The transition to a productive economy and archaeological discoveries in the Libyan desert

Transition to Food-Production and New Discoveries in the Libyan Sahara

Osama Elnur

Transition to a productive economy

And archaeological discoveries in the Libyan desert

Osama Abdel-Rahman Elnur

I was asked to provide a brief, survey-based overview of the achievements in the field of ongoing research in the Libyan desert, within the framework of the cultural season at the Faculty of Arts/Sebha University. The purpose of this lecture will not only be to provide a summary of the findings reached by archaeologists currently working in the Libyan Desert. [I note here my agreement with Cooper that using the traditional name for a larger geographical unit such as “Libyan Desert” seems more appropriate today rather than resorting to using terms such as “western Sudan”, “western Nubia”, “Western Sahara” or “Western Egyptian Desert”, which terms may be welcome for reasons of political geography, but from a scientific standpoint are less appropriate for distinguishing the region as a part of of the landscape - which includes parts of Egypt, Libya and Sudan - which provided a special environmental framework for human evolution]. Rather, I will try to discuss some preliminary conclusions, focusing on some overlapping cultural connections, especially between the Nile Valley and the desert to the west of it. This attempt will be made, although I do not claim at the present time to be able to analyze only a small amount of the material that has been excavated in the Libyan desert by all the expeditions currently operating, so my reading may depend to some extent on an impressionistic view of the pottery and rock art, which can be projected into the scheme of a significant amount of radio carbon dates.

The subject of this lecture centers on the beginning of food production, a topic that has increasingly proven to be one of the most important themes in African archaeology. It is important in itself due to the different geographic systems, ancient climatic conditions, and technical developments surrounding it. However, if one is to accept the premise that contemporary societies trace their roots back to that historical period, then food production is more important for its relationship and impact on contemporary African events and developments.

Although there is agreement on the fact that Neolithic conditions often correspond to an economic transformation of prehistoric societies, and although many researchers stress the difficulty of recognizing and testing the specific nature of the economic content archaeologically, they take some liberties in using the term "Neolithic", making it based only on certain features (primarily pottery). It seems to us that it is necessary to emphasize not only technical developments, but above all, the economic and social transformations that the societies of the Sahara and the Nile Valley witnessed during the Holocene.

It has become clear for some time that the concepts underlying the term “Neolithic” as applied to the Sahara need to be reconsidered. It is well known that tremendous theoretical progress has been achieved through the effort to reach a suitable and consistent interpretation of the totality of data that has accumulated in recent years in the prehistoric museum that was uncovered on the African continent across the Tropic of Cancer. It seems now established, in fact, that the Neolithic shift (1) cannot be fixed in a single case of some kind of strict structure, because the past has shown that strict definitions gradually collapse whenever new scientific achievements are achieved; Our knowledge is expanding, and researchers' methods are undergoing modifications. But this must be in accordance with specific principles that, far from making it a prisoner of fixed prior classifications, place it at the center of an open system in which there is no room for old, unnecessary limitations. This is the situation in many areas of the desert, where specific physical evidence regarding the process through which the domestication of plants and animals was achieved is completely absent, but this does not mean that such a process was not underway. We cannot conclude that it was already underway from mere “keys” that allow us - taking into account our level of mental development - to recognize a different type of consciousness specific to a human group that is in a position, and knows this, higher in relation to “nature” which has always remained the basis of its food in addition to being the scene of its birth and development.

The Sahara has witnessed, only in exceptional cases, urban growth, as is witnessed in other African regions, due to the climatic conditions of the Sahara. The desert oases were the traditional centers of trade and exchange that continues to this day. In any case, current research indicates that the Sahara was the original focus of the development of a culture that depended on pastoralism as its basis, a transformation that had fundamental effects on the entire course of the history of the African continent. The pastoral productive economy, along with the exploitation of wild cereals in the Sahara, has been documented starting in the mid-Holocene, with some evidence dating back to about 10,000 years ago. In fact, it can be assumed that a clear and deliberate model of environmental exploitation, with basic means of resource accumulation, can be identified at an earlier period, around 18,000 years ago, in Kush.

Ongoing research in recent years has demonstrated how, at the end of the Pleistocene, human populations in the Libyan Desert and their geographic environments underwent complex transformations. In this lecture, emphasis will be placed on this change, the ways in which it occurred, and the date of its occurrence. An image of the first horizon. Pre-domestication activities can be observed in the early stages of the Holocene, when the desert and the Nile Valley constituted a single ecosystem. The groups' economic strategy involved the use of a series of techniques, making exploitation of the environment more efficient: hunting, plant gathering, and fishing. At the same time, the first experiments with cow herding began in drier environments, such as the Libyan Desert, which led to cows becoming the main source of protein, taking this role from fish. At this time two resources were paramount to the growth of human populations - water and the abundance of wild grains.

The presented lecture does not seek to trace careful experiments in food production in the desert, nor to highlight the effects of those experiments on the outcomes of the Middle Holocene. However, the paper is based on the hypothesis that although these experiments did not lead to the establishment of an agricultural economy in the desert, they allowed the transfer of experience to the Nile Valley, and influenced the local Neolithic cultures (Fayoum A, Badari, and Naqada).

The basic premise of this lecture lies in the assumption that the history of the continent as a whole was definitively determined by the beginning of the drought that struck the desert around 5,000 BC. The population movements stimulated by this drought provided basic motivations for the emergence of the Pharaonic civilization in the Nile Valley. This process, in turn, affected the distribution of population and languages ​​to this day throughout the continent in such a fundamental way that one may regard the drought that struck the Sahara and its resulting ecological consequences as a driving force in the history of Africa.

Agriculture, and primarily pastoralism, constitutes the basis and form of human life in large parts of the African continent. This is especially true for large dry areas that cover more than a third of the entire continent. It is precisely here that nomadic herders have developed subsistence strategies over thousands of years that have helped adapt the human lifestyle to meet the challenges of a harsh environment.

Precisely during times of the most intense cultural transformation, at the beginning of the Holocene, the repopulation of the Libyan Desert occurred in the north of the continent, which is generally considered one of the most interesting parts of the prehistory of the ancient world. After extending further south at the end of the Ice Age, living conditions in the desert became more hostile than they are today. About 12,000 years ago conditions improved, and with the awakening of animals and plants, people claimed the desert as their own again. Against this background, archaeologists find themselves in a fascinating starting point that can be compared to that of a biologist who is able to observe the emergence of life on a new volcanic island emerging from the sea (Cooper). In the case of the Eastern Sahara, the entire process is clear, including its end, and therefore the subject of the investigation is very specific in time. Nowadays, the Libyan Desert between Kharga Oasis and Wadi Howar and between Kufra and the Nile Valley - an area of ​​720,000 square kilometers.

Indications indicating the domestication of cows in the Western Desert of Egypt around the early period of the ninth millennium BC, regardless of the controversy over this, appear to be correct according to modern DNA tests. The oldest evidence from Sudan dates both to the fourth millennium, and from East Africa to the third millennium BC.

The Akakus Mountains are located near the Algerian border, in Fezzan, in the far southwest of the Jamahiriya. The region has a shape closer to a triangle, within the coordinates 24° 00´ north - 10° 20´ east - 26° 00´ north - 11° 20´ east. The nearest oases are Sardals (Al-Awainat) and Ghat. The geomorphological and rock features of this series were analyzed by the Italian researcher Marclongo (2).  Overall, the height of the chain is slightly less than a thousand metres, making it possible to explore the rocky sheds located at the top of its slopes. The area is geographically extensive (about 1,100 square kilometers).

The investigation and exploration of the pre-history of Tadrart Acacus began in the 1960s on the initiative of Fabrizio Mori, who succeeded, through a series of seasons of work, in bringing to the spotlight an impressive complex of rock art that bears a great resemblance to what was discovered in Tassili, Algeria. Mori published the results of his discoveries in Al-Acacus in a book published in 1965, which was translated into Arabic and published by the Libyan Jihad Center against the Italian Invasion (currently the Libyan Jihad Center for Historical Studies). The heart of the research was the Chewent Valley, which allowed the observation of a long periodicity of these artistic works associated with the remains of human habitation. Stratigraphic excavations were conducted and the results were published in Barbara Parish's book referred to below. These excavations provided evidence of human habitation in the Tadrart-Acacus series during a period, based on the radiocarbon dating method 14, extending from the fifth millennium to the fourth millennium BC.

In that period, however, research efforts were directed at classifying and understanding rock art. Morey presented a classification then from a point of view that took into account stylistic aspects (large wild animals, round heads, pastoralism, horse, double triangles) which later, contrary to his intentions, became chronological phases.

In trying to address the subject of culture and environment, today's archaeologist cannot overlook the importance of both concepts in the branch of knowledge called archaeology. The two concepts require reference to the principles of cultural ecology and geoarchaeology. Culture - by which I mean the group that expresses such culture - lives in interrelation with the natural environment: the environment dictates not only aspects of material culture but also economic choices, residential characteristics, and demographics.

The emphasis that functional archeology places on the procedural concept of culture, that is, on culture as a product of systemic functionalism, leads me to push some questions of research strategy to the fore. Evaluations of the dimensions of spatial phenomena were conducted. This included moving away from the traditional “unity of the archaeological site” and directing the research focus to broader regional frameworks. It also became clear the need to pay attention to the processes of deposition, to the processes of archaeological site formation and destruction (which depend heavily on fluctuations in ancient environments), to the stratigraphic contents and post-depositional dynamics. In addition to these considerations, we must not neglect to conduct the study in terms of topics related to the distribution of resources (water, plants, animals, and raw materials) because this is related to the nature of the environment.

These last points, as is known, were developed particularly in the field of geoarchaeology, a branch of knowledge that has shown the ways in which quantitative principles and techniques, particularly for the study of the environment, can be applied in archaeological research. It is known that Butzer's works represent a fundamental development of the principles of functional archaeology, and provide a solid foundation for archaeological research aimed at providing cities with not only theoretical tools but also technical tools that the archaeologist needs. An example of this is found in Butzer’s understanding of culture as “a concept that does not take on the metaphysical value of a system, nor is it an ideal system for the behavior of society,” an understanding that developed in the field of cultural ecology. In any case, it is possible to notice a shift in both cases from interest in tools and their typological classification to interest in shifts in behavior, that is, the shift to the dynamic by which people organize their existence through their interaction with others and their cultural, natural, and metaphysical environments... From this standpoint, I am trying in this lecture to present the general outlines of the pre-history of the Libyan desert from the reality of a vision characterized by an emphasis on the development of the economy and the general lifestyle without neglecting the definition, succession, and interrelations of the named industries. Thus it seems to me that the most evident shift in The behavior of desert groups in the mid-early Holocene can be seen in the first experiments with food production, that is, the transition from a state of dependence on the environment to a state of “actual” organization and production of resources. In agreement with prehistoric Egyptian archaeologist Hassan, I say that food production can be seen as the result of an adaptive dynamic resulting from selective exploitation practiced by man, as a result of his accumulated experiences, on the environment.

Although it is possible to note that systemic functionalism and the concepts of adaptation related to it may lead to a mechanical explanation of cultural phenomena that excludes individual contribution, it cannot be denied that the concept of systemic allows reaching a degree of control and quantitative measurement of data to a degree that was not possible to reach through traditional models. With regard to human society, there is general agreement that change can be brought about not only by the environment but also by other factors such as demographics and symbolic ideology. However, in any case, the influence of the environment in desert conditions was an important, even decisive, element in determining the groups’ decisions. The possibilities of choice were still numerous among early Holocene groups, and the flourishing of civilization along waterways in particular was the result of decisions made by human groups at that stage. But later, with the emergence of the dry phases that characterized the late Holocene, the restrictions imposed by the more stringent environment began to require changes in the location of residence and changes in economic strategy. Clark and Brandt insist that archaeologists who devote their research to the transition to food production must construct models of cultural change “suitable for achieving a more comprehensive understanding of the question why man first domesticated plants and animals.” Clark, Brandt 1984:2. In this regard, I should point out that the systematic formula justifies the use of models of human behavior, after which the data resulting from observation are arranged. They are models of comprehensive use, usually used in ethnoarchaeological contexts. In fact, studies on hunter-gatherer societies have demonstrated the ineffectiveness of traditional inductive explanations and have proposed a generalized approach based on descriptive models of the lifestyle of hunter-gatherers Bronitsky[ed.]; Hardesty; Hayden; Rindos. An interpretive model was put forward in 1988 by Redding regarding these issues. He analyzes in holistic terms the problem of the transition from hunting and gathering to food production, taking into account previous models and basic concepts of human ecology and geography. Redding's model goes back to optimal foraging theory but assumes that the goals attributed to groups in terms of behavior can be differentiated on the basis of the way the society is structured. Therefore, preferred interpretations must be equally diverse and flexible.

Process archeology assumed that food production was the main element in, and the main indicator of, change in the situation of human groups in the early and middle Holocene, including in such a process all progress of a technical nature. Using this approach, I am trying here to talk about the transition from hunting-gathering to herding among the Libyan desert groups. The body of data that I will use to construct and test the model comes from my field research that I conducted in Sudanese Nubia and to the west of it, and in Masak Staft in the Libyan Desert, and from the wealth of evidence provided by the research of many archaeologists working in the Libyan Desert in its broadest sense.

Economic transformation in the Libyan desert

The ecological descriptive model used here was previously discussed in a previous paper I presented at a symposium (2002). In this model, food production is seen as an adjustment of groups wholly dependent on an appropriative economy to environmental pressures. The model emphasizes, in particular, that resource fluctuations act as an element in increasing the exploited subsistence base (on this, see Hayden1981). In my interpretation of archaeological data, I have placed special emphasis on environmental standard units. For this reason, the discussion of the evidence represented by industrial tools and the change in economic strategy has been shaped taking into account the results of studies on various aspects of the environment. Geomorphological research clearly indicated the presence, especially along the eastern slope of the Tadrart Acacus, of groundwater. This groundwater must have accumulated during the rich humid phases and was stored over time and slowly consumed, for the benefit of the plant and animal worlds. In addition, the retention of groundwater resources only in other belts - both to the east and to the west - may have encouraged a certain amount of mobility for human settlement sites, a hypothesis put forward by Marcolongo.

Pollen analysis indicated a more open plant world at Tin Tora (located on the eastern side of Tadrart Acacos), which favored more efficient human use of the land. On the contrary, in covered areas such as the Chewent Basin, the influence exerted by the hydrological situation of the eastern slope provided microclimates with higher humidity and increased local sedimentation, as indicated by the study of Schultz1987. This situation led to the concentration of water resources, a phenomenon that continued even when the resources of the marginal belts began to be depleted (starting approximately from 5,000 BC).

Vasilikova's (1993) recent study of tall plant specimens (seeds and fruits) confirms the results obtained from the analysis of inocula and provides important additional detailed information. They show that there was a richness of plant material at habitation levels that is at least partly a result of intentional human use of such resources. New evidence resulting from Vasilikova's research confirms the economic model proposed by Barbara Parrish for the Tin Tora phase groups. Therefore, it seems to me that it is permissible to say, based on the results described above, that hunter-gatherers and fishermen, who preferred to reside on the eastern slope of the Tadrart Acacus, may have played a role in the process of pre-selection of candidate species for domestication. The stratigraphic evidence at the three sites - the Two Cave, Tora East, and Tora North - indicates that this type of exploitation continued from the eighth to the fifth millennium BC. A shift in the original subsistence pattern at the end of the Tin Tora phase can be extrapolated because there was a new interest in the domestication of plants and animals. This new phenomenon is well documented in the Wan Mohegag frequency and material in the Chewent Basin. While the plant assemblage observed at Tin Tora persisted, Goethe1987 pointed out differences in the faunal assemblage: 92% of the bone fragments could be attributed to domesticated animals and only 4.2% to wild animals. In the lower two levels, the ratio of cows to sheep is 1:1, while the ratio in the upper levels indicates a predominance of sheep. Barbara Barish

On the basis of these data and due to the absence of actual gaps in the regional strategic frequency, I assume a shift in the economic model that accommodates a local incentive, such as climate elements, but at the same time reduces the role of external influences. In fact, the availability of a series of complementary local environments within a limited area will allow balancing the effects of unfavorable climate developments and the resulting pressure on resources, through the exploitation of new areas.

This type of economic transition, witnessed in Tadrart Acacus, can be taken as an example of perfect frequency, and can be spread to other areas of the Libyan Sahara region where this richness of data is not currently available.

I say that the real socio-economic revolution lies not in domestication itself - always assuming that it might have happened - but, mostly, in the ideas that lie at its foundation, in the cosmic vision that led to its occurrence and from which it developed, and in the set of concepts that were the source of a different way of experiencing life and the individual’s natural surroundings. What happened was that the gradually growing influence of all that man's mind had unconsciously absorbed during the early millennia - with primordial support, no doubt, received from his interrelations with the environment - caused the same "choices" to be made in those regions around the Tropic of Cancer as they were made in other regions in various ways and by various means. It is very likely that there are indicators under the desert sand indicating that these new models of behavior have remained over long periods of time, despite the fact that there are clear indicators of the continued existence of an economy based on hunting and gathering, which we know has never been completely abandoned, as long as there are large areas of the desert devoid of any traces of domestication or agriculture. Desert is the "key" word. The desert has always appeared on the stage to play its role, and we must take into account what we do not realize. There is no doubt that such a situation will continue for a long, possible period of time. But if the demise of millennia-long civilizations is attributed, as seems likely, to the process of desertification, we are tempted to view drought as responsible for the disappearance, or at least dramatic decline, of the Round Head period in Saharan rock art. In both cases, it may seem logical to assume that the significant decline occurred at the beginning of the Holocene, more than 8,000 years ago, and that it occurred mostly by replacing one cultural dominance with another, and that it occurred among human groups responsible for socio-economic forces that were gradually weakening and disappearing with the passage of time, and whose seeds bore different fruits under different challenges in later eras and in other regions.

Climate is undoubtedly an element that deserves great attention, because it must have had a major impact on the long chain of knowledge process necessary for specific human groups to be able to realize their growing freedom to achieve movement in their relationship with the natural world. It is not difficult to jump to the conclusion that "harsh" living conditions may not allow the acquisition of technologies, or in more general terms, cultural models of the kind whose preconditions must have been the presence of suitable environmental conditions. There is an amazing agreement in the results of research conducted in different regions of the desert, even though that research dealt with ecological environments that are usually far apart, and diverse morphologically and physiologically. Beyond that, the penultimate period of drought (18,000-10,000 BC) may have been less severe than previously thought, because there are indicators of climatic conditions that could have, in the end, developed and stimulated the beginning of important socio-economic transformations in those mountainous areas of the central desert that provided good conditions for shelter, humans and animals to gather in groups, as indicated by the results we have indicated.

There are gaps in our information about material culture, and the available data not only seem contradictory, but they are still faced with challenge and rejection. Let us take, for example, the work of J.P. Maitre, who provided the first dates for the pottery site at Launi in Al-Hajar (Al-Houqar) in Algeria, and also for the site in the Amenki Camps. Only a few years ago these dates were considered incorrect and unreliable, because they were contrary to the entirety of the evidence available at the time, and the idea of ​​constantly reviewing the research was no longer acceptable. But the number of "keys" continued to increase. The vast data available from the Central and Eastern Sahara led to propose a very ancient date for the Neolithic shift, with pottery traced back to earlier stages dating back to about the eighth millennium BC. Pottery as well as faunal remains have been brought to light, although the latter contains a degree of uncertainty specifically as to which species were domesticated or were in the process of being domesticated Gautier. The observations made by Wendorf make it clear, however, that there are other data worth taking into account besides those derived directly from the finds. Wendorff refers to the ancient climate and environment by pointing out the necessity of adhering to the interpretation of the finds according to which they date back to the period of the bulls (bovids) in desert rock art, which was actually under human control at that time, in one of the stages (parasitic, domestication, or pre-domestication) that marked the path leading gradually towards complete domestication and controlled hybridization. J.P.Maitre

In the more central regions of the Sahara, the picture is much broader and different: from Niger to Mali, from Al-Hajar to Tassili, and from Akakus to Misak, the central ranges surrounding the region have revealed and continue to reveal a dual, multi-dimensional identity, which must be analyzed within the framework of its local ecological environment before embarking on a study of its diverse, comprehensive and amazing nature.

In addition to the evidence provided by archaeological excavations, ancient climate and all other relevant branches of knowledge, the contribution of rock art can be added. Despite the hesitation that still exists regarding frequencies and chronology, rock art represents a very important element in the study of these very ancient civilizations, and its enormous views provide exceptional possibilities for interpretation. What seems particularly solid in this argument is precisely its non-specialized nature, its relation to the slow and progressive growth of consciousness that constitutes the starting point of both the cultural developments themselves, and all the acquired information that certainly preceded them and underlies them.

In this way, pottery also gains its overall value and importance, and is no longer seen as a mere element that provides “containers” for food products, nor as merely evidence of a stable life. Like many other cultural elements, pottery appears in the Libyan Desert in the eighth millennium BC, at an advanced stage of technical development. Pottery combs, which are still used in pottery production and in various forms of decoration and shaping. Roset; Petit-Maire; Barich; Aumassip; Garcia; Di Lernia  points out that we are dealing here, as in rock art, with evidence of mature mental processes. The many skills found in the process of pottery production are still a source of amazement today, when we notice that they belong to an environment whose cultural values ​​were based on an existence “close to nature.” Since this pottery was for a time correctly interpreted as a Neolithic indicator Camps - although many rejected this view - it can certainly be seen as evidence rather than mere evidence of a different food chain, since that chain depended on the more continuous and widespread use of plant species. While it is true that there are no traces of domesticated plants in this region yet, there is certainly clear and clear evidence in this pottery indicating the beginning of a new interaction and relationship with the plant environment, bringing with it a new type of environmental adaptation. Not that pottery was necessarily used only to contain plants. It may have been used for dairy products, and if it becomes possible to prove the presence of milk in ancient containers, this will provide good additional food for those who see the need to push back the date of the beginning of the “Neolithic shift”, with its many different stages in the path of man’s slow journey to emancipation from the captivity of nature. Garcea

I believe that it is important to re-evaluate the role and importance of pottery, and to note that the way in which man transforms clay bears witness to the emergence of a fundamental new culture, because there are many technical skills contained in pottery making: the high temperatures that must be achieved, for example, the selection of clay and dealing with it, the hardness and mixture that must be chosen to give the clay the desired body and material, and the selection of shapes to suit the life requirements of the group. All of these considerations - and undoubtedly others that may not come to my mind now - seem to force us to view pottery as an indicator of change in people’s behavior towards nature. It now seems likely that man's liberation from the captivity of nature went through a long process of steps: different subsistence techniques, or various economic techniques in the broadest sense of the term, may have existed simultaneously for long periods. They may have succeeded or overlapped, and we are still not forced to believe that the "acquisition" activities - while being linked to the tools of the Epi-Paleolithic type - suddenly came to an end when the "Neolithic" ideas came to the stage. The activities of hunting, fishing, and gathering must have involved the slow, progressive stabilization of new adaptive mental processes and technology, without losing little of their intrinsic social significance. In those cases where there was an actual trigger towards the Neolithic shift, it must have had a variety of causes. According to the different social, economic and environmental conditions in the northern temperate zone, the end of the Form Glacier must have caused the slow but definite development of new ecological conditions. There must have been significant shifts in climate even in the southern fringes of areas directly affected by glaciation, and research to date indicates that subtropical populations did play an important role in moving towards an economy based on 'producing' part of their food requirements. This is not the place to go into detail about the various theories about the possible establishment of new economic technologies over such a long period in parts of other continents and in similar environments Butzer, nor is it the place to provide a critical evaluation of theories about “Neolithic diffusion rates” based on the discovery of Edmonson pottery, or on interesting observations such as the spread of early agriculture among the inhabitants of Europe Ammerman & Cavalli-Sforza.

My current interest is in providing an answer to two questions related to the roots of the economic system based on food production in Africa as a whole and in the Sahara in particular: How did the transition occur, and what are its causes? Opinions on the answer to the two questions always show more or less difference, but each answer often contains a good positive contribution to solving the problem. From a theoretical perspective, one could say that no matter how subjective and traditional the approach to the issue is, it contains in itself the germ of the answer that we seek to reach. In practical terms, however, it is more useful to note that the psychological side of the question also needs attention, since the moment at which awareness of the phenomenon occurs is always of the utmost importance. We can certainly accept the hypothesis that events as long and varied as those involved in the domestication of plants and animals would have difficult-to-trace roots going back to times well before the Neolithic, but we must also remember the fact that a special type of man, who was paying increasing attention to the physical elements of his environment in order to identify those most appropriate to his own existence, needed cultural development before he could identify recurring events and objectify them so as to be able to fully comprehend their significance. The analysis of some aspects of the material embodiment of reality is what indicates, of course, that a long series of “creations” took place over a period of time and in different places, until the moment came when their value became firmly recognized by the group as a whole. Another important aspect of the problem, however, was the need for particular groups to improve their chances of survival by exploiting the environment in a particular way. Since every element of economic technology, from the most elementary to the most complex, has its primary goal directed at the preservation of the species, it seems to me that the possibility of producing food, and the slow acquisition of confidence that food can actually be produced, is, and has been, an enormous biological advantage when it comes to evaluating options for prolonging the lives of group members. This is, potentially, the point at which other elements of cultural “choice” come into play. It is clear that in order for this process to be firmly established, some conditions must be met. In the first place is the necessity of providing plants and animals that can be domesticated; Therefore, the environment must have exerted pressure on humans, making it easy for them to change their direction in searching for food. A certain stage of cultural evolution - different from, but not necessarily "inferior" to, contemporary cultures in other regions - must have caused some human groups to feel the advantage of such a shift in traditional subsistence activities. The fact that at least some other populations living in very similar environmental conditions have continued to maintain hunting, fishing and gathering methods for long periods of time clearly reflects, I believe, the cultural complexity of the issue. Within a cultural setting, certain genetic elements may have initially provided some sort of incentive toward certain choices, which were then modified to enable them to control those choices and make them more achievable on a practical level. Geneticist Doobzhansky believes that “the effectiveness of a population in a given environment can be the product of a good balance between a number of variables: social organization, psychological adaptation, technology, and emotional elements.” Even if it is assumed that these emotional elements are the final product of a long series of interrelations that have reached the final stage of their development as an inevitable factor, they must have had a far-reaching impact on the economic choices of some human groups, based on the fact that the abandonment of a certain type of economy - hunting, fishing, gathering or herding - was and in some cases still is unacceptable even if it means an unfortunate deterioration. It also seems to me that the effects of climate - in certain regions - must have had more than just a secondary role in the behavior of some residents. Therefore, any attempt to shed light on the roots of the domestication process often needs to recognize the wide range of elements, among which only a few can be identified.

At this point, it is necessary to emphasize that in the initial stage of transformation, which can rightly be called “revolutionary,” human groups consolidate their separation from the surrounding environment with which they have been coexisting until that moment in harmony and solidarity. There is convincing evidence for this, represented by the different functional properties of wild and domesticated grains. When the clusters of the former mature, they allow the seeds necessary for reproduction to fall to the ground, while in the case of the latter, artificial selection has caused some changes in the frequency of genes (genes) in the species. This may result from the appearance of some genetic combinations, or isolation may have worked to favor the survival of some mutant forms, as a result of which the plant's ability to produce mature seeds disappears or disappears completely, and the harvest becomes easier. Opportunities for survival must have been a consideration in many decisions (choosing a residence location away from dangers, for example), and with regard to food production, a fundamental and decisive change occurred at this time. It must be acknowledged that, in theory, these chances of survival had increased when the first tool was produced, but during the long transition from the Pleistocene to the Holocene, some groups in some places slowly realized that their future no longer depended solely on the unsafe and dangerous activities associated with hunting. This is made clear and partly confirmed by the possible periodic "renewal" of some plants and animals. The preservation of the species, or at least some of the groups within it, has come to depend on something that no longer involves a high degree of chance and adventure. The price to be paid was stability, but as an acquired habit rather than a specific way of life (hut villages can be found in specific areas even in the Upper Paleolithic). However, we have no way of knowing to what extent this way of life or tendency toward it was the cause or consequence of the phenomenon that concerns us. It seems to me very clear that the process of biological evolution at this stage of ancient history must have followed a number of different paths, and it also seems acceptable to assume the emergence of a way of life based on the accumulation of reserves or compensable surplus from one period to another, in a period prior to the emergence of agricultural or mixed agricultural societies. Such reserves or surpluses could no doubt have been used to support the simple existence of the group, but they could also have been "redirected" (to use Tinbergen's precise expression) in a number of ways, largely for sentimental, culturally-related reasons. It is a surprising fact, for example, to find that the concepts of power and wealth in many contemporary hunting or herding societies represent something very different from those that developed in societies whose roots go back to mixed agriculture. Some of our basic concepts are, in such societies, rejected in favor of values ​​that are no more than a theoretical character for the visions of our contemporary cultures. While others are upside down. This occurs not only in societies in which grading power requires linking values ​​of generosity, altruism, and lack of aggressiveness toward the group, but also in other societies in which wealth - in the rare cases in which it actually accumulates - is not inheritable (coon), but is shared among members of the group upon the death of the owner. I also think that it is worth noting the possibility that cultural elements or religious beliefs may have contributed to the continuity of the hunting economy by becoming an insurmountable obstacle to the adoption of agricultural activities practiced by neighboring groups. The cult of Mother Earth, for example, must have had deep roots among certain groups among the American Indians, since their shamans* stated, at the end of the nineteenth century, that the issue of refusal to adopt agricultural techniques was primarily linked to opposition to a certain type of “work” that would scar the earth, which would result in group members being prevented from dreaming and thus losing the possibility of gaining Arrowsmith wisdom. I also find Butzer's observation that there were no significant technical and social differences between primitive agricultural economies and resistant hunter-gatherer societies, but rather that the evolutionary process that resulted from the former followed different paths and made things easier for some groups that had the advantage of a wider range of skills as well as the material capabilities for accumulating reserves - capabilities that gradually expanded with the slow development of exchange and the gradual growth of domestic aggression.

At this point in studying a period of such importance in the history of mankind, there is no doubt that observations drawn from a number of different branches of knowledge need to be linked to each other, such as genetics, studies of animal behavior, and psychology. At the same time, the results of paleoethnological research must be noted. The roots of the food production system are often linked to the beginnings of the shrinkage of group space, accompanied by a fundamental movement in life interests towards growing individualism. Both psychology and genetics have shown, for example, that where groups of organisms compete for something necessary for survival, selection between groups takes precedence over selection between individuals within the same groups.