They’re no doubt dwindiling, but there have been stone age cultures very recent in the ethnographic record; up until 20 or 30 years ago, many of them still used stone technology exclusively. When my department head did an ethnography on the Dani of New Guinea in the 1970’s they were still using stone age technology.
Politician was mentioned earlier, but how about leader? The one who decides things. You see this in animals, with the alpha male or the top dog.
The thing about being a leader, though, is that on a hunter gatherer level it’s a much less formalized institution than what we think of as leader of a society. Our contemporary notion of a “tribal chieftain” is sort of tied up in a romaticized version of a sort of noble savage monarchy. In a hunter gatherer or agriculturalist culture the leader is most often in the “Big Man” model, an informal position held by the guy who is listened to only because he’s the smartest or most experienced. It’s not a hereditary position and doesn’t actually hold any authority other than influence. On a lesser scale anyone can be a Big Man for a day, if he influences the group to follow his course of action. At any rate, the Big Man doesn’t enjoy any special privilege in the group and does the same activities everyone else does, he just gets listened to more often.
Astronomer probably wouldn’t be too far off the mark.
All this stuff about hunting, gathering, farming, etc… this is all off the mark as well. So is trade. In the spirit of the question, these don’t really count as professions, because they’re for self-sustenance. A true profession would be any service or goods traded so that one doesn’t have to produce one’s own sustenance.
This being the case, I would go with either politician or religious leader, not joking at all. The leader of the clan (or spiritual leader), by virtue of skill, strength, or leadership ability, would have been the first person who could coast through life without the burden of directly providing his (or her) own sustenance, by virtue of these services provided to others.
If on the other hand you regard those as social positions and not technical professions, then I would argue that medicine is another possible candidate. Botanical healers are people who could conceivably spend all their time learning and practicing their profession, and trading this knowledge for sustenance and security rather than producing it for themselves.
Shamans are healers in HG cultures.
Yes, stone-age, but only stone? I’d like to see a cite on a present-day HG that still uses flint, etc exclusively.
Based on written records, apparently the oldest profession is “Clerk”. 
Erm… what? Since when did skill level become part of the definition of a profession?
I don’t dispute that shamanism covers a spectrum of roles. However I was acknowledging the distinction between the ends of the spectrum. A shaman who sees visions and makes decisions for a tribe essentially reduces to a leader who derives authority from knowledge or the appearance of knowledge, either of the natural world, or how to best lead the tribe. Thus some people might consider shamanism more of a social role like mother, father, leader, provider, rather than a technical profession.
If on the other hand you were talking about someone in a non-leadership role who spent all their time learning the healing arts and plants, and was excused from hunting and foraging for this reason, that would indisputably be considered a technical profession. And being that this wouldn’t be far removed from shamanism, that would make it pretty old.
When didn’t it? :dubious:
Are you being serious? If so, what skill level is required to qualify as a profession.
So far, Googling “worlds oldest profession” gives me mostly hit on bad joke and innuendoes about hookers, and many claims that flintknapping really is. Of course, that’s just a consensus, and isn’t proof by any means.
Here’s a decent cite:
*Either way, flintknapping is the world’s oldest documented profession, popular mythology not withstanding. *
However, evidence of flintknapping is older than evidence of shamanism or art. That does not prove that flintknapping was the 1st stand-alone profession, of course.
Yes, only stone, until relatively recently. I don’t know about “present day” as in right this second, but if by present day culture you mean has there been a culture observed and recorded within the last century that relied exclusively on stone age technology, yes, there have been many, like the Dani I mentioned:
A Glimpse of the Stone Age, Daniel Weld, Professor of Anthropology, University of Washington.
Well, even giving “A Chronological History of the Martial Arts and Combative Sports” the benefit of the doubt, Mr. Svinth appears to have a master’s in history and is speaking outside of his discipline. More importantly, though, that’s not really a cite. It’s a sustitution of assertions: his for yours. He just makes a statement and doesn’t supply us with and data or argument to evaluate it.
Any work that requires sufficient training/experience that an ordinary person of good intelligence could not do it with 24Hrs± notice or the same in on-the-job training.
Jobs that you can do that with are merely…jobs.
True, but it’s something, I can’t find anything better that supports Shaman, can you?
As to the New Guinea tribes, oddly my Father worked as a liason with them during WWII. Admittedly his job was just “getting them to kill more Japs”, but I know they had steel weapons then, in fact I have a primitive “bolo” type machete or bushknife made by a NG tribesman, hammered out of some scrap steel. Very sharp, I might add, and dating from WWII.
Next your cite makes no mention of professions (other than “Big Man”) or who does the stoneworking. For all we know, each village supports a FT “professional” stoneworker.
However, those tribes have had steel since WWII as I said, and at least “since the last 30 years” as your own cite said (which depending on the tribe, the figures are fairly close, too)
This cite:
“Shields provide defense against weapons which include bows with bone or bamboo-tipped arrows, sharp wooden spears, stone axes and bone knives. Contemporary additions are metal bush knives, steel axes and guns, some homemade or smuggled in the black market drug trade between Australia and New Guinea.”
Here’s an article about the Kamoro, another “stone-age” tribe:
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:IrDMjt1IGcYJ:www.papuaweb.org/dlib/tema/kamoro/muller-sda/07.rtf+Irian+Jaya+tribe+metal+tools&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=4
"The Kamoro returns to the fallen sago tree in a few days, with his *trusty metal-tipped spear * and the chances of bagging a boar are excellent. "
An artilce about the Asmat tribe:
“Contemporary and civilized Asmat use metal tools”
I don’t doubt that some stone tools are still used. But in order for you to support your hypothesis, you’d have to show a more or less 100% stone culture that does not support a “professional” stoneworkers/toolmaker, but does support other “professions”. Your cite fails to do this.
Culture Change and Development in the Balim Valley, Irian Jaya, Indonesia. p. 118. Naylor, Larry Lee, 1974.
Ah, but the Dani are an agricultural society, not a Hunter-gatherer society. From your cite “The Dani are sweet potato horticulturalists…The remainder of the diet consists of a number of other cultigens and mainly pig meat.” The cite does go on to say “The Dani are hunters of sorts; hunting for small forest marsupials, birds and field rodents…Field rodents are hunted with a branch from a tree or a bush.” The Dani also have no suitable stone for themselves, they trade for stone tools “The (stone) blades are traded into the valley as there is no quarry in the Balim”. Thus, the specialist “flintknapper” can’t exist within the Dani society, but may well have existed within the other tribes the Dani traded with. (I use the past tense as I have to assume the Dani now use some metal tools, since that article was written in 1974). Note that your cite goes on to say that “The Dani are, technically speaking, a “stone age” culture as that their technology is based on the use of stone tools. While stone tools are important, the culture could just as easily be termed a “wood” or “string” culture…Nearly all of the cultural materials of the Dani are actually fashioned from forest materials: fiber and wood.”
Thus, the Dani aren’t even a HG society, don’t make their own stone tools to any extent, and don’t even use many stone tools. Of course they don’t have a FT “pro” flintknapper- they don’t even have any flint to knapp. 
Not a good example, I’d say. A real HG socity, with a source of flint and a need for many flint weapons is much more likely to need a FT flintknapper (and early man sites very often have a lot of evidence of flintknapping, even though I concede we can’t tell if it was one dude or every hunter knapping said flint). Agriculture came later, not before HG, thus Flintknapper could well precede shaman.
Or perhaps Shaman was first. Who can tell? Certainly those were two of the first “professions”.
Dr. Deth can we possibly have a reputable reference that profesional flint nappers have ever existed in HG societies? I’ve read a lot about a lot of different HG societies in Australasia, Asia, the Americas and Africa and have never seen a single reference implying that anything remotely like a professional stone worker existed in any of them.
Such specialisation would seem to be impossible to achieve within HG scoeities purely for practical purposes.
Of course the same limitation also applies to shaman as a profession. I’ve never seen any evidence that Shamans were ever professionals in pre-agricultural societies. Certainly some people, usually the most elderly in each clan, would be entrusted with shamanic duties but such people still did still just as much work supporting themselves as every other member of the tribe.
Shamanism in HG societies provides prestige and perhaps marriage rights. I’ve never seen any suggestion that it was rewarded with food, goods or services. As such it fails the most fundamental requirement for a profession.
Shamans in agricultural societies were and are rewarded for their duties, thus leading to the development of a preisthood, but once again the profession of farmer and tax getherer have to exist [ibefore* shaman as aprofession is viable.
Because you personally have never seen any such suggestion, that means it doesn’t exist?
Not really. If a tribe of hunters and gatherers decide that the shaman’s role is so important that they’ll do his hunting and gathering for him, then that qualifies as trade. You don’t need a tax-man or organized farming for basic trade.