3 ms·
Showing Ireland as being dependent on roots and tubers in pre-colonial times is just plain wrong. It was the colonisers who brought the potato to Ireland. This
by barking 11y ago
Showing Ireland as being dependent on roots and tubers in pre-colonial times is just plain wrong. It was the colonisers who brought the potato to Ireland.
This makes me suspect that the data is being made to fit the theory here and that they didn't want to leave out Ireland because, well, people would expect it to be there in any article about the impact of the potato :)
- jameshart 11y agoTurnips and beets are roots too.
- tgflynn 11y agoDo we have good information on what the crop distributions were in Ireland prior to 1492 (I assume that's how they define "pre-colonial") ? I wonder how this could really be determined anywhere. I wouldn't think there would be enough archaeological evidence to determine this with much accuracy and it seems unlikely written records from that period would have given sufficient detail either.
- dunmalg 11y agoThey actually have a pretty good idea of what they ate. Interesting article on it here: http://www.ravensgard.org/prdunham/irishfood.html http://www.ravensgard.org/prdunham/irishfood.html The TLDR of their diet is "mostly pottage and soups, heavy on meat and dairy. Some oats and barley were grown, but a lot of that ended up being made into alcoholic beverages."
- danieltillett 11y agoAlcoholic beverages have the advantage of making contaminated water drinkable without losing much in the way of calories in the original grain. A really clever solution to a problem of how to avoid dysentery when your water supply is not safe to drink.
- barrkel 11y agoIreland's myths and legends all revolve around cattle, and cattle - milk, specifically - was the primary source of food before potatoes, along with some grain and vegetables: http://www.bonappetit.com/trends/article/what-the-irish-ate-before-potatoes http://www.bonappetit.com/trends/article/what-the-irish-ate-...
- tgflynn 11y agoGreat article, I'm a little skeptical about the sourcing though. Most of the information seems to come from general literature (as opposed to something more objective, like say taxation records). What people choose to write about isn't necessarily what's most common in practice. For example a visitor from France would probably be more likely to write about some strange kind of cheese he's never seen before than the bread that looks more or less similar to what he's been eating everyday. I don't doubt the importance of dairy but I doubt it accounted for the majority of people's calorie intake.
- benbreen 11y agoAgreed, fascinating thesis but these types of big picture analysis are always as weak as their least reliable source of data. And as others have pointed out, labeling "pre colonial" Ireland as reliant on tubers makes me question their sources. I have the same problem with Pinker's "Better Angels of Our Nature" which seems hugely convincing until you check the footnotes and realize he's relying substantially on historical data from a single out of date and non peer reviewed source.
- tgflynn 11y agoAnd why is most of Europe except Ireland and Spain left out of the maps ? That alone suggests they could be cherry-picking the data.
- mcguire 11y agoWhat about China? Most of it looks like "large chiefdoms".
- harigov 11y agoThis article uses such a broad definition of pre-colonial times. When exactly is that? I don't believe India was almost empty around 1400 AD. Quite contrary, given that there were already well established empires at that time.
- hga 11y agoNot hardly, by that time, Muslim invaders were half-way through 4 centuries of slaughtering 100 million Hindus (and I'm sure Sikh and Janes), and were hardly depopulating the land. And, yeah, there was a lot of history of empires and such before the start of this in the 13th Century.