No "Neolithic Revolution" .

[Hanslune]

8 hours ago, jarjarbinks said:

in 2000bc, there was a state society in south america?

Yep

Ecuador: Valdivia;

Peru: Casma/Sechin culture, Norte Chico (Caral), Buena Vista, Casavilca, Culebras, Ventarrón, Viscachani, Huaca Prieta;

Chile: Chinchorro

Caral was probably the most important - depends on how you want to value the parameters.

Main city

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caral

Culture

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norte_Chico_civilization

 

Edited August 18, 2017 by Hanslune

[DingoLingo]

they did not need to advance.. basically the locals really only lived in small familys and travelled around there patch.. or country.. there are around 250 different aboriginal languages spoke today..

basically they stayed as hunter gatherer's only really developed things that would help them hunt..

 

heh funny thing is.. each tribe will tell you they were the first to develop the boomerang lol..

 

[atalante]

On 8/14/2017 at 5:30 PM, back to earth said:

Not sure if your point 1. is correct 

Panicum decompositum, known by the common names native millet, Australian millet, papa grass, and umbrella grass, is a species of grass native to the inland of Australia. It occurs in every mainland state

Native millet is a staple food of outback Aborigines, who hand-harvest the seed to make damper, a traditional soda bread.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panicum_decompositum

" Charles Sturt’s exploration party of 1844 was saved from death when it chanced upon four hundred Aboriginal people harvesting grain on the Warburton River (South Australia), in what was to become known as Sturt’s Stony Desert. Sturt and his men were revived with cool well-water, roast duck and the best cakes Sturt had ever tasted. "

http://www.pipmagazine.com.au/eat/aboriginal-traditional-foods-an-alternative-australian-history/

Even when the whole neolithic founder group of 8 different food plants could be cultivated in the same society -- diets of early agriculturalists were still nutritionally deficient in many ways, relative to hunter-gatherer diets.

 

Presumably at early dates, when millet was the only farmable crop that grew in Australia, ancient attempts to start living by farming-alone in Australia would have created severe nutrition problems, for potential ancient Australian farmers.

 

In America today, millet is mostly only used for bird seed, even though millet can be a supplement (today) to the neolithic founder group of cultivated plants.  . 

 

 

quote from:  https://pluto.revolvy.com/topic/Neolithic agricultural revolution&item_type=topic

 

Consequences

Social change

It has long been taken for granted that the introduction of agriculture had been an unequivocal progress. This is now questioned in view of findings by archaeologists and paleopathologists showing that nutritional standards of Neolithic populations were generally inferior to that of hunter-gatherers, and that their life expectancy may well have been shorter too, in part due to diseases and harder work. Hunter-gatherers must have covered their food needs with about 20 hours work a week, while agriculture required much more and was at least as uncertain. The hunter-gatherers' diet was more varied and balanced than what agriculture later allowed. Average height went down from 5'10" (178 cm) for men and 5'6" (168 cm) for women to 5'5" (165 cm) and 5'1" (155 cm), respectively, and it took until the twentieth century for average human height to come back to the pre-Neolithic Revolution levels.^[55]Agriculturalists had more anaemias and vitamin deficiencies, more spinal deformations and more dental pathologies.^[56]

However, the decrease in individual nutrition was accompanied by an increase in population.

The traditional view is that agricultural food production supported a denser population, which in turn supported larger sedentary communities, the accumulation of goods and tools, and specialization in diverse forms of new labor. 

 

 

[Jarocal]

14 hours ago, DingoLingo said:

they did not need to advance.. basically the locals really only lived in small familys and travelled around there patch.. or country.. there are around 250 different aboriginal languages spoke today..

 

heh funny thing is.. each tribe will tell you they were the first to develop the boomerang lol..

 

Everyone knows the oldest boomerang was found in the tunnels under the Bosnian P*r***d proving it originated there and spread to Oz later...

[kmt_sesh]

1 hour ago, Jarocal said:

Everyone knows the oldest boomerang was found in the tunnels under the Bosnian P*r***d proving it originated there and spread to Oz later...

Aren't those tunnels below the p*r***d where they bred the first kangaroos, too? I think that's how the prehistoric Bosnians used to travel.

[back to earth]

On ‎30‎/‎08‎/‎2017 at 10:52 AM, atalante said:

Even when the whole neolithic founder group of 8 different food plants could be cultivated in the same society -- diets of early agriculturalists were still nutritionally deficient in many ways, relative to hunter-gatherer diets.

 

Presumably at early dates, when millet was the only farmable crop that grew in Australia, ancient attempts to start living by farming-alone in Australia would have created severe nutrition problems, for potential ancient Australian farmers.

 

In America today, millet is mostly only used for bird seed, even though millet can be a supplement (today) to the neolithic founder group of cultivated plants.  . 

 

 

quote from:  https://pluto.revolvy.com/topic/Neolithic agricultural revolution&item_type=topic

 

Consequences

Social change

It has long been taken for granted that the introduction of agriculture had been an unequivocal progress. This is now questioned in view of findings by archaeologists and paleopathologists showing that nutritional standards of Neolithic populations were generally inferior to that of hunter-gatherers, and that their life expectancy may well have been shorter too, in part due to diseases and harder work. Hunter-gatherers must have covered their food needs with about 20 hours work a week, while agriculture required much more and was at least as uncertain. The hunter-gatherers' diet was more varied and balanced than what agriculture later allowed. Average height went down from 5'10" (178 cm) for men and 5'6" (168 cm) for women to 5'5" (165 cm) and 5'1" (155 cm), respectively, and it took until the twentieth century for average human height to come back to the pre-Neolithic Revolution levels.^[55]Agriculturalists had more anaemias and vitamin deficiencies, more spinal deformations and more dental pathologies.^[56]

However, the decrease in individual nutrition was accompanied by an increase in population.

The traditional view is that agricultural food production supported a denser population, which in turn supported larger sedentary communities, the accumulation of goods and tools, and specialization in diverse forms of new labor. 

 

 

 

Yes . well you understand that !   (  There were two incidents in other forums here where all that was denied.  The main 'proponent of denial' is ...... how shall I say it, a fan of everything white modern and European ... Of course, he won't venture into this forum ...  where I invited him .   Same old arguments ;  health and medicine, lack of  modern cons, danger         

Regarding your ; "  Hunter-gatherers must have covered their food needs with about 20 hours work a week,  "   Yes.   I have heard figures cited that in 'good country' in the best seasons it can get down to  2 - 3  hours a day, for  essentials ;   H & G  , shelter etc . The rest is for  enjoyment family, culture etc. ( I in 5 modern Australians work more than 50 hours a week !  )

I find it interesting that their  early contact with Indonesia seem to have little effect on them, except for some language, maybe some  religious  ideas,  some art ( ships) and song and dance (  a 'sword dance' )   . But not metallurgy   .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makassan_contact_with_Australia

Edited August 31, 2017 by back to earth

[badeskov]

On 8/29/2017 at 8:13 PM, kmt_sesh said:

Aren't those tunnels below the p*r***d where they bred the first kangaroos, too? I think that's how the prehistoric Bosnians used to travel.

I know, incompletely OT, and completely inappropriate....I just have an issue with animations as part of avatars and the like......just a personal grudge that I should probably see a psychologist for  

Cheers,
Badeskov 

[Gingitsune]

On 8/31/2017 at 5:27 PM, back to earth said:

Regarding your ; "  Hunter-gatherers must have covered their food needs with about 20 hours work a week,  "   Yes.   I have heard figures cited that in 'good country' in the best seasons it can get down to  2 - 3  hours a day, for  essentials ;   H & G  , shelter etc . The rest is for  enjoyment family, culture etc. ( I in 5 modern Australians work more than 50 hours a week !  )

Too bad it's an average. Inuits could have to wait over 10 hours for a seal to finally come to breath in the ice hole. At least it's plenty of time to work over you stories which you will tell your wife and kids at home.



Back to the map fro the first page, there's another neolithic adverse archipelago in Asia: Japan. They will get to agriculture around 300 BC, but only with an inflow of farmers from the Korean peninsula, named the Yayoi. The locals, which are named the Jômon, where hunters, gatherers and fishers and although they were doing pottery, had no real inclination for neolithic. Maybe Australians didn't had their Yayoi invasion and that's why they never get to become farmers, even in the North East forest were they could have implanted their neighbors' know how.