3 ms·

Agriculture isn't the only way to sustain moderately-sized populations, it's just the most efficient in the short term. Semi-passive cultivation is arguably mor

by bsanr2 5y ago

Agriculture isn't the only way to sustain moderately-sized populations, it's just the most efficient in the short term. Semi-passive cultivation is arguably more sustainable because you don't encounter the issues of deforestation, soil depletion, and centralization of resources. Nomadism doesn't preclude semi-permanent settlements, especially as migratory patterns retrace sites.

nl 5y ago
Semi permanent sites did exist in this timeframe. But they were much smaller in terms of population and rarely (if ever) walled cities like those which existed around 4000 BCE.
pvg 5y ago
Completely agree with you that agriculture is not required to form non-permanent settlements that didn't last tens of thousands of years.
- kuschku 5y ago
  No one said it had to be a single, year-round, uninterrupted settlement. A seasonal, interrupted, settlement would be no different to an asteroid.
- bsanr2 5y ago
  A non-permanent settlement conceivably could see continuous (non-permanent) habitation for thousands of years. If, as a semi-nomadic group, you return to the same location year after year, generation after generation, and you do so alongside a large number of nearby settlements, with whom you maintain social relationships... Well, it might not have a post office or gate, but it's a dynamic fulfills many of the requirements of a "city".
danans 5y ago
> Agriculture isn't the only way to sustain moderately-sized populations, it's just the most efficient in the short term. Semi-passive cultivation is arguably more sustainable There is a theory by Jared Diamond [1] of how pre-Agricultural Jomon people of Japan were able to invent pottery 18K years ago: the wild-food rich environment of Japan, being moist, temperate, and surrounded by ocean - allowed them to have very settled lives while other hunter gatherers had to constantly move. Outside of rate examples like this, there is little evidence that non agricultural societies reached even moderate populations. 1. https://erenow.net/common/gunsgermssteel/23.php https://erenow.net/common/gunsgermssteel/23.php

by bsanr2 5y ago

nl 5y ago

Semi permanent sites did exist in this timeframe. But they were much smaller in terms of population and rarely (if ever) walled cities like those which existed around 4000 BCE.

pvg 5y ago

Completely agree with you that agriculture is not required to form non-permanent settlements that didn't last tens of thousands of years.

kuschku 5y ago
No one said it had to be a single, year-round, uninterrupted settlement. A seasonal, interrupted, settlement would be no different to an asteroid.
bsanr2 5y ago
A non-permanent settlement conceivably could see continuous (non-permanent) habitation for thousands of years. If, as a semi-nomadic group, you return to the same location year after year, generation after generation, and you do so alongside a large number of nearby settlements, with whom you maintain social relationships... Well, it might not have a post office or gate, but it's a dynamic fulfills many of the requirements of a "city".

danans 5y ago

> Agriculture isn't the only way to sustain moderately-sized populations, it's just the most efficient in the short term. Semi-passive cultivation is arguably more sustainable There is a theory by Jared Diamond [1] of how pre-Agricultural Jomon people of Japan were able to invent pottery 18K years ago: the wild-food rich environment of Japan, being moist, temperate, and surrounded by ocean - allowed them to have very settled lives while other hunter gatherers had to constantly move. Outside of rate examples like this, there is little evidence that non agricultural societies reached even moderate populations. 1. https://erenow.net/common/gunsgermssteel/23.php https://erenow.net/common/gunsgermssteel/23.php