HS3016 — Full — Societies in Comparison

☆ what is subsistence technology?

#*subsistence*, in our context, means the *provision of very basic necessities of life*, so subsistence technology is technology that people use to obtain the basics that they need for their lives. Lenski suggests that subsistence technology is not just something that describes a given society—it appears to be the single most powerful force responsible for the most important differences among human society. That being said, Lenski does not take a technologically deterministic perspective. Instead, he posits that technology's role in human affairs include: (1) *Setting limits* on what is possible within a society, so advance in sub tech is a necessary precondition for substantial growth (2) Because they set these limits and greatly influences the relative cost of each of the options within those limits, it is the *single most important cause of the totality of differences* among the societies [depending on what technology they adopt] (3) Because societies have grown substantially in size/complexity/wealth/ power enjoy a great advantage in intersocietal competition and are more likely to transmit their social and cultural characteristics to future generations (4) Nature of world system has been increasingly shaped by the process of tech advance and increasingly reflects characteristics of those societies that are most tech advanced and innovative

what are the mechanisms of the evolution of human societies?

(1) *Continuity* [an essential ingredient]: — biological evolution: nearly invariant reproduction of DNA — sociocultural evolution: possible because of norms: things happen as they are expected. Things that make this possible include (1) conscious recognition of values, (2) standardized behaviour, and (3) socialization and traditions (2) *Innovation* — biological: random (nonpurposive) mutations of things, usually to adapt to environment to maximise chances of — sociocultural: cultural innovations are often combinations of chance and purpose. These are brought about because of [1] human needs (i.e. plant cultivation), [2] environmental change, [3] diffusion by contact with other societies, [4] existing store of cultural information: number of items of information. (3) *Selection* in that the cultural climate makes possible for some innovation to be adopted and spread, and for others to be rejected. — biological: natural selection - new generation is not entirely 100% replica of older generation — sociocultural: comes in the form of [1] intrasocietal selection and [2] intersocietal selection

what were the consequences of hunter-gatherer → horticultural societies?

(1) The practice of horticulture forced people to stay in one place for extended periods which led to *more permanent settlements*. In most areas (except middle east, although unexplained), simple horticulturalists usually have had to move their settlements every few years. This led to *larger settlements* and *denser populations*. — *Result*: people accumulated more possessions than ever before, with more diversity in terms of weapons — *Result*: dwellings became more substantial, some buildings contained several rooms and a small courtyard. Materials such as sun-dried clay blocks were capable of lasting as long as 2 generations. — *Result*: Appearance of religious shrines / ceremonial centres (2) *Growth of trade and commerce* as a result of [*1*] increase in occupational specialisation (at least at chief commercial centres) as well as their [*2*] locations. because of the locations they were in. Even in remote villages, there is evidence of trade: shells from the Mediterranean have been found in the sites of horticultural villages and in graves in northern Europe, etc. — *But* this growth was *limited*, because families mostly produced nearly everything they used (3) *Increase in Warfare* — in horticultural era, there's evidence of arms in the graves of adult males, reflecting the impact of technological advance (metallurgy in particular). Causes are unclear, although it may have been due to an *increase in free time for men as a result of economic surplus*, lack of hunting, increase in wealth in the form of cattle, or there's a fight of rights as horticulturalists deplete the source of game. — Greater warfare also resulted in female infanticide. In short, the adoption of horticulture in the realm of technology was comparable to the adoption of symbol use in the realm of communication: each was a decisive break with the mammal and private world. But the *most fundamental change* of food production is *the creation of a stable economic surplus*. Such economic surplus *opened up important new possibilities for the organisation of societal life*. This led to: • the ability to *support non-producers* of food ↓ • concentration of *occupational specialisation* ↓ • emergence of *governmental or religious institutions* staffed by full-time officials and priests + • emergence of *full-time artisans and merchants* + • development of cities In full, the *development of stable economic surplus meant*: — Paved the way for growth in the size of societies — Formation of multicommunity societies — Increased division of labour — Urban communities — Increased trade and commerce — Formation of the state — Greatly increased inequality *But* there was a need to make sure that *growth in productivity did not get consumed by growth in population*. This required an *ideology* that would motivate the producers of food to turn over part of their harvest to an individual authority who dispensed it as he saw fit. This came in the form of [*1*] offering sacrifices and [*2*] turning the food over to the headman for distribution.

features of the *agrarian revolution*

(1) There was an *agrarian way of life* which referred to: — *Feudalism* both in Europe and Asia where ordinary individuals did not have their own land and worked for someone else. — Work was *more demanding* in comparison to H&G or Horticulture. There was therefore a *lower standard of living* and a *shorter life expectancy* as the result of hard work and an *uncertainty of crop yields*. — People who were close to domesticated animals were also first to get diseases and had yet to develop the antibody for it. (2) In terms of *social structures*, the *political rule* constituted of the religious elites such as priests and their congregants, the *economic structure* consisted of lords and peasants, and the *military structure* consisted of knights and foot soldiers. Rule was *hereditary* and there was a *surplus expropriation* in terms of rent and taxation. (3) In terms of *family* size and structure, there was an increase in populations though initially, life expectancy dropped. *Male members* stayed with the family because they did not split the land amongst kids. There was also a *village and clan exogamy* regardless of bloodline, but an *ethnic, religious, and class endogamy*. For the first time, *patrilineality and patrilocality* became the dominant way of positioning. Clans were also invested in seeing individuals get married, so *arranged marriages* were a way of ensuring that the marriage, as a family/clan event, would not be left to the individual's hands. (4) The *status of women* was markedly reduced because of their contribution to subsistence. Women used to be more knowledgable about crops, but now farming, which is also a strenuous activity, has fallen onto the men. There's a *decreased visibility and value* of women's work. Part of this is due to the *increased fertility rate* — women have been more focused on raising and rearing 10-12 children during their prime years. (5) *Social stratification* was also much more complexed. Discussed later. (6) There was an *emergence of universal faiths* — polytheism was replaced by monotheism (particularly Christianity, Islam, Buddhism), and this was the period when the religions we see today took root. There was a *construction of major architectural works*, specifically temples and shrines. Finally, there was an *increased importance of religion* in [*1*] unifying diverse peoples, [*2*] social control, [*3*] support for hierarchy in terms of ideology. (7) The *rise of empires* also occurred in this period, as will be discussed later.

☆ *horticultural societies*: simple → advanced + metallurgy

*Metallurgy* is the key criterion for differentiating between simple and advanced horticultural societies. This refers to how *widespread* the use of metal weapons and tools are. *Simple societies = wood/stone* while *advanced societies = metal*. The *shift from stone to metals was a gradual process* for a number of reasons. E.g. slow discovery of the uses of copper, perhaps first to its colour and then invented a way for it to be less brittle and used for other purposes, and then added heat, and then discovered smelting which allowed for the extraction of copper from ores, and then can melt copper to cast in molds: (1) Until *smelting* was discovered, supply of copper was limited or needed to be transported a distance (2) Metalworking was probably *mastered by only a few specialists* who treated their skills as a kind of magic to protect a lucrative monopoly (3) Since any man could make his own tools and weapons out of stone, *people were reluctant to switch to the costlier product* The shift was also *significant because of the far reaching effects* of the manufacture and use of metal weapons and tools. Social consequences of metal tools and weapons can be best seen in *China*, who had the most prolonged horticultural era due to an *absence of the plow*. It was the most advanced in that era. One such example of this is because the *dominant metal is bronze, not copper*. Bronze is harder than copper and can be used for many more purposes, and was the result of *military successes* from the use of bronze weapons. If *plant cultivation = conquest of nature*, then *bronze = conquest of people*. Both were decisive turning points in sociocultural evolution. Possibility of the conquest, control, and exploitation of other societies for profit needed an advance in military technology, i.e. bronze

☆ food production

*Misconceptions:* (1) Not a conscious choice to adopt farming — it *evolved as a by-product of decisions made without awareness of its consequences* (2) *Not necessarily a sharp divide* between nomadic hunter-gatherers and sedentary food producers. *E.g.* some became sedentary but not food producers, others became sedentary first and adopted food production later on. There are also groups of mobile food producers that return to check on their crops and mtaintain them. (3) *Blurred distinction* between *food producers as active managers of their land* and *h/g as collectors of wild produce*. Some hunter-gatherers do manage their land. The *development of food production* was gradual. In its *early stages*, people simultaneously collected wild foods and raised cultivated ones. Collecting activities diminished in importance at different times as reliance on crops increased. The main reason why the transition was gradual is that food production systems *evolved as a result of the accumulation of many separate decision about allocating time and effort*. There are two main impetus towards this: [*1*] People seek to *maximise their return of calories* by foraging in a way that yields high returns for least effort and [*2*] to *minimise their risk of starving* by prioritising moderate but reliable returns. Men hunters also tend to guide themselves by ideas of [*3*] *prestige* preferring to hunt for prestige rather than reliably gathering nuts. People are also guided by [*4*] seemingly*arbitrary cultural preferences* such as fish=delicacies or taboo. Finally, their priorities are influenced by the [*5*] *values* they attach to different lifestyles, such as hunting vs. herding. Once food production had arisen in one part of a continent, *neighbouring h/g could decide to adopt or ignore*. *Adoption of food production may have been rapid* and wholesale in southeastern and central Europe because the hunter-gatherer lifestyle there was *less productive and less competitive*. By contrast, food production was *adopted piecemeal* in southwestern Europe, where sheep arrived first and cereals later, or because h/g lifestyle based in areas with seafood and local plants were productive. There were times where food production systems were *abandoned in favour of h/g* for a few hundred years before resuming farming. There are *five main factors* as to why the predominant result has been a *shift from hunting-gathering to food production*: (*1*) The *decline in the availability in wild foods, especially animal resources* either because of climate changes or because of depletion when people's skills improved. *E.g.* Polynesian settlers depleted species of animals until they had to intensify their food production. (*2*) On top of (1), an *increased availability of domesticable wild plants* made steps leading to *plant domestication more rewarding*. *E.g.* climate changes at the end of the Pleistocene expanded the areas of habitats with wild cereals, which were precursors to the domestication of the earliest crops in the Fertile Crescent. (*3*) The *cumulative development of technologies on food production* allowed them to increasingly turn to plant domestication. (*4*) As *population densities rose, food production became increasingly favoured* because it provided the increased food outputs needed to feed all those people. Adoption of food production is therefore an *autocatalytic process*—a gradual rise in population = compelled people to obtain more food = people become more sedentary = higher birth rates = rise in population. This *explains why they were less well nourished than H/G*. Because of these denser populations, they were able to *displace or kill h/g* by their sheer numbers, not to mention other advantages associated with food production (tech, germs, soldiers). Only in areas with potent geographic or ecological barriers which made immigration of food producers or techniques difficult were H/G able to persist until modern times.

*advanced agrarian societies*: characteristics and common features

*Technologically* speaking, the most important technological advance was the *discovery of the technique of smelting iron*. Prior to this, bronze had been the most important metal, but because the *supply was limited* and the demands of the governing class took precedence over the need of the peasants, bronze was primarily used for military, ornamental, and ceremonial purposes. So it was only in the *8th century BC* that there are true advanced agrarian societies, when iron came into general use for ordinary tools. Compared with simpler societies, advanced agrarian societies enjoyed a very *productive technology*. There was also a continuing trend in the *growth of the size of the population* — this was due partly to advances in agricultural technology that permitted greater population densities, and partly due to advances in military technology that aided the process of empire building. *Birthrates* were also high (triple of that in industrial societies) because there have been *little interest in limiting the size of families* since children were valued for both economic and religious reasons. One of the *constraints on population growth* is the threat of *severe deprivation*. The growth of territory and population came with an *increase division of labour*—there was a *significant economic specialisation* both by regions and by communities, which was accompanied by an *increased occupational specialisation*. Because politics and economics were always highly interdependent in advanced agrarian societies, *those who dominated the political system also dominated the economic system*. The production and distribution of resources were determined less by supply and demand than by *arbitrary decisions of the political elite*. Hence, these are *command economies*. In most advanced agrarian societies, the governing elite owned a grossly disproportionate share of the land. The basic philosophy of the governing class was to *tax peasants to the limit of their ability to pay*, so the peasants' living conditions were *worse off than that of H/G from thousands of years earlier*. For the majority of peasants, the one real hope for substantial improvement in their lot lay in devastation wrought by plagues, famines, and wars. Thus, the *population of the city/urban communities consisted of only 10% of its total population*—it composed mostly of the governing class, merchants, artisans, beggars, slaves, and criminals. There was also a *continuing development of the state*—in all advanced agrarian societies, the *government was the basic integrating force*. Nearly every advanced agrarian society was a monarchy, *headed by a king or emperor* whose position was usually hereditary. Coercion was necessary to hold things together because society run for the benefit of a tiny elite. Because of the *absence of commercialisation*, most *conflict was intraclass*. Most members of the governing class *considered political power a prize* to be sought for the rewards it offered. This practice reflects a proprietary theory of the state. There was also an *emergence of universal faiths*—an emergence of Buddhism, Christianity, and Islam—which *reflected the broader social and intellectual horizons* that resulted from advances in transportation technology and the spreading web of trade relations. There was also a growing *separation* of religious and political institutions, although leaders in both spheres worked closely together. *Kinship ties* remained of great importance to individuals although they *ceased to be the chief integrating force* There was also an *increasing complexity of stratification* — the basic cleavages were the same, and so were the basic patterns of inequality and the principal division in society was still between the governing class and the mass of peasants, but it *altered in that it became more complex*. There was a growing overlap in classes and occupations, and class divisions were greater than in simple agrarian societies.

☆ *horticultural societies*: characteristics (10,000 - 12,000 years ago, advanced and simple)

*Technology of horticulture:* — Swidden cultivation — Division of labour: men clear land and women are responsible for planting, tending, harvesting crops *Population and economy* — Average number of *1,500* people (simple) + *5,000* (advanced) giving them substantial advantage over competing H&G societies — Larger populations result in the *emergence of multicommunity societies* united under a single leader. —— These multicommunities demonstrate that the subsistence technology allowed for a production of stable and dependable economic surplus. !!! Invention of food production: independent food production in seven regions of the world, sites of early food production Middle east, Northern/Southern China, Sub-saharan African, Central Mexico, South central Andes, Eastern United States No communication between the different regions because there's no way to travel These are the places that independently developed food production technology that is historically and socially significant Why? (1) Food production involves domestication of wild plants and crops (2) Involves domestication of animals as well - hunting is food collection, but raising + breeding them is domestication All these places had had food production emerge at about the same time - why??? Why at this time, why not 20,000 years ago, etc Warfare started - Human power become valued as well because intense cultivation of land require human physical muscle power, so slavery became a thing Energy was being devoted to war and then developing land and tech

☆ geological/ecological conditions of Eurasia

*Why did food production spread at different rates on different continents?* The diffusion of food production was *facilitated in Eurasia* because its *predominantly East-West axis* shared exactly the same *day length and its seasonal variations*. To a lesser degree, localities distributed east and west of each other also tend to share *similar diseases, regimes of temperature and rainfall, and habitats or biomes*. There is also *no insuperable obstacles towards food production*. Therefore, the domesticated crops in the Fertile Crescent could be readily planted in western Eurasia. In contrast, the diffusion in the predominantly *North-South axis* in the Americans, Africa, and New Guinea/Australia, spread of food production was *slowed by the greater variation in climate, deserts, diseases (e.g., trypanosomes), nonarable lands, jungles (e.g., Panama), etc*. The *evidence* for such issues being real causes is in the patterns of which varieties of particular plants were domesticated where - and there is ample evidence that most of the crops in Eurasia were domesticated once, while those elsewhere were often domesticated two or more times.

☆ systems/forms/evolution of social inequality

- lecture on political/economic changes p118-121 - lenski p123-134

*environmentally specialised* societies !!! (p91)

... environmentally specialised societies refer to those that have *adapted to a specific geographic environment*. These fall *outside the main sequence of sociocultural evolution* and is often portrayed as an *evolutionary bypath*. *Pastoral societies* Defined: subsistence emphasis on herding domesticated livestock Pastoral economy: herd growth Capture, breed, and tend species of wild animals Emerged between 10,000 and 12,000 years ago Adaptation to grass land, mountainous terrain, and temperate desert Origins: East Asia, Southwest Asia, India, Middle East, Peru 1. Dog (canis lupus familiaris) 2. Sheep 3. Goat 4. Pig Nomadic: nomadism or transhumance Animals are the form of wealth as well as power But also risky because of drought, disease, theft More reliable and productive strategy than hunting and gathering Communities are typically of small size (30s-100s, average 72) Societies are usually fairly large Social and community life organized around the needs of the herds Livestock for food (milk, blood, meat) May also grow crops *Fishing societies* *Maritime societies*

☆ single origin / out of africa theory

... posits that early species of genus homo ventured out of Africa and dispersed to all around the world. Out of all these early species, only one branch survive today and thus we are all descendants of one species no matter how different we look. The idea behind this theory is that more isolated populations lacking genetic contact then evolved into a number of new species. Basically, it suggests that Homo erectus evolved into Homo sapiens in Africa, and then ventured out of Africa and dispersed to all around the world. - Based on DNA and fossil records - evidence that we all descend from the same species because scientists have traced back the Y chromosome (that's easier to trace since you can only get from the dad) - Timeline: early homo out of Africa into Eurasia (about 2 mil years ago) - Evolved into a number of new species (e.g. Neanderthals, Peking Man, Java Man in Indonesia, Homo Erectus in Africa) - Homo Erectus from Africa eventually replaced all other species *in contrast to:* multi-regional continuity theory

☆ what is *sociocultural evolution*?

... refers to the changes in [1] behaviour patterns, [2] social relationships, [3] values and [4] beliefs that happen in human populations. It is also the process of change that results a society acquiring new information, particularly technology. The best way to understand what sociocultural evolution has meant is to examine the sequence of the four types of societies and trace all the basic trends in population, culture, material products of culture, social organisations, social institutions. These trends can be attributed to the rise of technologically more advanced societies contributing directly to the decline of the less advanced because these societies lacked both the numbers and weapons needed to defend themselves against the more advanced societies that coveted their territories and other resources.

what is *biological evolution*?

... refers to the changes in the genetics of populations which alter their potential to develop adaptive characteristics. — Occurrences of genetic mutation, e.g. Why we have different facial features — Social sciences does take this into consideration, but doesn't look at the biological side, and instead focuses on sociocultural areas

☆ *multi-regional continuity* theory

... suggests that Homo erectus ventured out of Africa and then evolved into modern man in several different locations through out the world.

where, when, how did ☆ food production develop in different parts of the globe?

According to Diamond, not all places invented food production (agriculture) on their own. Many places simply *got plants that were already domesticated from other people*. These plants are what he calls *founder crops*—varieties of plants that were easier to grow and required less effort to yield the same quantity of food. They were either *adopted by the native people* of some regions themselves, who then partly or completely abandoned their hunter-gatherer way of living. In other instances the founder crops were *brought by people* from other regions. This was especially possible in Eurasia because its *long east-west axis* allowed for the same founder crops to be used various times in various places. These invading communities *used the founder crops as a means to kill, outnumber, or displace* the local communities because it made their way of living easier compared to the local communities as they had to spend less time in gathering food. They had a more secure source of food as well as more time to utilize for other purposes. These founder crops include: [*1*] Cereals (emmer wheat; einkorn wheat; barley), [*2*] Pulses (lentil, pea, chickpea, bitter vetch), and [*3*] Flax

what kind of changes occurred in horticultural → agrarian societies?

Agriculture allowed for: (1) The *separation of producers and consumers* as the result of an *increase in economic output* per capita (2) *Craft specialisation* as a result of the economic surplus (3) New *cultural artifacts* (4) *Warfare* between large groups and societies (5) *Slavery* is more prominent than in any other societies There was also prominent societal growth: (1) *Population growth* after agriculture took off, but subsequently dropped again in AD1400 during a major plague. (2) *Political growth* in terms of *size of the empire* and *increase in complexity*. Three particular periods of growth: 3000-2000 BC, 1500-60 BC, 200 BC onwards (3) *Technological growth* in terms of economy and military (4) *Economic growth* in terms of an increase in size and density of trade networks

☆ egalitarian practices of !Kung (leveling mechanisms)

As a hunter-gatherer society, the !Kung were highly dependent on each other for survival. Hoarding and stinginess were frowned upon, and the ǃKung's emphasis was on collective wealth for the tribe, rather than on individual wealth. Thus, the !Kung have a practice of *insulting the meat* — this is to make sure that the hunters who manage to procure more meat do not see themselves as above the rest. By touting their meat as worthless, they teach hunters not to be boastful nor prideful, "cooling his heart" to stop him from thinking he's better. The !Kung also practice a *reciprocity* in sharing their resources. They don't *accumulate* their possessions because of their nomadic lifestyles, so people have little opportunities to hoard. In terms of *subsistence activities*, men are not more important than women as a part of the community and vice versa, although men usually are the hunters of meat.

☆ *horticultural societies*: social organisation

Continuing *importance of kinship* in simple horticultural societies because almost everyone is related in some way especially with the virtual absence of social organisations like guilds or parties. Kinship systems *are very complex* with rules governing relations among numerous categories. — High incidence of *ancestor worship* because their *permanent settlements* place them in closer proximity to their dead so those that have passed are more likely to be remembered and honoured. —— Such a high incidence of ancestor worship is also attributed to the needed *justification for the emerging enhanced leadership role*. Many of them also adhered to *matrilineal kin groups* probably as a result of the relative contributions of men and women to subsistence. In societies where men also make a substantial contribution, such a matrilineal pattern is not likely to develop. In terms of *leadership*, they tend to be led by *headmen or chiefs* who also took on important religious functions as shamans. The *chief's influence* is enhanced when he *combines secular with religious functions*. *Social inequality* is also *generally limited* in that there is no extremes of wealth or political power. Substantial differences in prestige emerge when [*1*] political / religious leaders enjoy higher status based on their personal achievements or [*2*] military prowess or [*3*] skills in oratory, age, kinship ties. The greater and more advanced the technology and economy, the greater social inequality tends to be. There was also a more *complex division of labour* as a result of specialisation. E.g. chiefs do not have to hunt in forests or work in production, craftsmen made tools, etc. *Earliest advanced horticultural societies* had a *feudalistic structure* which meant that power was in the hands of a warrior nobility that ruled people in their immediate area, who paid tribute to the king and supported him militarily, but was *essentially independent*. There was also a *marked social inequality* in the form of *2 basic classes*: a [*1*] small warrior nobility who were the governing class and lived in walled cities that served as their fortresses and had access to resources like bronze, and the [*2*] great mass of common people who mainly functioned to produce economic surplus by which [1] depended on. *Kinship was extremely important* because membership in the governing class was largely *hereditary*. Physical structure of those *early urban centres* were also impressive and reflected the evolution of the state and its newly acquired ability to mobilise labour on a large scale.

☆ demographic transition theory (FDT and SDT)

Demographic transition (DT) refers to the *transition from high birth and death rates to lower birth and death rates* as a country or region develops from a *pre-industrial to an industrialized economic system*. Thus, it's a *theory that connects population growth to the economic system*. *Characteristics of the First Demographic Transition* — Pre-Industrial (*1*) Declining age of first marriage: *Marriage* was seen as an economic necessity; an expansion of networks and arrangement for property transfer. In order to accumulate wealth by combining their land and resources, children got marriage earlier (2) Low *cohabitation* (3) Low *divorce*: Not really need for divorce as often families got along well. Using china as an example, families often get married within their family line to preserve their wealth E.g. cousin to cousin. Thus as the family are familiar with each other and grew up together, the tendency for them divorcing is low. In addition, if they divorce, there is no other methods for either to survive alone (*4*) Decline in *material fertility* via reduction at older age (*5*) *Preoccupation with basic material needs*: for survival (*6*) Rising membership of *political and cultural networks* (*7*) Dominance of *single family model* (*8*) *Importance of children*: As labour was needed to maintain the farming fields *Characteristics of the Second Demographic Transition* that began in western Europe as they were the first to industrialise. (1) Fall in proportion *married*; decline in remarriage: No need for accumulation of wealth through land and resources with the movement to industrialized societies. Thus the younger generations were not subjected to arrange marriage anymore. (2) Delayed age in *marriage*: as they left the fields, they were economically independent, they had to work in order to accumulate wealth from scratch before getting married, thus there was a delayed age in marriage (3) High *divorce* rates: Not because they increasingly had conflict, but rather there was a buffer by social welfare created by government. Thus even though they divorced with kids, the government had platforms to support them as compared to previous generations with nothing (4) *Delayed childbearing*: due to delayed marriage age; and no need for children labour (5) Rise in *high order needs* (6) Rise in *female economic activity*: No more farm labour to tend for

☆ fertile crescent and the mediterranean zone

Diamond asks: Why did agriculture never arise independently in some fertile and highly suitable areas? Why, among the areas where agriculture did arise independently, did it develop much earlier in some than in others? *Two possible explanations* are propose: there's either a *problem with the apples* (plants are not domesticable) or a *problem with the Indians* (people were sucky). The *fertile crescent* appears to have been the earliest site for a whole string of developments including cities, writing, empires, and civilisation. The *advantages of the fertile crescent* include: (*1*) It lies within a zone of so-called *Mediterranean climate*, characterised by *mild, wet winters* & long, hot, dry summers. The *climate is important because* it selects the plant species that are able to survive the long dry season and resume growth rapidly upon the return of the rains. *Plants there* are *annuals* that dry up and dies during the dry season. One year of life produces big seeds instead of making inedible wood/fibrous stems such as trees and bushes. They constitute *6 of the modern world's 12 major crops*. (*2*) *Wild ancestors* of many founder crops were already *abundant and highly productive*, occurring in large strands whose value must have been obvious to hunter-gatherers. These crops made it easy for hunter-gatherers to *collect huge quantities of wild cereals* when the seeds are ripe for *storage* and enables them to *settle down more permanently* even before plant cultivation. Such *ease of domestication*—as compared to other crops such as corn that had to undergo drastic changes to become useful—made it the among the first crops to develop in certain areas, including the Fertile Crescent. This contrast between wheat/barley (big-seeded annuals) and the difficulties posed by teosinte may have been a significant factor in the differing developments of New World and Eurasian human societies. (*3*) Flora included a *high percentage of hermaphroditic selfers* which meant that their reproductive biology was *convenient for early farmers*. Furthermore, on the occasions that they did cross-pollinate, they also generated new varieties among which to select from. Of the first significant *8 crops to have been domesticated*, all were selfers. Th question that turns to why, if they had the same climate, did other zones in the Mediterranean fail to rival the Fertile Crescent as an early site of food production? What *advantages did the Fertile Crescent enjoy*? (*1*) Has the world's *largest zone* of Mediterranean climate. A larger area meant a *higher diversity of domesticable plants*. (*2*) *Greatest climate variation* from season to season and year to year, which *favoured evolution* among the flora, especially in a high percentage of *annual plants*. The combination of *high diversity* & *high percentage of annuals with large seeds* means a *high diversity of annuals*. (*3*) It *provides a wide range of altitudes and topographies within a short distance*, which means that harvest seasons can be *staggered*. Hunter-gatherers could thus harvest grain seeds as they matured instead of being overwhelmed by a concentrated harvest at a single altitude. (*4*) Wealth in ancestors—because they have a lot of diversity over a small distance—not only of valuable crops, but also of *domesticated big mammals*. The early domesticated animals (goat, sheep, pig, cow, horse) lived in sufficiently close proximity that they could be readily transferred after domestication from one part of the Fertile Crescent to another, such that the region had all four species. *Agriculture* could arise in the Fertile Crescent from the domestication of locally available wild plants without having to wait for the arrival of crops derived from plants domesticated elsewhere. So *agriculture was launched in the fertile crescent* by the early domestication of 8 "founder crops" — 3 cereals, 4 pulses, and flax. The fertile crescent thus had an *advanced biological package for intensive food production*. (*5*) It may have faced *less competition from H/G lifestyle* than that in some other areas because mammal species hunted for meat are overexploited by the growing human population and reduced significantly, the food production package quickly became superior, hence there was a *quick transition*. In the other areas, the problem *does not lie with the people* as well. [*1*] Ethnobiological studies have shown that hunter-gatherers know all their locally available wild species and their crops. And [*2*] they do exploit their knowledge to domesticate the most useful available species as evidenced by studies that demonstrate that the hunter-gatherers of the time brought home only the most useful available seed plants and avoided toxic plants or those with small or unpalatable seeds. *New Guinea* offers a *contrast* to the fertile crescent because their indigenous food production was restricted [*1*] by the *local absence* of domesticable cereals, pulses, and animals, [*2*] by the *resulting protein deficiency in the highlands, and [*3*] by limitations of the locally available root crops at high elevations. This is *despite* knowing as much about the wild plants and animals as people today. Thus, New Guinea is the perfect example of Diamond's stance that *limitations on food production has nothing to do with the peoples, and everything to do with the biota and environment*. Especially since when *local peoples promptly took advantage of productive crops when they arrived from elsewhere*, and increased greatly in population.

☆ animal domestication: the anna karenina principle

Diamond is trying to explain *why so many places in the world did not have large domesticated animals*. This is important to his theory because some people would claim that people like the Australian Aborigines did not domesticate animals because they were too backwards. Diamond disagrees with that sort of assessment and wants to say that *geographic luck led to most of the inequality* in human history. All large animals that could be domesticated were domesticated by 2500 BC. The term "*Anna Karenina principle*" refers to the book Anna Karenina, by Leo Tolstoy. The first sentence of that book is "Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is different in its own way." This relates to animals because it means that *there are many things that must be true about an animal in order for it to be domesticable*. That means that there are many different ways that an animal can be "bad" for domestication, but all domesticable animals are similar because they have all of the necessary traits. *Cultural variances do not explain* the absence of domesticates at some locales: (*1*) *Imported* domesticates are typically rapidly accepted when appropriate to the locale, (*2*) *pet keeping* is universal, (*3*) domestication arose rapidly where appropriate species were available, (*4*) independent and parallel domestication occurred at different locales, and (*5*) there has been very limited success at modern domestications. Efforts in the 19C and 20C to domesticate the eland, elk, moose, musk ox, zebra, and bison have met with limited success. Diamond says that animals must have: (*1*) The *right diet* — omnivore or herbivore with the exception of the dog (*2*) Growth rate (*3*) Ability to *breed in captivity* in terms of room (cheetahs need more room) and mating rituals (cannot be too long) (*4*) *Temperament* — their disposition must be suitable for taming (*5*) *Calmness* in that it accepts penning (*6*) Social structure and hierarchy to accept subordinate role and herding (cats don't herd) *An animal can have all but one of these and be useless for domestication.* This supports Diamond's theory because it means that the *ability to domesticate animals comes about by luck*. You have to be lucky enough to have one or more of the few animals that fulfils all the criteria living near you in order to domesticate them. Domesticated animals are *changed through mutations from their wild progenitors*, not just tamed. Many have gotten smaller under domestication and have been otherwise modified for greater milk production, more wool, etc.

☆ what is the *Ecological Evolutionary Theory*?

Ecological-evolutionary theory (EET) is concerned with 2 things: (*1*) relations among the parts of societies and the interactions between societies and their environments and (*2*) evolution of societies—how and why they change and how these changes create differences among societies. EET *predicates societies as part of the global ecosystem*; the organization of which parallels that of many species of multicellular organisms. Lenski utilises the theory as a *framework for*: — *Explanations of evolution and change* of human society with an emphasis on historical/cultural influence of change — Emphasis on *biophysical environment* — Emphasis on the level of *subsistence technology* in explaining the kind of social culture, norms, that the particular society has developed. Believe that subsistence tech is the key; it is a necessary condition for any significant increase in the size and complexity of a society. *Basically argues*: that all all societies are an adaptive mechanism evolved repeatedly; not just a conscious choice and selection, but a repeated adaptation process that make a society as it is today.

☆ domestication of plants and animals: *Why did food production prevail as a way of life?*

Food production was seen as the *first great social revolution* because the domestication of plants and animals for food purposes led to the first major transformation in human society. It used to be that the environment influenced society's structure, but people were now *able to somewhat control their environment*. It also *changed the dynamic between species*. (1) *Possessing domestic animals and livestock fed more people* by: — Becoming the *major source of animal protein* instead of wild game — Serving as sources of *milk and milk products* (butter, cheese, yogurt) thereby *yielding several times more calories* over their lifetime than just meat — *Increase crop production* by: —— manure provides crop *fertilizer and fuel* —— pulling *plows* and making it possible for people to till land that had previously been uneconomical If they had no animals = grew crops in river valleys. (2) *Sedentary lifestyle* enforced by food production — *Denser* human populations permitted by a shortened birth interval (2 years instead of 4 years) — Store *food surpluses* which are essential for [*1*] feeding non-food-producing *specialists* and the [*2*] formation of complex political units, [*3*] feeding professional soldiers and priests (justifications for war) —— This was crucial to the complexity of the political units, which allowed them to be better at conquest. (3) *Yield natural fibres* for making clothing, blankets, nets, ropes from both crops + livestock (4) Big domestic mammals revolutionised society by becoming *land transport* — can move goods and people in large quantities rapidly and for long distances *E.g.* Most direct contribution of plant and animal domestication to wars is the conquest from Eurasia's horses, whose military role made them the jeeps and Sherman tanks of ancient warfare on that continent — Lead to westward expansion of speakers of Indo-European languages — Invention of stirrups: allowed Huns and successive waves of other peoples from the Asian steppes to terrorize others —Only the introduction of tanks in WWI did horses finally become supplanted *BUT*: Germs also evolved in human societies as a result of animal domestication. Those first to fall victim are also those that developed substantial resistance to new diseases.

☆ *hunter-gatherer societies*: characteristics (only type of human societies until about 10,000 years ago)

Hunter-gatherer societies are differentiated by their *food foraging way of life*. They hunt and gather wild products of the environment such as plants, vegetables, nuts, fruits, and animals that they are able to catch with their technology. Such technology isn't quite as prehistoric, as the hunter-gatherers are very knowledgable about animals. They're known as the *original affluent society* as their needs are met with minimal labour—they had a well-balanced and ample diet with plenty of leisure time. They were also rich in human warmth and aesthetics such as painting and music. They were also very *sustainable ecologically* because their needs were modest and relied primarily on gathering. When resources become more limited, more emphasis is placed on hunting. The most *striking feature is that they're an egalitarian society*. Differences in prestige of social influence is based on hunting ability, artifact manufacture, healing and curing skills, knowledge of history and social rules, etc. The forms of *social control* they have include criticism, gossip and ridicule. Public denouncement, exile, and execution.

☆ history of the industrial revolution

It is difficult to define but broadly, speaking, the IR really *refers to the major shifts of technological, organisational, social-economic conditions* in the *late/mid-18th century* that began in Britain and then spread throughout the world. There are *four phases* in of the Industrial Revolution: (*1*) *1760 - 1850*: Geographically centred in England and consisted of the innovation of machines that *increased the efficiency of human labour* (creation of the factory system) and *harnessed new sources of energy* (factory system spread from textile to iron industry). No longer was a single tool used for drilling/boring/grinding/milling, but there was the rise of *machines capable of precision work*. (*2*) *1850 - 1900*: primarily in technological facilitation of transportation such as the *steam engine*. This greatly reduced the cost of moving goods which reduced the price of most heavy bulk commodities, thus leading to a greater demand for them and a breakdown of local monopolies/ogliopolies. England gradually became a single giant market for a growing number of commodities. There was also an *organisational innovation* that was important towards the development of the modern corporation (*3*) *1900 - 1950*: synthetic materials, nuclear power, and transportation — in this phase, IR also *spread to new parts of the world*, thus changing the relative ranking of nations in economic terms. (*4*) *1950 - present*: the information age - the first major technology was *television* which enabled those in control to transform/manipulate values, beliefs, and actions of people. Why is the *industrial revolution still occurring*? *Firstly*, there are greater informational resources and a larger population; the *more people = more minds at work*. *Secondly*, there are changing attitudes towards innovation — members of society actively promote and encourage innovation instead of stigmatising it. Education no longer just encourages rote memorisation but creative thinking and research. *Thirdly*, the rise of modern science contributes to the need for innovations that facilitate us in explaining the workings of the world we live in. So if modern science continues to prevail, IR will continue. *Fourthly*, military tech becomes obsolete within a short frame of time, so military research will keep on innovating, and their products will be beneficial for non-military areas of life (e.g. silicon chip). *Fifthly*, environmental feedback as a result of risk society requires the wheel to keep turning and maintaining the environment. *Finally*, there is a desire for ever higher standards of living; the more people have, the more people want.

*yali's question*

Jared Diamond (JD) has done extensive field work in New Guinea. His indigenous New Guinean politician friend Yali asked why whites had been so successful and arrived with so much "cargo" compared to the locals. J JD rephrases this question: *why did white Eurasians dominate over other cultures by means of superior guns, population-destroying germs, steel, and food-producing capability?* JD's main thesis is that this occurred *not because of racial differences in intelligence, etc. but rather because of environmental differences*. He wishes to play down Eurocentric thinking and racist explanations because they are loathsome and wrong. Modern stone age peoples "are on the average probably more intelligent, not less intelligent, than industrialized peoples." New Guineans are "more intelligent, more alert, more expressive, and more interested in things and people around them than the average European or American is", traits which he attributes to survival of the fittest.

☆ causes of the industrial revolution

Lenski cites *4 important things that led to the IR*: (*1*) There was an *accumulation of information in the agrarian era* which meant that there was an enormous store of information which held the obvious potential for an increase in the rate of innovations when other conditions within societies became favourable. (*2*) *Advances in water transportation* led to the *conquest of the New World*. Voyagers shipped back vast quantities of gold and silver, which meant there was a tremendous growth in the money economy and a decline in the barter system. *Money* was important towards breaking down the barriers for technological innovation because people were more likely to invest in new enterprises and less likely to state obligations such as wages, rents, or debts. It also *produce inflation* that led to an orientation towards *rational profit-making*, therefore motivating people to provide financial support for technological innovations that would increase the efficiency of people and machines. As colonies provided a growing market for Europe's manufactured goods and paid for them with a swelling flood of cheap and abundant raw materials, which resulted in a *shift of the center of world trade*, as Western Europe replaced the Middle East. (*3*) The *printing press* was also invented and contributed to the *dissemination of new technological and ideological information*, which was a major factor in overcoming resistance to innovation and change. The printing press made it easier for *protestant doctrines* to be disseminated, that subsequently led to parts of society developing a new outlook in life. The protestant reform *remolded the attitudes, beliefs, values of countless people in ways that undermined the traditional agrarian economy* on top of *stimulating economic and technological innovation*. Lenski suggests that it's more than a coincide that the IR had its beginnings in predominantly protestant nations, hence the protestant reformation was an important link in the chain of causation that led to the IR. (*4*) *Advances in agriculture* — thus far, the chief restraint on societal growth and development is in *agricultural technology* because the elites want to maintain the status quo, and the peasants were happy to survive. However, things changed when the *increased use of money and inflation* began to undermine the system because it led to agriculture in Europe gradually *becoming more profit-oriented and capitalistic* and *less governed by tradition and custom*. So in the 18th century, *innovations were adopted* where traditional systems of agriculture had been weakened, such as crop rotation or simple machines.

☆ what is *evolution*? !!!

Long-term directional patterns of change that scientists have discovered throughout the world of nature.

what were the main causes of hunter-gatherer → horticultural societies?

Most scholars doubt that hunter-gatherers would abandon their way of life until they absolutely had to. *Old theories* posit ideas of [*1*] human intelligence (that led them to produce their own foodstuff instead of hunting), [*2*] population pressure (that fruits/plants were not enough to feed the growing population) and [*3*] natural outcome. *New theories* have emerged out of better technology to study these societies and attribute this shift to several factors, largely as a result of [1] *climate change* and [2] *gradual growth of population*. — Global warming (15,000 - 8,000) years ago (*1*) changed climate greatly in many areas, (*2*) raised ocean levels, (*3*) altered the habitat of a number of important animals and plants —— [Result]: Reduced supply and changed the migration patterns of a number of large game animals, forcing societies either to follow surviving animal populations into new territories or to find substitute foods —— [Result]: More people were competing for a shrinking resource base — Hunting and gathering also became *less rewarding* as opposed to the domestication of wild plants. — Rise in population is also an autocatalytic process —the HG communities are *dominated* in terms of land and food resources. In the end, it's all about *human adaptation*—the mental cultural ability to adapt to changes in the environment. It's not as much of a clean shift as it is about responding to change.

☆ overview: types of human societies (based on 4 types of subsistence patterns)

Need to understand that *there isn't clear cut features of categorisation*; some areas they may resemble more of societies outside their category than those inside, etc. But *we categorise because distinctions reflect real and important differences* but we recognize that the characteristics of groups in a category are not identical, just like in age categories. (1) *Hunting & Gathering* societies — from *human beginnings to 8000B.C.* — hunting wild animals, birds or fish — Gathering wild foodstuffs (nuts, fruits, berries, roots, seeds) — Few *roles* to take, mostly on the basis of age, sex, kinship status — *Nomadic* and *egalitarian* — Small group size (2) *Horticultural (simple and advanced)* — *8000B.C. to 3000B.C.*, with advanced horticultural emerging in the last *1000 years* — *Cultivation* of land for food instead of passively relying on land for their basic necessities — Use of *hand tools* only — More *sedentary*, hence they had more possessions — *Semi-nomadic* and may be *egalitarian, ranked, or stratified* depending on amount of surplus — Groups of 100 to several thousands of individuals (3) *Agrarian societies (simple and advanced)* — Emerged about *10,000 years ago, 3000B.C. to 1800A.D.* — Depend on *farming using ploughs, draft animals, irrigation, or machinery*. This sort of tech gave rise to different social organisations and relationships among people — Society based on *possessions as status symbols* — *Individual ownership* of resources — Much occupational specialization — Usually *stratified* with multiple social classes — Live in groups consisting of thousands of individuals or larger Sedentary living (towns and cities) (4) *Industrial societies* — Started about *400 years ago* — Depend on mass production/factories (began rapid development with industrial revolution in England in 1600's) — From *agriculture to manufacturing* (crop rotation, steam power, specialized labor, spinning wheel) — Massive increases in productivity, surplus, population, settlement size, etc. — Increased *division of labor* These days you also have industrializing societies, etc, or societies that are a hybrid as well

☆ plant domestication

Plant domestication is defined by Diamond as growing a plant and thereby—consciously or unconsciously—causing it to change genetically from its wild ancestors in ways making it more useful to human consumers. For *plants*, their key purpose is to disperse their seeds, many of which trick animals into carrying them. Some have adapted to being eaten and dispersed, so the early unconscious stages of crop evolution from wild plants is *evolving in ways that attracted humans* to eat and disperse their fruit without yet intentionally growing them. *So what are people's unconscious criteria that plants have adapted to?* (*1*) *Size* — people prefer larger berries, which explains why many crop plants have much bigger fruits than their wild ancestors, a difference that only arose in recent centuries. (*2*) *Taste* — wild seeds evolved to be *bitter* or even poisonous to deter animals from eating them, so natural selection acts oppositely on seeds and fruits. The fruit itself tastes good, but their seeds do not in order to be dispersed. *E.g.* Almonds in the wild originally contained a bitter chemical that can break down to yield poison cyanide. Why it has become something we consume today is because of a mutation in a single gene that prevents them from synthesizing the chemical. These nonbitter almond seeds would be the ones sampled and planted, at first unintentionally, and then later intentionally. These are the *2 top criteria*, but other criteria include fleshy/seedless fruits, oily seeds, long fibres. *Seedlessness* is a good example of how human selection can completely reverse the original evolved function of a wild fruit. *Thus*, by harvesting these individual wild plants that possessed these desirable qualities to an exception degree, ancient peoples unconsciously dispersed the plants and set them on the road to domestication. Other than humans, there are other *major types of change that did not involve them making visible choices*. (*1*) Only mutant seeds that lack mechanisms for dispersal would have been harvested because otherwise, they could not have been efficiently gathered. *E.g.* Wild wheat and barley had seeds that grew on stalks that would shatter, dropping seeds on the ground for germination. The single-gene mutation prevents stalks from shattering, and these end up being the ones harvested and brought home. Thus, the mutant seeds became the ones that farmers harvested and sowed, while normal seeds fell to the ground and became unavailable. This demonstrates how *human farmers reversed the direction of natural selection*. (*2*) *Annual plants* evolve by means of germination inhibitors that make seeds initially dormant and spread their germination over several years because the weather is unpredictable and they need to up their chances of survival. This is done by enclosing their seeds in a thick coat or armor. Early farmers discovered that they could obtain higher yields by tilling and watering the soil. (*3*) Mutant plants that *did not have germination inhibitors* would have sprouted and yielded harvested mutant seeds that would have changed the course of natural selection. (*4*) For plants that *reproduce themselves, the mutant gene would automatically be preserved*. *Why were some plants domesticated early on, some later on, and some never at all?* The stages of domestication is based on the *characteristics of the plants*. (*1*) *Wheat, barley, peas* were domesticated *10,000 years ago* because they were [*1*] already edible and gave high yields in the wild. They also [*2*] grew quickly and could be harvested within a few months and were easily stored. Furthermore, their [*3*] wild ancestors required very little genetic change to be converted into crops. (*2*) *First fruit and nut trees* were domesticated around 4000 BC. Compared to (1), they had the drawback of not yielding food until *at least three years after planting*, and not reaching full production until after a decade. But they were still the *easiest crops to cultivate*. (*3*) There are also *trees that cannot be grown from cuttings* and is not worth *growing from seed*. They need to be grafted instead.

hunter-gatherer → horticultural societies

The emergence of horticultural societies is marked by a *rise in food production and a shift away from food collection*. Changes in subsistence technology changes the way humans organise their lives and the way they structure their society. *Food production* refers to *human control* over the reproduction of plants and animals (horticultural, agricultural, industrial). So for the first time in history, humans can have control over food production; their life rhythm is no longer dictated by just the foodstuff in the wild and therefore not that bound by seasonal changes. There isn't a *sharp divide* between hunter-gatherers and food producers—some hunter-gatherers intensively manage their land. So the *society transitioned* from *food collection to food production*—humans begin to cultivate crops and keep herds of animals. It's *not a sudden change*; people who adopted food production did not consciously strive towards farming as a goal because they did not know what it was.

consequences of the industrial revolution

The initial consequences came with the invention of the spinning and weaving machines that led to the *creation of factories*. Factories required a *concentrated supply of dependable labour*, which led to *urban settlements*. Communities could not *handle the flux*, which led to: (*1*) Abrupt disruption of social relationships in that ties and kinship were severed and uprooted. The vulnerable mass of people who streamed into cities led to a multitude of *social ills*. (*2*) Local officials had neither the means nor will to cope with rampant problems such as housing, health, education, crime, so cities became overcrowded and problematic. The immediate effects of industrialisation have thus been *traumatic* for vast numbers of people in virtually every society that has made the transition between agrarianism.

*simple agrarian societies*: characteristics and common features

The innovations of that period included the invention of the wheel and its application both tao wagons and to the manufacture of pottery, the invention of the plow, the harnessing of animals to pull wagons and plows and their use as pack animals, the harnessing of wind power for sailboats, the invention of writing and numerical notation and invention of the calendar. With these new cultural resources, societies expanded their populations, increased their material wealth and developed social organizations far more complex than anything known before. (*1*) *Technology* Although all of the innovations mentioned above were important, the *plow had the greatest potential for social and cultural change* because it made more [*1*] *permanent cultivation* possible in a greater variety of soils, and thereby led to the *widespread replacement of horticulture by agriculture*. It also [*2*] facilitated the *harnessing of animal energy* which led to increased productivity. The plow and related techniques of agriculture apparently [*3*] spread by diffusion until agrarian societies were eventually established throughout most of Europe, North Africa and Asia. The plow *presupposed certain earlier inventions and discoveries* underlying again the cumulative nature of technological change. (*2*) *Religion* and the *Growth of the Economic Surplus* Technological advance created a possibility of *surplus*, but *ideology* was needed to *motivate farmers into producing more than just subsistence*, and then to *turn that surplus over to an authority*. Although this has sometimes been accomplished by means of secular and political ideologies, a system of beliefs that defined people's obligations with reference to the supernatural worked best in most societies of the past. Religion was an *extremely powerful force* in the earliest agrarian societies in that the combination of church and state allowed for a better social control. (*3*) *Population*: Growth in Size of Communities and Societies In the first few centuries after the shift to agriculture, there was *striking growth in the size of a number of communities*, especially in Mesopotamian societies. (*4*) The Polity: *Growth of the State* Traditional modes of government based on kinship ties were *no longer adequate* for administering the affairs of societies whose populations now sometimes numbered in the millions. Through rulers continued to rely on relatives to help them govern, they were forced to turn increasingly to others. *One solution* was to incorporate a conquered group as a subdivision of the conquering society, leaving its former ruler in charge but in a subordinate capacity. Eventually all successful rulers found it necessary to *create new kinds of governmental structures* that were no longer based on kinship ties alone. One *consequence of the growth of empires and bureaucracy* was the establishment of the *first formal legal system*. As empire grew, it was necessary to bring diverse cultures under a single political system. (*5*) *Economy*: The First Monetary Systems and the Growth of Trade Money was absent in the first simple agrarian societies, although there existed standardized media of exchange, such as barley. As these media became too cumbersome the *use of currency became common*. The growth of monetary systems had *enormous implications for societal development*. Money has always *facilitated the movement, the exchange, and ultimately the production of goods and services of every kind*. The establishment of a monetary system *greatly expands the market for the things each individual produces*, because products can then be sold even to people who produce nothing the producer wants in exchange. Thus the *demands for goods and services increases*. (*6*) *Stratification*: Increasing Inequality In most simple agrarian societies of the ancient world, newly emerging or expanding *social and cultural differences created internal divisions within society*, and sometimes conflict as well. Three cleavages were especially serious: [*1*] between the *small governing class* and the much *larger mass of people* who had no voice in political decisions and who to hand over all or most of the surplus they produced to the governing class; [*2*] division between the *urban minority* and the far more numerous *rural population*; [*3*] between the small literate minority and the illiterate masses. Because these 3 lines of cleavage tended to converge, their impact was greatly magnified.

what are the *basic components of human societies*?

To *understand how these social and cultural answers develop*, we need to consider *5* basic components that are present in every human society. (1) *Population* or the *collection of physical individuals* (bodies). There are *3 components* to this: — [Genetic constants]: traits that are the same for every society and every generation like basic needs, physiological resources (eyes, ears, etc, even reflexes to extreme heat). We are thus [motivated to optimise pleasurable experiences and minimise painful and unpleasant experiences]. These constants also allow for us to revert to similar symbol systems because of our physiological resources (lips, tongue, brain, speech control). We also inherit powerful emotions and appetites inherited from distant prehuman ancestors. — [Genetic variables] refer to things like race and sex differences, taste sensitivity, etc. Direct impact may have limited importance, but their indirect effects (sociocultural responses such as ethnic stereotyping, prejudice) have often been substantial. These days, cultural adaptation (e.g. suntan oil) help to circumnavigate the biological adaptation. — [Demographic variables] refer to how certain clusters of genes vary from one society to another that may impact life expectancy at birth, etc. (2) *Culture* refers to the *society's symbol systems and information they can convey* *E.g.* Language, symbols, norms, ideology, values — Biophysical environments may be similar, but the culture may differ. And the culture influences different aspects of the same demographical features (meanings of race, gender). — *Important because* they're like the foundation laid by a previous generation that enables the future generation to [address new challenges instead of working on the same ones]. The continuing expansion of old symbol systems and the creation of new ones have steadily increased the capacity of human societies to handle information. (3) *Material products* refer to the *things people produce* or *obtain through trade*. — May vary vastly despite commonalities — Can also be known as [material culture] (4) *Social organisation* refers to the *networks of relationships among members of a society*. — Organises society into predictable relationships — There are also [cultural influences] in systems of social organization (5) *Social institutions* refers to *combination of (1) to (4)*. - These are the structures in society, manifested as groups of social positions and associated social relations — [Function]: Maintain and carry out essential social functions and perpetuate the social order

☆ *hunter-gatherer societies*: social organisation

Types of societies: (1) *Bands* which consists of 30-50 people and are typically smaller because they don't have the mechanisms to hold a larger society together (government, education). Band membership was fluid because there was alikelihood of being absorbed by another band, and band identity isn't rigid. — *Social organisation*: personal kinship relationships — *Movement*: Nomadic / semi-nomadic hunter/foragers with a tendency to have a permanent base or moved according to the seasons — *Division of labour*: Gender and age — *Conflict*: Rarely external, spent more time and energy socialising and building up (2) *Tribes* are collectives of bands or lineage groups, each with a similar language and lifestyle, occupying a distinct territory. They're often made up of *100-500* individuals, making movement more challenging and thus have a slant towards [horticulture]. Due to its size, bands allow for better survival and division of labour. — *Movement*: Nomadic / semi-nomadic villages — *Division of labour*: Gender and age, more stratified due to size — More *status differences* between individuals in these societies — May have *limited horticultural and pastoral economy* In terms of *leadership*, they tend to be led by a *headman or big man* depending on the culture, who's role is to be generous, settle disputes, and to form consensuses. Headmen are entitled to polygyny and family members may be first for food allocation. They are *not elected by birth* and *did not fight* for the position, but *emerged because of their ability* by having [*1*] skills that the group wants or that [*2*] they're charismatic. In terms of *economics*, they go by a *system of reciprocity*—people exchange things of similar value that needs to be established over time. The principle of reciprocity *guides distribution and exchange*. There's also a *generalisation of reciprocity* which means that people distribute whatever they have found regardless of whether they know the person or not. In terms of *religion*, they practice *animism*: the belief that all things have spirits and therefore, they have a sort of respect towards things in their lives. They also participate in *ancestor worship*.

rise of *agricultural societies* (5000-6000 years ago)

[Agrarian] refers to the combination of social, economic, and political system, but [agriculture] means to work at a field with a machine. Thus, agrarian societies were distinguished by their usage of farming as a main method of subsistence. Advanced agrarian societies have *widespread access to iron/steel tools* and is distinguished from the use of *stone vs. iron* plow. Early sites of agrarian societies were in *Mesopotamia* (Iraq, Syria, Turkey, Iran) and Egypt, and later China and India. Other agrarian societies emerged, but these places were first because they had the *material and social (ideology+social organisation) foundation* to develop and take root. The emergence of agricultural societies is *marked by the use of the plow*. The invention of the plow was seen as an *agricultural revolution* because it transformed the way crops grew *and* how crops growing was conducted. Again, this happened in gradual steps, contingent on other innovations such as domestication that allowed for the planting and harvesting of crops. The invention of the plow allowed for: (1) Better control of *weeds* which allowed them to plant more than root plants (2) Bringing back leached *nutrients to the surface* which allow them to plant more than root plants (3) Harnessing of *animal power* (oxen) (4) Greatly *improving the productivity* of the land There is significant [*1*] specialisation of labour in both regions and communities. [*2*] Often a governing elite that control both the political and the economic aspects of life. [*3*] Trade is increasingly important. Nearly every society was once ruled by a king or other monarch. [*4*] Military conflict is much more common because now there's a lot to fight for and ideology (~monotheistic religion) to support killing, raiding, stealing of other communities. [*5*] Religion also plays a much more important role than before. [*6*] Construction of major architectural works is more common - specifically temples and shrines. There was also an [*7*] advancement of leisure and arts and a further stratification of the social classes. [*8*] Highly developed elite class is another feature of an agrarian society.

*hunter-gatherer societies*: case study — [prehistoric san]

— People living in that area of South Africa as early as 50k years ago (and probably earlier). By trying to study them, we will be able to better understand our past. — Debate: San are actually pastoralists who fled Bantu overlords and became foragers Archaeological evidence suggests continuity between present day San and prehistoric people No historic documentation of this *Characteristics*: — Meat contributes 30% of the calories - so *meat isn't really a big part of their diet* even though they're named hunter-gatherers. — *Social-distribution and feasting* when a large animal is killed — *Techniques*: mobile-poisoned arrows, with dogs, underground after burrowing animals, snaring — Usage of *foraging tools* — *Awareness of the environment*: highly intelligent and capable of surviving, very knowledgable in terms of animal habits and their ability to track animals, typically using poison arrows or beetle larvae. — Women's ability to *identify vines, edible plants* — *40% (young and old) don't contribute* and depend on the rest — Population of 466, 46 are over age of 60 — Leisure time (compared to industrial society) — *Dietary* quality: 37% meat, 63% veg, nuts, fruits Mongogo nuts (not all are eaten). 300 nuts/day, 33% of veg diet. — *Settlement villages*: [*1*] Dry season villages during May-Oct, 8-15 huts, 20-50 people near permanent water. [*2*] Rainy season villages — *Egalitarianism in sharing* such as "insulting the meat"