ext_44983 ([identity profile] sophiaserpentia.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] sophiaserpentia 2005-05-09 03:56 pm (UTC)

Re: this is an issue i have spent a lot of time on

I don't know how to compare the risks of either way of life. I mean, farming depends on there being no major weather mishaps, no raids, stable water supply, etc. I am unsure how to quantify risks vs. benefits of agriculture vs. hunting-gathering.

So I look at it from a resource allocation standpoint. Agriculturalists ate less and reproduced more, and that gave them an advantage. They had to compete against hunter-gatherers and pastoralists for land, though. By attrition, agriculturalists would eventually win that conflict.

Some cultures seem to have a built-in defense against agriculture leading to division of labor -- the potlatch. It's as if the people of these cultures had abortive attempts at civilization, were horrified, and decided it was better to destroy all surpluses or give them away.

I think too that there must have been some kind of evolutionary watershed that allowed it to happen. For example, farming requires the observation that there is a yearly seasonal pattern.

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting