While the Herders originated in the Mesolithic, each Mesolithic culture used domesticated animals in their own unique way. As mentioned, the question of origination of domestication and how it was accomplished is ambiguous, at best. A more appropriate question is which types of animals were domesticated by each group and for what reason. Let us look at how each of the cultures used their domesticated animals and what the cultural ramifications were. We will see that the three distinctly different types of domesticated animals, the herded animals of the shepherds, the penned animals of the farmers, and free running animals of the hunters led to three distinctly different cultural outlooks.
Herded animals, i.e. goats, sheep and cattle, graze the open land. The owner does not feed the herded animals; he merely moves them from place to place, wherever the grazing is good. The cultures that herd animals are necessarily nomadic, always looking for fresh pastures. These nomadic cultures, that are also called pastoral because of the constant search for greener pastures, are in no ways linked with tilling the soil. Hence while these pastoral cultures domesticated animals they did not domesticate or cultivate the land; they just used and abused it, wandering another place when the present area had been overgrazed. This type of domestication, while leading to an intimate knowledge of animals, leads to a general disrespect for the earth and its environment.
On the other hand their owners must feed penned animals. Hence the owner must provide food, which he normally grows. Penned animals are intimately linked to agriculture[1], the tilling of the soil. As opposed to the pastoral system, the soil and the livestock must live in balance. The livestock fertilizes the soil, which provides the livestock with food. This leads to a sense of cultivation of both animal and earth. This aspect of the farming culture led to an attitude of cultivation and cooperation between plant and animal life.
Most of the time the domestication of animals is not associated with the Hunter/gatherer cultures, but they were the first to domesticate an animal. It was not the herding animals of the nomads, nor was it the sedentary livestock, including flocks of chickens of the farmers. Instead the Hunter/Gatherers domesticated a pack animal, presently called a dog. All dogs evolved from wolves.
Maybe these early hunter-gatherers threw some bones out which were picked up by some wild wolves. The wolves began hanging out around the campsite, maybe even following the tribe for scraps. Eventually the Tribe was able to raise a wolf cub from infancy. The wolf as a Pack animal develops an incredible loyalty to the pack. Soon these domesticated wolves serve as a source of protection and with the proper training are also able to assist with the Hunt.
As opposed to the farming cultures, many hunting cultures, including the Plains Indians of North America, revere the wolf for its skill as a hunter, for its selfless loyalty to the Pack, or, by extension, the Tribe, at all costs, for their sense of hierarchy, and even for their family values.
Both the herder and farmer vilify the wolf and seek his destruction because of their attacks upon their precious herds and flocks. As wolves have been around for some 40 million years, the human species, with only a few million years of existence, are a relative newcomer to the ecosystem. The Hunter-Gatherer societies dominated human culture for the first two million years. The Herding and Farming cultures have only been around for the last 10,000 years or so, less than 1/2 of a percent of our time upon the planet. Just as these recent upstarts have attempted to tame or exterminate the wolf because of its wildness, they have also attempted to tame or exterminate the Hunter-Gatherer societies. Their lack of success is a testament to the inherent vitality of the Hunter-gatherer way of life.
The Hunter-Gatherer neither pen nor herd their wolf-dogs. Instead the wolf-dogs remain through choice, through loyalty, alone. Hence the preferred Wild of the Hunter-Gatherer is preserved. The Hunt is still at the top of the list. Now the Wolf-dog adds perseverance and loyalty to the list of traits that are emulated. Further in emulating the wolf, the Hunter-Gatherer ceases to kill wantonly and in excess, but kills only enough game feed the Tribe.
While herders and farmers tend to feel superior to the animals they have domesticated, the Hunters have always looked to nature and animals for examples of adaptive techniques. Hence the Hunter might have learned how to hunt from watching wolves. This involved patient stalking over substantial distances. There has even been the suggestion that the early humans looked to the wolf pack as an example for their early tribes. The similarities are striking. The Pack has a home base where the female wolves raise the cubs while the male wolves hunt for food. Remember that the Primates were not great hunters and so humans didnÕt really have that instinctive gene pool to draw upon. Remember that status and food are also linked in the Pack.
Thank you brother and sister Wolves for teaching my early ancestors how to survive and then protecting them from harm. Further we apologize for the shabby treatment that youÕve had since then.
It is too bad we couldnÕt have learned population control from the wolves. The wolf pack has an alpha couple who determines who can breed. Many times it is only they. In this way they assure that the Pack will not grow beyond the capacity of the Pack to support itself. In this way the wolf has survived some 40 million years through many Ice Ages. Modern human has not even made it 1 million years and we have always had problems with overpopulation, as we shall see.
The wolf packs were eco-hunters as well. They hunted hoofed animals such as elk and deer. Rather than kill the whole herd they would kill the old, sick, and weak, culling the Herd to make it stronger evolutionarily. Again it is too bad that we humans canÕt learn from the Wolf Pack. Maybe we could also survive for 40 million years.
One last feature of the wolf pack that we would be wise to emulate was that they were led or ruled by an alpha-couple. It wasnÕt male dominated or female dominated, instead it was ruled by the polarity of male and female. Interestingly some of the most popular and effective presidents in recent times have had strong wives, who seemed to take a part in running the country. As examples Eleanor Roosevelt, Jackie Kennedy, and Hillary Clinton, just to name a few. It is as if the American public wants a couple to run the country instead of just a single man. In ancient Taoism a couple led the ceremonies. TÕai Chi is the ultimate balance between yin and yang. Forget the ever present patriarchy. Forget the non-existent matriarchy. Why not be led by the balance of male and female – the couple?
The Hunter-gatherers looked to Nature for examples. Nature was their teacher and guide, their ally. Conversely the Herders and Farmers had tamed Nature. Further Wild Nature threatened their existence. The wolves ate their livestock and the deer ate their plants. Wild Nature was their enemy. Only Domesticated Nature was their ally. Thus the Farmers and Herders have constantly waged war on Nature, attempting to tame and domesticate her, feeling above her.
The Taoists, with their shamanistic roots, were associated with the concept of learning from Nature, copying her. As such they were in touch with their animal nature. The Confucian school, on the other hand, distanced themselves from nature and instead focused upon their human past, copying the ceremonies of their ancestors.
In using the term Mesolithic culture, most archaeologists are referring to a culture that is using hunting and gathering techniques to provide them with a substantial amount of their food. Hence hunter/fisher cultures with pottery and limited agriculture are considered Mesolithic under this definition. The early American pioneer farmer culture, ala Little House on the Prairie, would have been considered Mesolithic in the sense that their diet was substantially supplemented by hunting. This view of cultural progression is assuming that agriculture societies are higher upon the scale.
This type of categorization leads to some ambiguities. Sometimes a Mesolithic culture, under this definition, will be more advanced than a nearby Neolithic culture, which displaces the sequence of the Ages of Cultural evolution.
To avoid this ambiguity and agri-cultural bias, we prefer to view the Mesolithic as the age of cultural differentiation based upon geography. The Hunter-gatherer culture retreat into their Forest cultures, but continue to evolve. The nomadic Herder cultures begin in the arid grasslands and begin to evolve. The settled Farming Culture types are just beginning to settle down, but still need to supplement their diets with hunting, fishing and gathering.
This last differentiation is what the traditional definition of Mesolithic addresses. In defense of this interpretation of cultural development, most hunter/gatherer/herder cultures will gradually convert to an agri-culture if given the choice. Some cultures didnÕt have the choice; their geographies just didnÕt work for agri-culture.
The limitations of the agri-cultural bias towards cultural evolution are realized fully when considering that the Viking and Japanese culture are based in the Mesolithic Hunter/Fisher cultures, relying for a substantial part of their sustenance from hunting and fishing, as opposed to farming.
For fun, however, and as mnemonic device we like to consider the Mesolithic as the Age in which animals were incorporated into the different cultures. The Wolf, a Pack animal, was domesticated by the Hunter cultures. Herds were domesticated by the Shepherd cultures. Herds and flocks were both domesticated by the proto-farming cultures. Mesolithic farming did not consist of tilling the field, but did include the gathering of seeds to throw into the fields. Because the Mesolithic is the Age of Animals and the animal based Herding culture presumably, (we have no evidence) began in this Age, we also like to call the Mesolithic, the Age of Herders, for fun.
Thus the Mesolithic was characterized by the beginning of the pastoral cultures, the advancement of the Hunter cultures, and emergence of the proto-agri-cultures, all based upon the demands of the local geography. A noteworthy feature of the Mesolithic was the domestication of animals for hunting, herding, or farming. We can now move on to the Neolithic where the land itself is domesticated. In this Age agri-culture developed full-blown, realizing its potentials for transforming the planet.
The Herding animals, all hoofed grass eaters, probably evolved in the ideally suited grasslands of the Great Arid Zone. One theory says that as competition increased for the oases of the shrinking grasslands that the peoples of the area, in closer contact with these herd animals, domesticated them. They fed this permanent food source by herding them from place to place. Thus their food source was stabilized but their home had just become nomadicized.
ÒCattle, sheep, pigs, goats, and horses—the most important and widespread of the domestic animals—are all hoofed grass eaters and can be kept in herds. All of them were first mastered by the early peoples of southwestern Asia. It has been suggested that the grassy plains of that region began slowly eroding some 10,000 years ago. Humans were forced to share smaller and smaller oases of fertile land with wild animals. People gradually learned how to control the animals. Some animals were bred in captivity, and from them the domestic strains developed.Ó (Compton's New Media, Inc., 1995)
ÒThe early peoples of central and southwestern Asia were the most successful in domesticating animals. They domesticated the cattle, sheep, pigs, goats, camels, horses, and donkeys that people use today.Ó (Compton's New Media, Inc., 1995)
ÒA Semitic people who conquered the Mesopotamian region in about 2300 BC were mounted on horses. The ability of these people to domesticate their horses may explain their success in war. The first sight of a person riding a horse must have struck terror into the hearts of people unaccustomed to such a sight. In addition, the myth of the centaur, half horse and half man, probably had its origin in just such an experience.Ó (Compton's New Media, Inc., 1995)
ÒA large proportion of the world's land area is unsuitable for crop production because of topography, climate, and deficiencies in soil fertility or rainfall. In many such areas the use of grazing animals is the only feasible way economically to convert the natural materials of plant growth into products of use to people. Even where grains or food crops are cultivated intensively, only selected parts of the plants can be eaten, because the human ability to digest fibrous materials is limited. Using animals, however, such crop residues positively contribute to the human food supply.Ó (GrolierÕs Multimedia 1997 Animal husbandry)
[1]Agriculture is here used in the specific sense of farming, Ôtending the soilÕ or ÔcropsÕ; not in the more general sense of using the soil which would include herding. The hairbreadthÕs difference: The farmer who Ôtends his cropsÕ might do so at the expense of his soil. While the farmer who Ôtends his soilÕ will never run out. The shepherd Ôtends his flockÕ, an especially Christian sentiment, also with a tendency to forget the soil and crops. Start at the bottom.