Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Hunter Gatherer = Being Hunted by Animals Red in Tooth and Claw

Expand Messages
  • Bill Maxwell
    While I sincerely disagree with your assessment of the hunter-gatherer lifestyle (and could provide links to debate it), I would like to approach this more in
    Message 1 of 12 , Mar 3 10:34 AM
      While I sincerely disagree with your assessment of the hunter-gatherer
      lifestyle (and could provide links to debate it), I would like to
      approach this more in relation to Fukuoka's style.

      By using the English suffix "-er", we tie ourselves to a metaphor that
      does not reflect reality. Other older languages do not need the verb
      "to be" to describe our relationship with the land. We "are" not
      teachers, we teach. We "are" not hunters, we hunt. This forms a
      relationship with the land that reflects what we do with it (as opposed
      "to it"), not who we "are" inside. It invokes no-mind; it breaks down
      the artificial limitations of "we are."

      Did men perform stupid stunts while hunting? Yes. And while partying,
      and while seeking a mate, and even while farming! Did women act with
      equal stupidity in their lives? Yes. Sometimes we act poorly. Women
      and men together formed a destructive society together. Now, we seek a
      way out of it.

      I suppose what I'm trying to say, in a practical sense, we need to forge
      a relationship with the land. Encourage plant and plant relationships
      that attract animals. Hunt them if you need; gather things if you need;
      garden things if you need. Look more to listening to the earth and
      responding rather than locking yourself into the dogma that one pure way
      exists.

      We hunt, we gather, we garden. We do things.

      I think that defines us as "humans."

      Best

      Bill Maxwell

      Robert Monie wrote:

      > Want to romanticize hunter-gatherer times? Some anthropologists think
      > the human race spent most of its time running FROM animals. Want to
      > bring it back Jurrasic Park style, by cloning all the fierce beasts
      > that used to chase us? Better buy some corporate stock now in
      > aerodynamically balanced spears with longer flight paths, sharp
      > feldspar and ash axes that sever vital arteries, and poison-dart blow
      > guns to stop our natural predators in their tracks, otherwise, the
      > massively multiplying animal populations will be painting pictures in
      > the caves showing all the human prey dripping with blood that they
      > have captured and fed to their young cubs and kids. The poet Gary
      > Snyder likes to say that environmental maturity consists of imagining
      > ourselves as dinner for some salivating carnivore in the wild.
      >
      > Let him, Jared Diamond, and all the rest of the golden days of
      > hunter-gathering retrovists(almost always males, have you noticed?)
      > take romance; I'll go with the (probably sensible female) inventors of
      > horticulture and agriculture, bringers of blessings to humankind.
      > Finally someone (a woman no doubt) had the good sense to see that
      > families didn't have to expose themselves to an endlessly grim
      > procession of invasions into the territory of one fierce man-child-
      > and woman-eating beast after another. Finally humans (probably of the
      > female persuasion) had the sense to grow their own food and wall
      > themselves out of the animal- predator's snarling path.
      >
      > Ask a great female evolutionist like microbiologist Lynn Margulis
      > about this rather than Jared Diamond. She will tell you that
      > hunter-gathering was a drunken bout of male excess,
      > needlessly exposing families to hazard and vainglorious hormonal
      > excitement. It was an old-boy network show, purely xx-chromosome
      > rated. Let us thank our lucky stars that the women had the sense to
      > civilize us, plant, sow, breed new varieties, and domesticate. They
      > paved the way for peaceful, vegan existence. Only at the extremes of
      > human imagination
      > (in Isaiah and the Garden of Eden) does the lion lie down with the lamb.
      >
      > Bob Monie
      > New Orleans, LA
      > Zone 8 (vegan country)
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Dieter Brand
      Philology never makes for very good philosophy, and the antiquity of a language does not vouch for its ability to represent reality. Lets forget about the
      Message 2 of 12 , Mar 3 11:01 AM
        Philology never makes for very good philosophy, and the antiquity of a
        language does not vouch for its ability to represent reality.

        Lets forget about the hunter gatherers, they where a brutish lot by
        any standards. We are at the cutting edge of humanity here an now.

        Dieter


        Bill Maxwell <true_tom@...> wrote:
        While I sincerely disagree with your assessment of the hunter-gatherer
        lifestyle (and could provide links to debate it), I would like to
        approach this more in relation to Fukuoka's style.

        By using the English suffix "-er", we tie ourselves to a metaphor that
        does not reflect reality. Other older languages do not need the verb
        "to be" to describe our relationship with the land. We "are" not
        teachers, we teach. We "are" not hunters, we hunt. This forms a
        relationship with the land that reflects what we do with it (as opposed
        "to it"), not who we "are" inside. It invokes no-mind; it breaks down
        the artificial limitations of "we are."

        Did men perform stupid stunts while hunting? Yes. And while partying,
        and while seeking a mate, and even while farming! Did women act with
        equal stupidity in their lives? Yes. Sometimes we act poorly. Women
        and men together formed a destructive society together. Now, we seek a
        way out of it.

        I suppose what I'm trying to say, in a practical sense, we need to forge
        a relationship with the land. Encourage plant and plant relationships
        that attract animals. Hunt them if you need; gather things if you need;
        garden things if you need. Look more to listening to the earth and
        responding rather than locking yourself into the dogma that one pure way
        exists.

        We hunt, we gather, we garden. We do things.

        I think that defines us as "humans."

        Best

        Bill Maxwell

        Robert Monie wrote:

        > Want to romanticize hunter-gatherer times? Some anthropologists think
        > the human race spent most of its time running FROM animals. Want to
        > bring it back Jurrasic Park style, by cloning all the fierce beasts
        > that used to chase us? Better buy some corporate stock now in
        > aerodynamically balanced spears with longer flight paths, sharp
        > feldspar and ash axes that sever vital arteries, and poison-dart blow
        > guns to stop our natural predators in their tracks, otherwise, the
        > massively multiplying animal populations will be painting pictures in
        > the caves showing all the human prey dripping with blood that they
        > have captured and fed to their young cubs and kids. The poet Gary
        > Snyder likes to say that environmental maturity consists of imagining
        > ourselves as dinner for some salivating carnivore in the wild.
        >
        > Let him, Jared Diamond, and all the rest of the golden days of
        > hunter-gathering retrovists(almost always males, have you noticed?)
        > take romance; I'll go with the (probably sensible female) inventors of
        > horticulture and agriculture, bringers of blessings to humankind.
        > Finally someone (a woman no doubt) had the good sense to see that
        > families didn't have to expose themselves to an endlessly grim
        > procession of invasions into the territory of one fierce man-child-
        > and woman-eating beast after another. Finally humans (probably of the
        > female persuasion) had the sense to grow their own food and wall
        > themselves out of the animal- predator's snarling path.
        >
        > Ask a great female evolutionist like microbiologist Lynn Margulis
        > about this rather than Jared Diamond. She will tell you that
        > hunter-gathering was a drunken bout of male excess,
        > needlessly exposing families to hazard and vainglorious hormonal
        > excitement. It was an old-boy network show, purely xx-chromosome
        > rated. Let us thank our lucky stars that the women had the sense to
        > civilize us, plant, sow, breed new varieties, and domesticate. They
        > paved the way for peaceful, vegan existence. Only at the extremes of
        > human imagination
        > (in Isaiah and the Garden of Eden) does the lion lie down with the lamb.
        >
        > Bob Monie
        > New Orleans, LA
        > Zone 8 (vegan country)
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






        ---------------------------------
        Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Bernhard Heuvel
        Dear Bob, the wild beasts you told of where replaced by wild humans, doing exactly the same: Killing humans. As I find, the ways human kill other humans is far
        Message 3 of 12 , Mar 3 11:36 AM
          Dear Bob,

          the wild beasts you told of where replaced by wild humans, doing exactly
          the same: Killing humans. As I find, the ways human kill other humans is
          far worse (my opinion).

          OK, there is a lot of dreaming and quite a bit of romance, when talk
          about hunting-gathering times come up. Something has to be noted though:
          Before agriculture came the figures humans made were women. I'm not sure
          if they actually prayed to them as female gods, but there have been
          female figures all over the world. As I understand the female played a
          big part in human live.

          Agriculture replaced the female figures with male ones. I suspect, that
          agriculture was the reason for thousands of years of female depression.

          Another thougt: Agriculture and storage allowed bigger numbers of humans
          at a spot. A crowd could easily be used to outnumber others and make war
          on them. So agriculture wasn't successfully in history because of it
          being sufficient, but because the crowds outnumbered other ways of live
          and simply killed them off.

          In hunting and gathering societies females give birth to children every
          four years (average), in young stage agriculture societies every two
          years babies were born. The conclusion is, that you can establish and
          keep bigger numbers of humans in one spot, while hunter-gatherers have
          to self-limitate themselves.

          Having so much storage and such a big number of people ready, it easily
          can be imagined, that slavery, war and kingdoms were mainly caused by
          agriculture.

          It is no question, that hunting-gathering is much more healthy for human
          beings. All the "civilization" diseases evolved when humans settled and
          began agriculture. This is well proved by today's archaeological
          pathology (hope this is the correct English word for it).

          So to summarize (and of course generalize, sorry):

          - females were depressed by agriculture, their role was replaced by man
          - bigger numbers of humans at one spot created might / sovereign
          - health declined by agriculture (quality was replaced by quantity),
          spread of pathogens easier
          - war, depression and violence find better conditions to emerge


          The main thing to consider: What we really lost, is the ability to act
          sustainable, to limit ourself. Self-limitation disappeared where
          agriculture came into play.

          Of course, that doesn't mean, that agriculture itself is mean or bad.
          What human beings have to add is simply self-limitation, to get the best
          of agriculture.

          Self-limitation is what we can learn from hunter-gatherers. To turn a
          violent, brutal agricultural spiral into a productive, peaceful heaven.


          Best wishes and regards,

          Bernhard Heuvel
        • Bill Maxwell
          Philology may not make for good philosophy but that doesn t make the point any less valid. There s a reason why Fukuoka s writings vary between practical and
          Message 4 of 12 , Mar 3 11:40 AM
            Philology may not make for good philosophy but that doesn't make the
            point any less valid. There's a reason why Fukuoka's writings vary
            between practical and philosophical. There's an issue in translation
            between his direct experience and his ability to communicate it to other
            people within the context of this specific society. That's a specific
            problem you see related in the postings of this group and the inability
            for no-till farming to achieve a solid foothold on the imagination of
            modern farming culture.

            Calling "hunter-gatherers" a "brutish lot" denies past archaeological
            evidence, current HG tribes, analysis of HG as a lifestyle and practical
            strategies to live. You have written of yourself as a practical person
            so it surprises me that you dismiss strategies -- and that's all these
            are, much like Fukuoka's method of farming is a strategy -- as archaic
            instead of time-tested. I even have a tough time considering this
            "humanity's cutting edge" since so much of what we're seeing is brute
            force applications brought about by the application of cheap energy.
            That's not cutting edge. That's brutish by any standards.

            I suppose after this e-mail I'll give up on the topic. It's not worth
            continuing on a farming group; I simply wish people to not immediately
            disregard ANY strategy that has a time-tested practical value, whether
            that's hunting, gathering, gardening or, most likely, a combination of
            all the above strategies depending on your bioregion.

            Best

            Bill Maxwell

            Dieter Brand wrote:

            > Philology never makes for very good philosophy, and the antiquity of a
            > language does not vouch for its ability to represent reality.
            >
            > Lets forget about the hunter gatherers, they where a brutish lot by
            > any standards. We are at the cutting edge of humanity here an now.
            >
            > Dieter
            >


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Robert Monie
            Bill, Humanity will soon be able to construct inexpensive shelter that is relatively immune to destruction by earthquake, tornado and fire and powered by
            Message 5 of 12 , Mar 3 12:22 PM
              Bill,

              Humanity will soon be able to construct inexpensive shelter that is relatively immune to destruction by earthquake, tornado and fire and powered by thin-film solar cells. (Dante Bini independently and Robert South of Monolithic domes have already begun this). Nothing like this was ever possible before in our entire time on this earth. Couple this with agriculture systems that need little external input (which is really Fukuoka's goal) and you do have a cutting edge revolution. Futurist Bucky Fuller saw this nearly a century ago. Fukuoka in his own way is also a futurist.

              To this kind of future, hunter-gathers have little to offer other than the fine sport of long-distance running (which I regularly engage in). You can run after "imaginary" animals and eat mostly grain (or fruit, veggies, and legumes, if you prefer), the way the Tarahumara Indians do and get plenty of exercise to more than satisfy the "cave person" within you. The recent technology of oil and gas also has little to offer (other than how to construct grids to put the solar equipment on).

              Fukuoka does not really want to go back to anything, certainly not hunter-gathering. He wants a new world where food is ubiquitous in a myriad of natural environments, all self-sustained. Neither the brave runner brandishing a spear in the teeth of an animal nor the oil driven State can bring this to pass. Only a benign and environmentally elegant technology combined with clean energy sources and natural farming know-how can.

              This site is supposed to supply the natural farming know-how.

              Bob Monie

              Bill Maxwell <true_tom@...> wrote:
              Philology may not make for good philosophy but that doesn't make the
              point any less valid. There's a reason why Fukuoka's writings vary
              between practical and philosophical. There's an issue in translation
              between his direct experience and his ability to communicate it to other
              people within the context of this specific society. That's a specific
              problem you see related in the postings of this group and the inability
              for no-till farming to achieve a solid foothold on the imagination of
              modern farming culture.

              Calling "hunter-gatherers" a "brutish lot" denies past archaeological
              evidence, current HG tribes, analysis of HG as a lifestyle and practical
              strategies to live. You have written of yourself as a practical person
              so it surprises me that you dismiss strategies -- and that's all these
              are, much like Fukuoka's method of farming is a strategy -- as archaic
              instead of time-tested. I even have a tough time considering this
              "humanity's cutting edge" since so much of what we're seeing is brute
              force applications brought about by the application of cheap energy.
              That's not cutting edge. That's brutish by any standards.

              I suppose after this e-mail I'll give up on the topic. It's not worth
              continuing on a farming group; I simply wish people to not immediately
              disregard ANY strategy that has a time-tested practical value, whether
              that's hunting, gathering, gardening or, most likely, a combination of
              all the above strategies depending on your bioregion.

              Best

              Bill Maxwell

              Dieter Brand wrote:

              > Philology never makes for very good philosophy, and the antiquity of a
              > language does not vouch for its ability to represent reality.
              >
              > Lets forget about the hunter gatherers, they where a brutish lot by
              > any standards. We are at the cutting edge of humanity here an now.
              >
              > Dieter
              >

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Dieter Brand
              I don t believe that farming is primarily concerned with imagination. And I have no idea about the HGers, but I fail to see the relevance to present day life.
              Message 6 of 12 , Mar 3 12:30 PM
                I don't believe that farming is primarily concerned with imagination.
                And I have no idea about the HGers, but I fail to see the relevance
                to present day life. There are very few hunting grounds left. Or
                did I misunderstand something?

                Do let us know more about why Fukuoka varies between the
                practical and the philosophical, I'm sure that would be of utmost
                interest to all of us.

                But you give up. Sorry, if we are not up to expectations.
                To me the primary function of language is to communicate; and
                if there is a problem with this group, that, to me, appears to be
                it's incapacity for dialogue.

                Dieter

                Bill Maxwell <true_tom@...> wrote:
                Philology may not make for good philosophy but that doesn't make the
                point any less valid. There's a reason why Fukuoka's writings vary
                between practical and philosophical. There's an issue in translation
                between his direct experience and his ability to communicate it to other
                people within the context of this specific society. That's a specific
                problem you see related in the postings of this group and the inability
                for no-till farming to achieve a solid foothold on the imagination of
                modern farming culture.

                Calling "hunter-gatherers" a "brutish lot" denies past archaeological
                evidence, current HG tribes, analysis of HG as a lifestyle and practical
                strategies to live. You have written of yourself as a practical person
                so it surprises me that you dismiss strategies -- and that's all these
                are, much like Fukuoka's method of farming is a strategy -- as archaic
                instead of time-tested. I even have a tough time considering this
                "humanity's cutting edge" since so much of what we're seeing is brute
                force applications brought about by the application of cheap energy.
                That's not cutting edge. That's brutish by any standards.

                I suppose after this e-mail I'll give up on the topic. It's not worth
                continuing on a farming group; I simply wish people to not immediately
                disregard ANY strategy that has a time-tested practical value, whether
                that's hunting, gathering, gardening or, most likely, a combination of
                all the above strategies depending on your bioregion.

                Best

                Bill Maxwell

                Dieter Brand wrote:

                > Philology never makes for very good philosophy, and the antiquity of a
                > language does not vouch for its ability to represent reality.
                >
                > Lets forget about the hunter gatherers, they where a brutish lot by
                > any standards. We are at the cutting edge of humanity here an now.
                >
                > Dieter
                >

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






                ---------------------------------
                Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Jeff
                While many groups through time have romanticized hunter-gatherer times. (THorou, Melville, etc), I m not sure that Diamond does this at all. Based on other
                Message 7 of 12 , Mar 3 6:00 PM
                  While many groups through time have romanticized hunter-gatherer
                  times. (THorou, Melville, etc), I'm not sure that Diamond does this at
                  all.

                  Based on other Diamond works, I would take the position that rather,
                  Agriculture is unsustainable, was not a "great" under taking, and all
                  societies that are unsustainable eventually fail. It is more an
                  explaination why agriculture suceeded despite its short comings.

                  .. and then your right .... human history is a million years old, our
                  species is much shorter, but even that, most of it we were chased by
                  large dangerous predators, but 10,000 the equation changed. Not just
                  because of agriculture, but the death of the mega-mammals. So not even
                  the romanticized hunter-gather can be declared innocent.

                  > Ask a great female evolutionist like microbiologist Lynn Margulis
                  about this rather than Jared Diamond. She will tell you that
                  hunter-gathering was a drunken bout of male excess,

                  I'm not sure that the drunken bout of male excess hold true either.
                  I'm not sure that it supported, but I see the hunting element of the
                  equation being very much an adaption to a cold/ice age climate. Even
                  now, the further north you go, the higher the animal portion of food
                  in the naitive diet. The most plant heavy cultures are tropical or
                  sub-tropical.

                  The question is in a tropical climate why would you spend the energy
                  and resources for hunting that results in less calories than spent
                  (often the case in jungle hunting)??

                  I think the answer to this is men's traditional role as defenders.
                  Hunting would keep the muscles in shape, senses sharp and a group
                  continuity that would aid a military expedition. In a gathering
                  society territory is everything. You must know when to be where.
                  Hunting may have been nothing more than an elaborate excuse to patroll
                  the territory.

                  Once a role is developed it is difficult to get rid of.....
                  I think this may also be related to the power of the sexes, but I
                  would need to more research on that one...

                  > Bob Monie
                  > New Orleans, LA
                  > Zone 8 (vegan country)
                  >
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                • macropneuma
                  Apocrypha, smoothly wriiten. Without any whiff of rigorous evidence. Lynn Margulis is a renowned authority in micro-biology, not having any authority in
                  Message 8 of 12 , Mar 3 8:12 PM
                    Apocrypha, smoothly wriiten.
                    Without any whiff of rigorous evidence.
                    Lynn Margulis is a renowned authority in micro-biology, not having any authority in
                    anthropology.
                    Jared Diamond is a physiologist and ecologist having worked extensively in Papua,
                    especially on avifauna, with so called Hunter Gatherers, so while he's not formally an
                    anthropologist, he's still renowned as a populariser of anthropological evidence. There's
                    better writers than him on anthropology, and specialists in farming anthropology and
                    archaeology such as Tim Denham and David R Harris. He even does over-simplify
                    history in his popular books, but you can get a good introduction to history through
                    anthropology from his books "Guns, Germs and Steel", "Collapse" recent in 2006 and he
                    clarified "The worst mistake in the history of the human race" with a refinement and
                    update in "The Rise and Fall of the Third Chimpanzee".
                    That's it!

                    --- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, Robert Monie <bobm20001@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Want to romanticize hunter-gatherer times? Some anthropologists think the human
                    race spent most of its time running FROM animals. Want to bring it back Jurrasic Park
                    style, by cloning all the fierce beasts that used to chase us? Better buy some corporate
                    stock now in aerodynamically balanced spears with longer flight paths, sharp feldspar and
                    ash axes that sever vital arteries, and poison-dart blow guns to stop our natural predators
                    in their tracks, otherwise, the massively multiplying animal populations will be painting
                    pictures in the caves showing all the human prey dripping with blood that they have
                    captured and fed to their young cubs and kids. The poet Gary Snyder likes to say that
                    environmental maturity consists of imagining ourselves as dinner for some salivating
                    carnivore in the wild.
                    >
                    > Let him, Jared Diamond, and all the rest of the golden days of hunter-gathering
                    retrovists(almost always males, have you noticed?) take romance; I'll go with the
                    (probably sensible female) inventors of horticulture and agriculture, bringers of blessings
                    to humankind. Finally someone (a woman no doubt) had the good sense to see that
                    families didn't have to expose themselves to an endlessly grim procession of invasions
                    into the territory of one fierce man-child- and woman-eating beast after another. Finally
                    humans (probably of the female persuasion) had the sense to grow their own food and
                    wall themselves out of the animal- predator's snarling path.
                    >
                    > Ask a great female evolutionist like microbiologist Lynn Margulis about this rather
                    than Jared Diamond. She will tell you that hunter-gathering was a drunken bout of male
                    excess,
                    > needlessly exposing families to hazard and vainglorious hormonal excitement. It was
                    an old-boy network show, purely xx-chromosome rated. Let us thank our lucky stars that
                    the women had the sense to civilize us, plant, sow, breed new varieties, and domesticate.
                    They paved the way for peaceful, vegan existence. Only at the extremes of human
                    imagination
                    > (in Isaiah and the Garden of Eden) does the lion lie down with the lamb.
                    >
                    > Bob Monie
                    > New Orleans, LA
                    > Zone 8 (vegan country)
                    >
                    >
                    > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    >
                  • Robert Monie
                    Dear Macropneuma, Hunter gatherers may have really just gathered (mostly fruits and tender greens) and not hunted much at all. (Though they were themselves
                    Message 9 of 12 , Mar 4 6:34 AM
                      Dear Macropneuma,

                      Hunter gatherers may have really just gathered (mostly fruits and tender greens) and not hunted much at all. (Though they were themselves hunted by carnivores whose territory they impinged upon) The hunting part may have been of the tall-tale Paul Bunyan slaking his thirst by emptying Lake Erie variety. Big macho stuff of little significance--something to tell the women and kids when you were half drunk.

                      Dr. Alan Walker of Johns Hopkins, who as an anthropologist microscopically examined more than his share of fossilized teeth and bone from the fabled hunter and gatherer period came to the conclusion that all these much-vaunted Tarzin-type heros were really frutarians. Paul Bunyan probably ate the Ur form of grapes and blackberries while he cleaned his ax and told about all the wild yak that got away.

                      The romance and derring-do in the HUNTER-gatherer reconstructions comes from the basic physiological need that humans have for exercise and excitement. There's no denying the thrill of the chase--all the whooping and hollering, the brandishing of spears and arrows, the gnashing of teeth, the defeat (symbolic or real) of the prey. It's a memorable adrenalin rush and great cardiovascular exercise to be sure. Dr. A. William Menzin of the Harvard Department of Psychiatry (himself a raw food vegan) used to listen to cases of people who romanticized the old days when men were men all drenched in blood etc. etc. His advice was to take up some nice sport like archery, rowing, fencing, to get the circulation going and eat plenty of fruit and greens.Work out in the weight room, on some construction site, or in the garden or field. You will get everything the hunter-gatherers supposedly had without the blood and the gore. The rest of it (if it really existed at all) died with the
                      dodo. As humans we have no physiological need for either hunting or meat. Our grandmothers were right: "eat your veggies and work hard."

                      Ask evolutionist Lynn Margulis sometime about the male Darwinist struggle-for-existence illusion. Eve taught Adam to eat the fruit and stop molesting the animals. She had it right.

                      Best wishes,

                      And, by the way (from a previous post years ago), you are right about the berries and the veggies--you don't have to eat grain. Doctor William Menzin convinced me about that (though I stil eat some grain because I tolerate it).

                      Bob Monie, gatherer, not hunter
                      New Orleans, LA 70119
                      Zone 8
                      macropneuma <macropneuma@...> wrote:
                      Apocrypha, smoothly wriiten.
                      Without any whiff of rigorous evidence.
                      Lynn Margulis is a renowned authority in micro-biology, not having any authority in
                      anthropology.
                      Jared Diamond is a physiologist and ecologist having worked extensively in Papua,
                      especially on avifauna, with so called Hunter Gatherers, so while he's not formally an
                      anthropologist, he's still renowned as a populariser of anthropological evidence. There's
                      better writers than him on anthropology, and specialists in farming anthropology and
                      archaeology such as Tim Denham and David R Harris. He even does over-simplify
                      history in his popular books, but you can get a good introduction to history through
                      anthropology from his books "Guns, Germs and Steel", "Collapse" recent in 2006 and he
                      clarified "The worst mistake in the history of the human race" with a refinement and
                      update in "The Rise and Fall of the Third Chimpanzee".
                      That's it!

                      --- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, Robert Monie <bobm20001@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > Want to romanticize hunter-gatherer times? Some anthropologists think the human
                      race spent most of its time running FROM animals. Want to bring it back Jurrasic Park
                      style, by cloning all the fierce beasts that used to chase us? Better buy some corporate
                      stock now in aerodynamically balanced spears with longer flight paths, sharp feldspar and
                      ash axes that sever vital arteries, and poison-dart blow guns to stop our natural predators
                      in their tracks, otherwise, the massively multiplying animal populations will be painting
                      pictures in the caves showing all the human prey dripping with blood that they have
                      captured and fed to their young cubs and kids. The poet Gary Snyder likes to say that
                      environmental maturity consists of imagining ourselves as dinner for some salivating
                      carnivore in the wild.
                      >
                      > Let him, Jared Diamond, and all the rest of the golden days of hunter-gathering
                      retrovists(almost always males, have you noticed?) take romance; I'll go with the
                      (probably sensible female) inventors of horticulture and agriculture, bringers of blessings
                      to humankind. Finally someone (a woman no doubt) had the good sense to see that
                      families didn't have to expose themselves to an endlessly grim procession of invasions
                      into the territory of one fierce man-child- and woman-eating beast after another. Finally
                      humans (probably of the female persuasion) had the sense to grow their own food and
                      wall themselves out of the animal- predator's snarling path.
                      >
                      > Ask a great female evolutionist like microbiologist Lynn Margulis about this rather
                      than Jared Diamond. She will tell you that hunter-gathering was a drunken bout of male
                      excess,
                      > needlessly exposing families to hazard and vainglorious hormonal excitement. It was
                      an old-boy network show, purely xx-chromosome rated. Let us thank our lucky stars that
                      the women had the sense to civilize us, plant, sow, breed new varieties, and domesticate.
                      They paved the way for peaceful, vegan existence. Only at the extremes of human
                      imagination
                      > (in Isaiah and the Garden of Eden) does the lion lie down with the lamb.
                      >
                      > Bob Monie
                      > New Orleans, LA
                      > Zone 8 (vegan country)
                      >
                      >
                      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      >






                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Robert Monie
                      You re on the right trail, Jeff. I believe Alan Walker said that his microscopic evidence indicated a mostly plant food diet in humans till the Ice Age. Humans
                      Message 10 of 12 , Mar 4 10:17 AM
                        You're on the right trail, Jeff. I believe Alan Walker said that his microscopic evidence indicated a mostly plant food diet in humans till the Ice Age. Humans were freezed out of their vegetation and had to make do in frosty "Freezeland" with meaty beasties till the thaw came. And the more North, the more people became convinced that they had to eat meat.

                        Also much of the hunting ritual is purely for show, territorial marking, patrolling, game-playing, exercise hi-jinks, and male posturing. Read the medieval romance Sir Gawain for examples (in that one the knights and nobles show off their bright outfits and handsome horses and gear, and pile up mountains of words on how the captured prey was sliced and trussed, dressed and pressed.) Often behind all this hoopla stood the peasants in the fields, pulling up the turnips and winnowing the rye and wheat, so the feasters would really have something to eat.

                        Relief came for the human race when it learned to grow its own food. Now we just need to do it sustainably.

                        Jeff <shultonus@...> wrote:
                        While many groups through time have romanticized hunter-gatherer
                        times. (THorou, Melville, etc), I'm not sure that Diamond does this at
                        all.

                        Based on other Diamond works, I would take the position that rather,
                        Agriculture is unsustainable, was not a "great" under taking, and all
                        societies that are unsustainable eventually fail. It is more an
                        explaination why agriculture suceeded despite its short comings.

                        .. and then your right .... human history is a million years old, our
                        species is much shorter, but even that, most of it we were chased by
                        large dangerous predators, but 10,000 the equation changed. Not just
                        because of agriculture, but the death of the mega-mammals. So not even
                        the romanticized hunter-gather can be declared innocent.

                        > Ask a great female evolutionist like microbiologist Lynn Margulis
                        about this rather than Jared Diamond. She will tell you that
                        hunter-gathering was a drunken bout of male excess,

                        I'm not sure that the drunken bout of male excess hold true either.
                        I'm not sure that it supported, but I see the hunting element of the
                        equation being very much an adaption to a cold/ice age climate. Even
                        now, the further north you go, the higher the animal portion of food
                        in the naitive diet. The most plant heavy cultures are tropical or
                        sub-tropical.

                        The question is in a tropical climate why would you spend the energy
                        and resources for hunting that results in less calories than spent
                        (often the case in jungle hunting)??

                        I think the answer to this is men's traditional role as defenders.
                        Hunting would keep the muscles in shape, senses sharp and a group
                        continuity that would aid a military expedition. In a gathering
                        society territory is everything. You must know when to be where.
                        Hunting may have been nothing more than an elaborate excuse to patroll
                        the territory.

                        Once a role is developed it is difficult to get rid of.....
                        I think this may also be related to the power of the sexes, but I
                        would need to more research on that one...

                        > Bob Monie
                        > New Orleans, LA
                        > Zone 8 (vegan country)
                        >
                        >
                        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        >






                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.