Do you notice a flaw in the following description (hint: if there’s an error, then it’s in the italicized section…;))
There was once a community of Etruscan people who, between 800 and 600 BC, inhabited a zone of land that was dominated by a single large hill some 1000 feet high in what we call the Italian peninsula today. The hill had two fixed settlements, one halfway up the hill on the north side and the other halfway up the hill on the south side. Over the course of each year, they moved from the north side to the south side and back again, spending more or less half of their total lives on each side as follows; from the months of October to March they lived on the northern settlement, and when April came, they moved over to the settlement on the south side of the same hill, living there until the end of September came, whence they moved back to their north settlement, and so on.
If this description is flawed, what would you change about the description (in italics) that would make it, if not perfect, at least consistent with what you know about human behavior in response to the environment. Assume that the migration wasn’t difficult, and that the settlements were equally well stocked and the migration was voluntary.
Do you think that the community of Etruscans would live in the way that I described, or is the error that you noticed, if not corrected, describe a way of life of a community that the Etruscans during that time period, would be highly unlikely to have lived, to the level of certainty where you feel like they just wouldn’t have done that? How sure are you, percentage wise, that the Etruscans did NOT live in the particular way that I described, but did so in some different way (that doesn’t completely change the description but modifies it in a single aspect that makes the description, from that change alone, become distinctly more plausible?)
Thanks so much!