Aaaah. That all makes sense, thank you! I’m also a lay history nerd only and have mostly only heard the “Doing agriculture early on mostly sucked compared to the alternative” thing people say a lot
think there was a sweet spot? like around Çatalhöyük's peak? the agricultural activity was less monoculture, maybe a mixture of farming and gathering. seems less hierarchical. i guess the next "sweet spot" wouldn't exist until palace economies which were basically just early centrally planned socialist systems.
I like to think, just total speculation here, but I think early agriculturalists probably did a fair bit of "hunting" but it was more like "killing the animals eating the crops"
And don’t forget just how many more animals there were. Even as recent that we have written records, the amount of animals there used to be just around everywhere is honestly unfathomable to me. And that was after the first 200,000 years of humans murdering every creature they could find wherever they went.
Would make sense what with most none bird animals people eat are plain grazers. Makes sense that A)it's the guys you used to hunt cause they're the easiest and B) if that herd shows up and chomps your crops those crops kinda double as bait to bring the meat to you. I dunno
I work in agriculture and half the job near harvest time is just scaring off birds and shit to keep them from eating (and shitting) all over the harvest. I like to think earlier humans would have thought similar but also "hey free food" if a sling or arrow could bring one down
It's mostly chuds who say that. They don't like offices and mobile phones and just want to live in some idealized Bronze Age where they would get Stacy and be allowed to kill anyone who makes fun of them for being a virgin.
human fossils from early humans indicate a high rate of violence experienced by males
I saw something that said that many of those fossils are probably the result of humans being killed and eaten by predators rather than human on human violence.
yeah i'm also a layperson but from what I do know there were various rules that tribes/clans put in place to avoid coming to blows with each other. Obviously it still happened but eventually it's in everyone's interest to agree on rules for usage of the good hunting grounds rather than have constant all out war
Yes exacty this was my point. Violence in pre state societies is a funcion mostly of population density and comletition of resources.
Another factor is that the people living in low density enviorments need a minimum number of members in their comunity to mantain their technological level. Thus the cost of violence is higher.
I was about to say, that doesn't indicate violence between male humans necessarily. It's probably from getting fucked up by mastodon voiced by Ray Romano.
deleted by creator
Aaaah. That all makes sense, thank you! I’m also a lay history nerd only and have mostly only heard the “Doing agriculture early on mostly sucked compared to the alternative” thing people say a lot
deleted by creator
think there was a sweet spot? like around Çatalhöyük's peak? the agricultural activity was less monoculture, maybe a mixture of farming and gathering. seems less hierarchical. i guess the next "sweet spot" wouldn't exist until palace economies which were basically just early centrally planned socialist systems.
deleted by creator
:data-laughing: got to be a tankie civilization for every era now
I like to think, just total speculation here, but I think early agriculturalists probably did a fair bit of "hunting" but it was more like "killing the animals eating the crops"
And don’t forget just how many more animals there were. Even as recent that we have written records, the amount of animals there used to be just around everywhere is honestly unfathomable to me. And that was after the first 200,000 years of humans murdering every creature they could find wherever they went.
True. It's wild to consider the biodiversity before we started chewing our way across the planet
Would make sense what with most none bird animals people eat are plain grazers. Makes sense that A)it's the guys you used to hunt cause they're the easiest and B) if that herd shows up and chomps your crops those crops kinda double as bait to bring the meat to you. I dunno
I work in agriculture and half the job near harvest time is just scaring off birds and shit to keep them from eating (and shitting) all over the harvest. I like to think earlier humans would have thought similar but also "hey free food" if a sling or arrow could bring one down
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
It's mostly chuds who say that. They don't like offices and mobile phones and just want to live in some idealized Bronze Age where they would get Stacy and be allowed to kill anyone who makes fun of them for being a virgin.
When you have warrior castes you are not an early agriculturalists.
Lewis binford dissagrees that the best lands for agriculture are the best lands for a hunter gatherer society even if his analisis is crude.
Most academics such as graber or fry also disagree that hunter gatherers were more violent.
The guts from darker angels of our nature think the evidence is inconclusive.
On the surviving non state societies we know the more sedentary ones that is horticulturalists are more violent.
deleted by creator
I saw something that said that many of those fossils are probably the result of humans being killed and eaten by predators rather than human on human violence.
deleted by creator
yeah i'm also a layperson but from what I do know there were various rules that tribes/clans put in place to avoid coming to blows with each other. Obviously it still happened but eventually it's in everyone's interest to agree on rules for usage of the good hunting grounds rather than have constant all out war
deleted by creator
Yes exacty this was my point. Violence in pre state societies is a funcion mostly of population density and comletition of resources.
Another factor is that the people living in low density enviorments need a minimum number of members in their comunity to mantain their technological level. Thus the cost of violence is higher.
I was about to say, that doesn't indicate violence between male humans necessarily. It's probably from getting fucked up by mastodon voiced by Ray Romano.
This is why to this day the voice of Ray Romano triggers a primal fight or flight response
That makes a lot of sense!