WI Homo Erectus slave trade...

Inspired by the hobbit slave trade thread. Since Homo Erectus are much larger they would actually be quite useful for manual labor. They are actually stronger than a modern human I do believe, so they could do jobs that we likely couldn't without the assistance of technology.

How would a Homo Erectus slave trade effect Africa, where the majority would likely come from? Would this eliminate the African slave trade, since Homo Erectus slaves would actually be more useful for heavy labor, and it would be seen as (arguably) less morally repugnant?

And this of course assumes they survived in significant quantities alongside modern humans. I know they are extinct in the OTL timeline, I'm not an idiot. So please don't post reminding me of this fact. :p
 

NapoleonXIV

Banned
They wouldn't be seen as slaves, esp if they'd evolved alongside us, but as domesticated animals.

We'd probably use them for work and food. The major difference is we might also use them for sex. This would have very profound effects on human society in general, esp if we could breed with them, and most of human history is butterflied away pretty quickly
 
Humans only developed the need for slaves and cheap labour once civilizations started, by which time Homo Erectus would long be extinct.

Wait... you already said that.

OK, I'll think revise my answer and then repost it later.
 
i dont buy into that whole interbreeding thing, personally i dont se how a group of people identifiing with a given tribe or ethnic group, would alow interbreeding with a group they percieve as ider inferior or competition or both
also how likely is it they become "domesticated animals" as these were by all chances relatively resorsefull hominids living in large tribelike packs, like most primates including humans, and a contact of two such populations would probbably not end in domestication, possibly forced enslavement

also if a major population of homo erectus survives somewhere on earth, by the time any human groupation develops to the point where they need to import or aquire slaves from outside their territory and ethnic groups, cultural taboos, superiority complexes, and the repetition of warious racist phenomena common to human culture, would make it practically imposible for humans to interact with said hominids in such a way as to crossbreed with them, exept in a hipotetical attempt to create breeds of hominids separate from the original, and even then members of human groups seen as inferior by the established cultural hegemony, would be used, aie humans who are already slaves and so percived as being on the same level

other than the possibility of breeding hominids much like dogs or horses, there could be a question of tehnologic interaction, that is, ewen if these beings were unable to produce new tehnologies on theyr own, weather becouse of a lack of mental capacity or simply the form of culture and economy they perpetuated, they would still most likely be able to peplicate simpler forms, and definitly able to use ready made human tehnology
 

NapoleonXIV

Banned
i dont buy into that whole interbreeding thing, personally i dont se how a group of people identifiing with a given tribe or ethnic group, would alow interbreeding with a group they percieve as ider inferior or competition or both
also how likely is it they become "domesticated animals" as these were by all chances relatively resorsefull hominids living in large tribelike packs, like most primates including humans, and a contact of two such populations would probbably not end in domestication, possibly forced enslavement

also if a major population of homo erectus survives somewhere on earth, by the time any human groupation develops to the point where they need to import or aquire slaves from outside their territory and ethnic groups, cultural taboos, superiority complexes, and the repetition of warious racist phenomena common to human culture, would make it practically imposible for humans to interact with said hominids in such a way as to crossbreed with them, exept in a hipotetical attempt to create breeds of hominids separate from the original, and even then members of human groups seen as inferior by the established cultural hegemony, would be used, aie humans who are already slaves and so percived as being on the same level

other than the possibility of breeding hominids much like dogs or horses, there could be a question of tehnologic interaction, that is, ewen if these beings were unable to produce new tehnologies on theyr own, weather becouse of a lack of mental capacity or simply the form of culture and economy they perpetuated, they would still most likely be able to peplicate simpler forms, and definitly able to use ready made human tehnology

We got a thread here about a guy who was the RECEIVER end of sex with a PIG, and you're talking about what primitive people would ALLOW???

If it feels good, people will do it, esp if there's profit to be made by viable interbreeding.
 
We got a thread here about a guy who was the RECEIVER end of sex with a PIG, and you're talking about what primitive people would ALLOW???

If it feels good, people will do it, esp if there's profit to be made by viable interbreeding.

I think he meant on a wide scale. Of course there will always be 'sickos'.

Also, I assume that homo erectus and human populations would remain separated similar to how human/chimp and human/gorilla populations did in the OTL until humanity reaches an appropriate level of civilization where it feels it needs slave labor.
 

bard32

Banned
I think he meant on a wide scale. Of course there will always be 'sickos'.

Also, I assume that homo erectus and human populations would remain separated similar to how human/chimp and human/gorilla populations did in the OTL until humanity reaches an appropriate level of civilization where it feels it needs slave labor.

Slavery, unfortunately, though it's been banned by every civilized country,
is still a part of human society, albeit an underground condition. It's banned by
the U.S. Constitution, British law, since 1807, and the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights.
 
well thats... nice.. of them... did they also outlaw heawy narcotics, sanction the use of landmines, say "newer again" to genocide fo a thousand times, condemned putting entire populations in ghetos, and define the organised bombing of civilian areas as a warcrime?

but no seariousy, if humans have a tendency to declare subhuman a population simply becouse of diferent facial lines or skin color, or numerous times just for having a wrong surname, wrong belief sistem, or living on rhe wrong side of a river, imagine how we would regard a population that was of a literarly diferent species, and a less developed one at that.
 
Last edited:
Turtledove's "A Different Flesh" touches on this issue...as well as how the existence of a clearly sub-human but "human-like" species would help eliminate racism among human varieties.

Also, I think a lot would depend on what Homo Erectus actually looked like, something we really can't know. If they exhibited ape-like hair, it is more likely they would be seen as a clearly different species and treated/exploited as such. On the other hand, if, as now commonly imagined, they were largely hairless like modern humans, they might be perceived as a form of human, especially since they were tool-and-fire makers.

Also, modern humans might be interfertile with H. erectus. We obviosuly share much more genetic material than with the great apes. We are perceived as different species largely because we are separated by 500,000 years. No way to check to see if breeding between the two groups wouild result in viable offspring.
 
Top