There is a clearly recorded case of a gorilla settlement (night camp, Kawai and Mizuhara 1959, see Egenter 1983, 1998*).This supports our suggestion of a primary sedentary element, the assumption of spatial organisation (SO) defined by fibroconstructive demarcations.
The term 'systematical' is important here and is meant in contrast to historical. This difference can best be explained by an example. Until Darwin, biology in general conceived the content of the term animal as an endless variation of classes and species, a worldwide population that, temporally had its origins in creation. This concept was essentially supported by historical sources in the narrow, that is, written sense. Time dimension: less than 2000 but referring to about 3-4000 years (theocraties of Ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia). Darwin fundamentally questioned this interpretation. He was strongly influenced by the geology of his time. It provided an entirely new periodisation suggesting geological strata as a much deeper reaching time scale. Animals found in these strata must definitely have lived much earlier than just some few thousand years ago. This is where the systematic aspect comes in. Darwin reconstructed the same question, 'the origins of the animals' with an entirely different 'system' contrasting fundamentally with historical hermeneutics. First he definitely showed that the content of the term animal was not static but dynamic, and second, that biology and geology were able to provide a new 'history of life'. In addition, zoology worked intensely on the inner structural systems of the animals and their evolutionary processes. Man became conscious of his biological roots. This type of post Darwinian 'history of life' can be called 'systematic'. The history of a defined subject is understood through the totality of its syn- and diachronical characteristics, not simply derived from a dated historical source.