Phi
December 31st, 2005, 01:09 AM
I find it interesting how there seems to be argument as to whether people were farmers or hunter-gatherers as if they had to be either one or the other, and there was a rule back then saying you could not do both.
I wonder if most of the time people may have been both. Farming a bit to grow what they couldn't gather, gathering what they could, and hunting too.
Even nomadic peoples could have gardened a bit if they stayed put for a season or two before pulling up and moving on. That bit of gardening makes them gardeners/farmers, the herding makes them nomads, and they still would hunt for game when they found it, and gather berries, nuts, roots, wild fruits as available. The Native Americans were able to be both hunter-gatherers and farmers, right? And isn't it true that they were considered to be "stone aged people" when the Europeans came? Yet didn't they teach the settlers about corn and pumpkins as well as where to find game?
I can't imagine some hungry ancient person saying "No! we don't eat blackberries or wild grapes! We don't eat venison! we are farmers, not hunter-gatherers!"
I also cannot imagine some tribe of hunter-gatherers saying "No! we cannot plant any seeds of any type and we cannot keep an animal with us! We'd just as soon starve when the game is not plentiful as plant anything and we don't like having readily available milk, or cheese! Even carrying a trapped rabbit or game bird in a cage made of sticks to eat later would require a tiny bit of animal husbandry, which is farming and we would rather starve!"
The either-or excludes even my own grandparents who had a large farm, but still gathered in the wild herbs, blackberries, nuts, mushrooms and muscadines and hunted and trapped game and fished to supplement their farm food. They were predominantly farmers, but still hunter-gatherers too!
Today, nomads in the Middle East like to go back to where their ancestors planted figs and palms near oases, and even though they are nomadic herders they have no taboo about planting more of same wherever they can find a place to do so. They do wander, but they also come back around in time to harvest what they or their people planted.
Why is it that we think ancient people had to be either/or? Or is the distinction merely a way of saying ancient people were predominantly one or the other? Is the idea that at some point in time people didn't have the understanding that one could plant a seed or nut and it would grow? How do they determine what people did or did not know and when they learned it?
I wonder if most of the time people may have been both. Farming a bit to grow what they couldn't gather, gathering what they could, and hunting too.
Even nomadic peoples could have gardened a bit if they stayed put for a season or two before pulling up and moving on. That bit of gardening makes them gardeners/farmers, the herding makes them nomads, and they still would hunt for game when they found it, and gather berries, nuts, roots, wild fruits as available. The Native Americans were able to be both hunter-gatherers and farmers, right? And isn't it true that they were considered to be "stone aged people" when the Europeans came? Yet didn't they teach the settlers about corn and pumpkins as well as where to find game?
I can't imagine some hungry ancient person saying "No! we don't eat blackberries or wild grapes! We don't eat venison! we are farmers, not hunter-gatherers!"
I also cannot imagine some tribe of hunter-gatherers saying "No! we cannot plant any seeds of any type and we cannot keep an animal with us! We'd just as soon starve when the game is not plentiful as plant anything and we don't like having readily available milk, or cheese! Even carrying a trapped rabbit or game bird in a cage made of sticks to eat later would require a tiny bit of animal husbandry, which is farming and we would rather starve!"
The either-or excludes even my own grandparents who had a large farm, but still gathered in the wild herbs, blackberries, nuts, mushrooms and muscadines and hunted and trapped game and fished to supplement their farm food. They were predominantly farmers, but still hunter-gatherers too!
Today, nomads in the Middle East like to go back to where their ancestors planted figs and palms near oases, and even though they are nomadic herders they have no taboo about planting more of same wherever they can find a place to do so. They do wander, but they also come back around in time to harvest what they or their people planted.
Why is it that we think ancient people had to be either/or? Or is the distinction merely a way of saying ancient people were predominantly one or the other? Is the idea that at some point in time people didn't have the understanding that one could plant a seed or nut and it would grow? How do they determine what people did or did not know and when they learned it?