River Valley Civilizations According to Pritchard and Fleming Argumentative Essay

What led to the rise of River Valley Civilizations? How were they similar or different? Why?

Please use the readings I provided only. Please make sure you have a clear argument and thesis.

Symbiosis, Instability, and the Origins and Spread of Agriculture: A New Model [and Comments and Reply] Author(s): David Rindos, Homer Aschmann, Peter Bellwood, Lynn Ceci, Mark N. Cohen, Joseph Hutchinson, Robert S. Santley, Jim G. Shaffer and Thurstan Shaw Reviewed work(s): Source: Current Anthropology, Vol. 21, No. 6 (Dec., 1980), pp. 751-772 Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2742515 . Accessed: 28/09/2012 11:48 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. . The University of Chicago Press and Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Current Anthropology. http://www.jstor.org CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY ? Vol. 21, No. 6, December 1980 1980 by The Wenner-GrenFoundation for Anthropological Research 0011-3204/80/2106-0002$02.55 and the Originsand Symbiosis,Instability, A New Model Spread of Agriculture: by David Rindos INTRODUCTION The originsofagriculture and its subsequentspreadhave been of concernto both naturaland social scientistsforover 100 years.The studyofagricultural originsis farmorethanmerely the investigationof a particularshiftin man’s subsistence. is seenby mostpeopleas thefoundation Agriculture ofmodern civilization.It is frequently heldthatonlyagriculture permitsa societytheluxuryofexcessproductionand thatalongwiththis excessproductioncomes the developmentof the hallmarksof civilization:writing,metalworking, and the establishmentof well-defined economicclasses. Despite the significance of agriculturalorigins,our understanding of thisphenomenonis far fromsatisfactory. We lack any unifiedtheoryto explainboth howagriculture aroseand whyit shouldhave arisenat all. Variousapproacheshave been takentowardstheexplanation of the initial appearance of agriculturalsubsistence.Most workersin thesocial scienceshave begunby lookingintoman’s cultureforthe factorswhichcould explainthe developmentof pristineagriculturalsocieties. Bachofen (1967 [1861]) and Frazer (1912) believedthatagriculturedevelopedout of traditionalsexual rolesand the divisionsoflabor that theycreated. Allen (1897) and Hahn (1909) presentedargumentsseekingto understandagricultureas an outgrowthof ritualisticand religiouspractices.This approachhas been recentlydevelopedin greatdetail by Isaac (1970). Otherworkershave ascribedthe originof agricultureto the influenceof climaticevents (Pumpelly 1908,Childe 1951,Wright1968). Finally,certainauthors have alwaystakenwhatmaybe describedas a “commonsense” view of the originof agriculture:that agriculture,like other is theresultofan “invention.”Carter technological innovation, (1 977) is a contemporary authoradheringto thisviewpoint. Recently,ecologicalparadigmshave cometo dominateagriculturaloriginstheories.Ecological theoristshave developed thepioneeringworkofthebiologistsDe Candolle(1959 [1886]) and Vavilov (1926) and thegeographerSauer (1936, 1969).The is a graduatestudentat CornellUniversity and teaching and research assistantat theUniversity’s L. H. Bailey Hortorium (467MannLibrary, CornellUniversity, Ithaca,N.Y. 14853,U.S.A.).Bornin 1947,hereceived hisB.S. inruralsociology from Cornell in 1969andhisM.S. inplanttaxonomy, witha minor in anthropology, in 1980.He has beenpalaeoethnobotanist with theCornellArchaeological Projectin Cyprusand in Honduras. His research interests are thesystematics oftheCompositae and theinteraction ofplantsand man.His Master’sthesisis entitled ” GenericDelimitation in theVerbesinoid Heliantheae(Compositae).I. The GenusZexmenia.” The present paperwas submitted in finalform8 I 79. DAVID RINDOS Vol. 21 * No. 6 * December1980 hallmarkof the ecologicaltheoristis thathe places major emphasis on the interactionbetween man and his immediate comworkersstressdifferent environment. Of course,different Workersplacinggreatemphasison ponentsofthisrelationship. a theoretical”equilibrium”betweenpopulationand the environment includeBinford(1968),Meyers(1971), Cohen(1975, 1977),and Flannery(1965,1973).Most oftheseworkersexplain the originor adoptionof agricultureas the resultof attempts to correcta disturbedequilibriumbetweenpopulationand the environment. Others,such as Lewis (1972) and Harris (1969, 1972), along with Flanneryin a paper otherthan those just cited (1969), stressthe importanceof the developmentof new techniquesand culturalpatternsto the originof agricultural systems. Most of thistheorizing on the subjectofagriculturalorigins has been permeatedby two fundamentalconcepts:that agriin originand that its adoptionand culturewas revolutionary subsequentdevelopmentweredue to intentionalpractices.As notedby Harlan, de Wet,and Stempler(1976:3), “the idea of an agriculturalrevolutionas elaboratedby V. GordonChilde fortheNear East was basicallyappliedto thesocialand cultural economies.”Onlyrecentlyhas consequencesof food-producing thisidea begunto be challenged.The agricultural way oflifeis now beginningto be seen as the resultof a seriesof gradual changes(cf. MacNeish 1964,Bray 1974,Higgs 1976, Pfeiffer 1976). Even today,most modelsforthe originof agriculture containat least some elementsof culturalor individualintention-eitherto explaintheinitialappearanceof thetechniques and plants of agriculturalsystemsor to elucidatethe survival and dispersalofagricultural systems.Corollaryto,and perhaps underlying, theseconceptsis the beliefthat agriculturefacilitatesthedevelopment ofa “superior”economy-onewithclear and substantialadaptivebenefitsto thesociety.This adaptiveinvokedto explainthe maintenanceand nessis also frequently it is held,is maineconomies.Agriculture, spreadofagricultural meansto feedlargenumtainedbecauseit is themosteffective bersofpeople;agriculture spreadsbecauseits greateradaptiveness allows it to spread at the expenseof more “primitive” meansofproduction. I shallhereintroducea newmodelfortheoriginand developmentof domesticatedplantsand agriculturalsystems.Rather thanrelyingupon the assumptionsjust mentioned,thismodel views agricultureas the outgrowthof evolutionarypotentials feedsupon whichmaydevelopwheneveran animalconsistently any set offoodplants.Intentand inventionare notdenied,but they are regardedas unnecessaryto the model. Parsimony would suggestthat if agriculturaloriginsmay be explained 751 withoutuse ofintentor invention, thentheseconceptsmay,for thepurposesofthismodel,be set aside.’ Given the evolutionary means by whichagriculturalplants and systemsdevelop,the originof agricultureis anythingbut theultimateeffects revolutionary-although oftheprocessmay be describedas a revolutionofthefirstorder.The adaptiveness of agricultureis not stressedin this model,althoughit is not denied that agriculturepermitsgreaterdensitiesof human populationthan mostotherformsof subsistence.Instead,emphasisis placed upon theinstabilities whichfirstdomestication and then agriculturalproductionintroduceinto subsistence strategiesand whichare the basis foragriculture’s”success.” Finally,the relationship betweenthe originof agricultureand the riseof moderncivilization,whileaddinga certainurgency to the study of the problem,is not addresseddirectlyhere. Discussionof thisdifficult problemwouldof necessitytake us farbeyondthe consideration ofagriculturalorigins.Nevertheless, if thismodelhas any heuristicvalue, implicationsmay be drawnfromit whichgo beyondthe meredescriptionof a new modeoflifeforman. Modernagriculturaldevelopmentschemesare a responseto theshortagesoffoodand resourcesthatplague so muchof the world.Allagricultural systemsappearproneto occasionalcrises in production.Besides their immediateeffectsupon human healthand survival,shortagesoffoodfrequently have deleterious effects uponthestabilityofpoliticaland economicsystems. The importanceof theinteractionofpopulationgrowth,dwindlingnaturalresources,and recurrent shortagesof foodplaces the studyof agriculturalsystemsin the mainstreamof human concern.The prospectof foodshortagesencouragesthe breeding of improvedcrops and the developmentof moreefficient croppingsystems.Success in theseprogramsencouragesreliance upon fewerand fewerspeciesofplantsand upon an ever decreasingnumberof varietiesof a givenspecies.Agricultural productionalso tendsto becomemorelocalized,to take advantageoffavorableenvironmental conditions, and to allowforthe exploitationof economiesof scale. Yet, as is well recognized, monocultures are extremelyvulnerableto catastrophicfailure as a resultofdisease,pests,and climaticextremes. Today, man reliesuponabout 20 speciesofplantsto provide most of his food (National Academyof Sciences 1975). Yet hundredsof species of plants have been domesticatedand thousandsutilized.Remarkably,no majorcrophas beendomesticatedfromthewildsincetheearliestdaysofagriculture. Even our best attemptsat improvement of existingcropshave been less than totallysuccessful.Recentlywe have begunto understand that plant breedingand the successfulintroductionof new,improvedcultivarsmay inadvertently be acceleratingthe loss ofmuchofthevariationin thecropsgrownby man. Attention has come to be directedtowardsthe importanceof the conservationof gene pools forcultivatedplants. We are also to understandthatthebreedingofimprovedvarieties beginning of crop plants is, paradoxically,oftenaccompanied by increased susceptibilityof the crop to previouslyunknownor unimportant pests and diseases. We are finallybeginningto recognizethatagricultureis a dynamicsystem-thatthe agriculturalecologyexistingin any regionis the productof the interactionofnumerousfactorsoverlongperiodsoftime.Only certainparts of the agriculturalecologyare completelyunder humancontrol.As we beginto understandthefunctioning and the evolutionof theagriculturalecology,however,our control over it is likelyto increase.Part of this understanding must come froma considerationof the originand developmentof agriculturalsystemsand an investigation of the factorswhich controland limitthedomestication ofplants. 1 Elsewhere I have given the issues of intent and inventionextendedtreatment(Rindosn.d.). The viewofhuman behaviorpresented here should not be confusedwith “sociobiology”; instinctand geneticsare also set aside. 752 If themodelforagriculturaloriginsand thedomestication of plants presentedhere proves useful,its greatestcontribution maycomefromtherecognition thatwe are notfacinga qualitativelydifferent set ofproblemsfromthosefacedby our distant forebears.The historyof agricultureis a historyof instability inproductionand ofagriculturally inducedcrises.Identification of the factorsresponsibleforthis instabilitymay allow us to takeactionto reduceit. Seen fromtheperspectiveofthemodel, manyof ourbestattemptsat increasingagricultural productivitycan be expectedto increasethevulnerability of thesystem to failureas well;thebestattemptsofourancestorsto improve the productivity of theirsystemshad similareffects.Whilein the past we have survivedagriculturalcrisesand even benefitedfromthem,however,we are no longerin a strictlycomparable situation.The consequenceof agriculturalcrisisis no but thepossibilityof starvation.By apprelongeremigration, ciatingthe historyof agriculturalsystemswe may be better preparedto developourpresentsystemsto satisfythedemands of the future. In the model, domesticationoccurs beforethe originand developmentof agriculturalsystems.Domesticationis thereason agricultural systemsdevelop.Althoughthe importanceof domesticationper se to a societydecreaseswith the rise of agricultural systems,domestication does not cease. It continues withinthe agriculturalcontext,furthermodifying the plants undercultivation.It may also occurwithplantsoutsideof the agriculturalecology.Domesticationis theresultoftheevolution ofa symbiosis between man and plant. The best way to understandthe changesthat have occurred in domesticated plantsis to lookat therelationship betweenthe plantand theanimalwhichfeedson it. Two ofthemostimportant effectsof domestication are (1) intensification of the mutualisticrelationship betweenanimal and plant and (2) exclusion ofotheranimalswhichmightalso be competingforaccess to theplant.These effects are usuallymediatedby morphological change.One of the mostimportantfactorsin the evolution ofthecultivatedplantis theisolationofthepotentialcultivated plant, by eithergeneticor spatial mechanisms,fromthe protakenhere mayalso genitorspecies.The viewofdomestication be used to accountforthe evolutionof weedsand forthe nondomestication ofpotentiallyvaluable crops. The transitionfrommutualisticdomesticationto evolved agriculturalsystemswas mediatedby environmental manipulation.Humanactivitiessuchas thefellingoftreesorthesetting offirescannothelpbut have had effects uponthelocal environment.The major effectof theseactivitieswas the concentration of domesticatedplants in localized areas. This permitted therealizationofa newseriesofevolutionary potentials.I shall presenta dynamicand interactivemodel to account for the originand subsequentspreadofagriculturalsystems. is based on environmental Agriculture manipulation.Ecological limitsupon plant productivity are thusreduced.Agricultureis a set of integrated whichaffects theenvironment activities inhabited its lifecycle.Agribythedomesticated plantthroughout cultureservesto increasethe domesticity of the plant. However,it has major effectsupon the communityof plants that are utilizedin agriculturalsystems.It tends to increasethe average yield of domesticatedplants. Competitionwithina speciesof domesticatedplantstendsto selectthoseindividuals best adapted to agriculturalpractices.Competitionbetween species of domesticatedplants tends,in a similarmanner,to select forthosespecies best adapted to agriculturalpractices. Thus, over time,althoughyieldincreases,it comesfromfewer plant species. Localizationof agriculturalproduction,however,is accomforsurvivaland panied by convergencein the requirements reproductionin species of domesticatedplants. This convergenceand,indeed,thelocalizationofproductionitselfintroduce new instabilitiesinto agriculturalproduction:what is a bad year forany givenagricultural plant is likelyto be a bad year CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY many by concentrating plants.Agriculture, forall agricultural plants in one area, may also encourageexcessivedamage by disease,insects,and herbivoresand thusdecreaseyield.Instaare expressedas periodsof greatlyrebilitiesin productivity duced yield. These crises cause the emigrationof the excess populationfromagriculturalsocieties.These emigrantpopulaforthedispersaloftheagriculturalway of tionsare responsible life. Selectionhas favoredthe spread of agriculturalsystems which maximizeinstabilityin production.Maximization of instabilitybringswithit maximizationof dispersals.Thus the mostsuccessfulagriculturalsystemshave been thosethat are, at least in the broadestsense,the least “adapted” agricultural systems. Rindos:ORIGINS AND SPREAD OF AGRICULTURE Hartzell (1967) has reportedon one particularant/acacia relationship.The ants inhabithollow,enlargedthornson the acacia and receivea sugaryexudatefromspecialfoliarnectaries at the base of the leaves. They also harvestmodifiedleaf tips calledBeltrambodies,whichare richin bothproteinsand lipids. Theseare usedto feedtheant larvae.The antspatrolthefoliage insects.Whenants were and removeand feeduponherbivorous experimentallyremoved from acacias, the plants were so and insectsthatall died within severelyattackedby herbivores a year.Otheracacias are protectedby theirants fromherbivore theplantis attackedand given predation;anyanimaldisturbing numerouspainfulbites (Hockeng 1975). The loss of chemicaldefensemechanismswithina speciesof DOMESTICATION AND SYMBIOSIS acacia involvedin a mutualisticrelationshipwithants is apparentlycommon.Ant-acaciaslack the biochemicaldefense ANIMAL-PLANT INTERACTIONS mechanismpresentin otheracacias (Rehr,Feeney,and Hanzen plantshave Domesticationis best understoodas an interaction 1973). In an analogousfashion,manyhuman-crop Coevolution. is exeggplant wild the systems: defense chemical lost their betweenman and theplantson whichhe feeds.2It wouldseem wild of flesh bitter the 1976:80); (Choudhury bitter tremely as an adaptaless thanaccurateto describesuchan interaction (1975) and Bemis for Whitaker is sufficient species Cucurbita tion of or by man to the demandsof continuedsurvival-we to postulatean originaldomesticationof thesefruitsfortheir may just as easily describethe processof adaptationof or by seeds; the domesticationof lettuce (Latuca sativa) has been the plant, forit too benefitsfromthe association.By placing in latex the emphasisupon theactionsof man we neglect fundamental accompaniedby a reductionofspininessand a decrease can oleraceae) (Brassica cabbage wild 1976:39); content (Ryder contribution made by the domesticatedplant to the developdanof bitter and quantity the much as four times as contain exist withcould not mentof agriculturalsystems.Agriculture gerousglucosimatesas cultivatedstrains(Josefsson,cited in out domesticatedplants. Domestication,as seen here, is a 1976:49); cassava (Manihot esculenta)has two Thompson natural evolutionaryprocessby means of whichanimalsand one poisonouswhen raw and the otherlacking highly forms, plantsare able to increasetheirfitness.Coevolution-a typeof of beingcooked and eaten withprelimiand capable poisons evolutioninvolvingtwo geneticallyunrelatedspecies-occurs of the organismspositively narytreatment-thepresenceof toxinsprobablybeing correwheneverthe interrelationship lated, at least in part,withmethodsof cultivationin differing affectstheir potential for survival. The relationshipwhich describedas a symbiosis. agriculturalsystems(Rogers and Appan 1973, Rogers 1965). resultsfromcoevolutionis frequently The hoardingof seeds is widespread Storageand harvesting. Coevolutionis widespreadin nature.Pollination,seed discan persal, and even predation frequentlyhave coevolutionary in theanimalkingdom,and, as it relatesto plantdispersal, of plants. history in the evolutionary significance be of major withinwhich aspects.Coevolutionprovidesa usefulframework Various birds,includingnutcrackers,jays, and woodpeckers, to observedomestication.By means of his interactionswith and mor- are knownto storeseeds of such plants as pine, beech, oak, plants,man inevitablyinfluencestheirdistribution phology.These changes,of course,do not occur by the direct chestnut,filbert,and variousPrunus species. Small mammals storeedibleseedsin their and chipmunks suchas mice,squirrels, influenceof man’s activityon the plants. Rather,theyoccur 1972,Stebbins1971). der Pijl caches (van in special and nests over manygenerationsas certainplants-the morefit-leave dried made of grassesand weeds. up a hay and store guard Pikas greaternumbersofprogeny. Guardingof storesis also commonin various birds (Emlen The most strikingevidenceforthe coevolutionaryview of 1973:164). Janzen(1971) notesthatseedsofstoredspecies can and agriculturaloriginsis the existenceof widedomestication soils near be foundgrowingto adult statusin thenitrogen-rich spread nonhumanagriculturalsystems.Domesticatedplants were “lost” seeds these that assumed be It can nest entrances. have establishedrelationshipswithmany animals otherthan resource a useful provide these plants Clearly, or “rejected.” man. In a fewinstances,theseotheranimalshave incorporated fortheinhabitantofthenest.Muskrattrappersin centralNew manipulationintotheirbehavioral techniquesofenvironmental rice and we may thereforecall the resultantsys …