theory in recent research into Architectural Anthropology). In: A. Ambrosi, E. Degano, C.A. Zaccaria (ed.): Architettura in Pietra a Secco; Atti del primo Seminario Internazionale 'Architettura in Pietra a Secco', Schena Editore, Fasano, Bari (Italy)
The present relevance of the Primitive in Architecture. Architectural Anthropology - Research series vol. 1, Lausanne
Semantic architecture and the interpretation of prehistoric rock art: An ethno-(pre-) historical approach. In: Semiotica 100-2/4 :201-266
Foy, G. Ph. de
1984 Les Pygmes d'Afrique Centrale. Coll. Architectures traditionnelles; Parenthses. Marseille
Frisch, K. von
Animal Architecture London, N. Y.
Fruth, B. and Hohmann G.
Nest building behaviour in the great apes: the great leap forward? In: McGrew et. al.: Great Ape Societies,Cambridge :225-240
Groves, C. J. and Sabater Pi, J.
From Apes Nest to Fixpoint. In: Man, 20 :22-47
Nest and home. Folia primatologica, 28, 170-87
Schilf und Lehm. Ein Beitrag zur Baugeschichte der Sumerer. Studien zur Bauforschung. Heft 6, Berlin
Bauwerke in der altsumerischen Bildkunst.Schriften der Max Freiherr von Oppenheim Stiftung. Heft 2. Wiesbaden.
Hirschberg / Janata
Ergologie und Technologie in der Ethnologie. Berlin
Kawai, M. and Mizuhara, H.
An ecological study on the wild mountain gorilla. In Primates, 2,1
La maison des origines - Essai de Critique anthropologique. Paris/ Milan/ Barcelone
McGrew, W. C.
Chimpanzee Material Culture - Implications for Human Evolution. Cambridge
McGrew, W. C., L. F. Marchant and ToshisadaNishida (ed.)
Great Ape Societies, Cambridge, :225-240
Encyclopaedia of Vernacular Architecture of the World. 3 vols. Cambridge
Pallasmaa, J. (ed.)
Animal Architecture. Museum of Finnish Architecture, Helsinki
Sabater Pi, J.
Etologia de la Vivienda Humana. De los nidos de gorila y chimpances a la vivienda humana. Barcelona
Sabater Pi, J., J. J. Vea and J. Serrallonga
Did the first Hominids build nests? In: Current Anthropology, vol. 38, Nr. 5, Dec., :914-16
Savage-Rumbaugh, E. S., S.L. Williams T.Furuichi and T. Kano
Language perceived: Paniscus branches out.In: McGrew, W. C. et al (ed): Great Ape Societies, Cambridge, :173-195
Wernhart, K. R.
Kulturgeschichte und Ethnohistorie als Strukturgeschichte. In: W. Schmied-Kowarzik and J. Stagl (eds.): Grundfragen der Ethnologie. Beitrge zur gegenwrtigen Theorien-Diskussion, :233-52, Berlin
Yerkes, R. M. and Yerkes, A. W.
The Great Apes. New Haven