One of the problems in ascertaining this transition is that here we
are basing everything on the available scientific evidence and not
bothering with the human behaviour element.
Human behaviour isn't always logical and doesn't always reflect the
Human behaviour especially between the ever increasing groups of
people might explain why settled agriculture might have developed in
preference to the increased competition for natural resources.
I suspect the transition took various roots and forms over a
considerable amount of time with a lot of trial and error. No doubt
many died as the result of poor experimentation.
One could even argue that the transition was never universal as forms
of hunting and gathering have survived up to this very day. Fishing
and the coastal shellfish trade for example.
On 1/27/16, Michael <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> On 26/01/2016 08:40, james monaghan wrote:
>> Hi All
>> A very useful reference to the concept of ‘domiculture’ and
>> non-agricultural management of an environment (albeit tropical) for
>> sustainable food supply
> James thanks.
> it seems a much more plausible transition from hunter gatherer to
> farmer, if we envisage a "farmed landscape" whereby the plants are being
> actively managed in a wide area whilst still in what we would see as
> hunter-gathering lifestyle. The transition to "farming" could be
> achieved as a gradual intensification of this farmed landscape into
> smaller and smaller and more defendable areas.
> I suppose the transition would be as much to do with plant species being
> "ready" for the more intensive management we call "farming" as humans
> being ready to farm. That in itself would suggest human activity was
> "selectively breeding" plants long before what we understand as