Admittedly my attempt at this isn’t too far from the typical “they just eat fish” solution, but I thought it would be interesting to play with how they acknowledge their respective statuses as predators and prey.
The two species have different but complimentary funeral rites. When a prey animal dies, it is ritually butchered and its meat consumed by a predator. When a predator dies, seeds are buried with the body so their remains fertilize crops that are eaten by members of the prey species. Specific individuals or families are chosen by the deceased in their will to carry out this task, and the relationship is treated like being a godparent.
I got this spacefaring race of what are basically big sentient tardigrades. There is a subspecies among them that are used as cattle that they trade with other races for whatever they need.
(Apologies if this ends up a double post. I replied to this comment in my notifications and it just fell into the abyss. Lemmy is weird like that. I’ve sometimes seen things I’ve only posted once show up two or three times in a row, too)
Anyway, I love the idea of a sapient species having a closely related nonsapient species. Yinrih have nonsapient congeners called tree dwellers. Humans often compare them to chimps, and while their intelligence is about on par with chimps, tree dwellers look indistinguishable from yinrih, at least to humans. Yinrih traditionally consider themselves to be sapient tree dwellers, even though they are different species, and there is a faction of yinrih that wants to shed their sapience and join their cousins in irrationality.
How big are these tardigrades?
Suppose the predators just eat other animals? I think if we found out pigs are sapient we wouldn’t stop eating cows and chickens. Is the predator species’ diet supposed to just be that one prey species?
It would depend on how technologically advanced their society is.
In a lower-tech world, I imagine something like a feuadlistic society where predators are the ruling class. A large family of predators would look out for and protect a large number of prey along with the land. The more altruistic predators might live primarily on fish and non-meats (assuming fish are not sentient), while others may utilize religious propaganda to identify “criminals” and “heretics” that they would take away to “reform” (and totally not eat, no there’s definitely not a bunch of predators that secretly gorge themselves on prey). The ruling predator class would be in a constant state of flux as they compete over the best grazing lands and water supplies, and other natural resources. There may also be groups of nomadic prey that have no predator leaders, who live in rougher or otherwise more desolate areas. Some of the feudal predators may have positive relationships with these groups, while others may see them as a
feastthreat.In a more advanced society, predators would likely sustain themselves on non-sentient meat sources, or barring that, artificial protein sources. And there totally wouldn’t be a secret cult of predators that still hunt and eat prey in the darkest corners of society, those are just baseless rumors.
I would have to ask why the two species would choose to coexist. I wouldn’t see the decision being mutual.
I would expect the predators to create a caste like system with them at the top and their prey at the bottom. Prey grow their own food under a system managed by predators while also providing other labor to make the predators’ lives more comfortable.
How meat is harvested could be through various means. Maybe some towns have an age limit where all prey can only become so old. Other towns may collect a brood tax, requiring mothers to offer up some of their children to be raised as fattened up food. Other towns may have a selection system or a lottery, perhaps with financial compensation for the prey family’s loss.
There would need to be a lot more prey around to feed the predators. I also expect the predators to have religion and propaganda to keep the prey in line.
Prey doesn’t mean defenseless. Lots of prey animals have gnarly defenses.
Or maybe the prey animals were the first to develope tools and a war was raged in prehistory before they started domesticating each other. Realizing they could accomplish more working together than apart.
Prey doesn’t mean defenseless. Lots of prey animals have gnarly defenses.
Anecdotally, I’ve heard it claimed that a large herbivore is more dangerous than a predator. No idea if that’s true, and I’m too lazy to verify it, but intuitively I’d think predators won’t spend more energy acquiring a meal than that meal provides, so if they’re full or don’t think you’re worth it they won’t go after you. But prey animals attack out of fear and are thus less predictable.
That’s what happens in nature, but you brought up a society in which a predators and prey live with each other. If the prey developed first and developed a military advantage over predators, why would prey allow predators to live?
cf : all the predators now extinct like mountain lions in Europe
Is there a case in nature where a symbiotic relationship has developed between predator and prey that wasn’t initiated by the predator?
