Over time people discovered that grasses such as wheat and barley had other uses. If ground to flour, mixed with water, and baked, the grasses could be made into bread. Adding yeast, a naturally occurring fungus, leavened the bread. At some inevitable point in time, barley gruel and yeast were probably accidentally allowed to stand, and the result was a fermented beverage we call beer. Archeologist Patrick McGovern at the University of Pennsylvania has suggested that not only beer but also wine was discovered early in the Fertile Crescent. The Taurus, Zagros, and Caucasus mountains there are regarded as the origin of Eurasian grapes, since this is “where the species shows its greatest genetic variation and consequently where it might have been first domesticated.” According to this theory, people would have been collecting wild grapes and storing them in containers. The grape skins would have contained natural yeast, and if left to stand, the grapes would have slowly fermented “into a low-alcohol wine—a kind of Stone Age Beaujolais Nouveau.” Then, according to McGovern, “one of the more daring members of the human clan takes a tentative taste of the concoction,” reports its pleasing effects to his companions, and invites them to partake. This would have been the world’s first wine tasting; there would be no turning back.19
Although the initial discovery of beer is often treated humorously in historical accounts, it may, in fact, have played an important role in the domestication of plants. For more than half a century, occasional scholars have suggested that “the domestication of cereals was for the purposes of brewing beer rather than for basic subsistence purposes,” sometimes referred to as the “beer before bread” hypothesis. Archeologist Brian Hayden and his colleagues at Simon Fraser University undertook a detailed examination of this thesis, including determining the technology that would have been involved at that time in beer making. They noted that the making of beer was extremely unlikely to have been done in traditional hunter-gatherer societies and most likely began when Homo sapiens became semisedentary. They also noted that “the cereals that were first domesticated (rye, einkorn, emmer, and barley) have been shown to be suitable for brewing” and that “there do not seem to have been any significant technological impediments or constraints to the development of brewing in the Late Epipaleolithic [about 12,000 years ago].” Hayden et al. also suggested that the initial brewing of beer was primarily associated with feasting:
Brewing beer is a laborious and time-consuming process that requires surplus amounts of cereals and control over significant labor.… It is not something which is undertaken by families of meager means nor by individuals for frivolous purposes such as ephemeral personal whims or pleasures. The ethnographic literature makes it very clear that brewing beer is done by those with surpluses almost exclusively for special occasions that are socially significant. It is for this reason that brewing is an essential constituent of feasts in most areas of the traditional world.20
As previously noted, there is evidence of feasting between 12,000 and 11,000 years ago at sites such as Göbekli Tepe and Hallan Çemi and there are suggestions of residual wine in the drinking vessels at nearby Körtik. Insofar as such feasting was being done to honor dead ancestors or other spirits, beer and wine, which are well known to stimulate “the mystical faculties of human nature,” may have been used to assist in communicating with such spirits. If this is true, then it is possible that beer and wine played a significant role in the early development of religious ideas.21
At about the same time that modern Homo sapiens began cultivating plants, they also began domesticating animals. The sequence of these two events has been debated, but they probably influenced each other. For example, the parts of domesticated plants that are not used by humans could have been fed to goats and pigs. Similarly, domesticated cattle, oxen, and horses could have increased the areas under cultivation by pulling plows.
Dogs almost certainly were the first animals domesticated. There are claims that this occurred as early as 32,000 years ago and that domestication occurred more than once. As Dale Guthrie of the University of Alaska noted, “Dogs were likely a revolutionary aid in finding game, holding it at bay, and tracking down wounded game—magnifying hunting success perhaps several times over the Pleistocene norm.” By 11,000 years ago, when other animals began to be domesticated, domesticated dogs had become widespread.22
Sheep and goats were probably the next animals to be domesticated, and there is evidence that this happened by at least 10,000 years ago. Modern Homo sapiens was an astute observer of animal behavior, as their cave paintings attest, and would have noted how wild sheep and goats followed a leader and how newborn animals, if removed from the flock, could be tamed. Both sheep and goats would have made important contributions to the lives of early farmers. As noted by Juliet Clutton-Brock in Domesticated Animals from Early Times, “The goat can provide both the primitive peasant farmer and the nomadic pastoralist with all his physical needs, clothing, meat, and milk, as well as bone and sinew for artifacts, tallow for lighting, and dung for fuel and manure.” Goatskins can also be used for clothing and as water containers.
Pigs (boars) and cattle (aurochs) are thought to have been domesticated next, although in some parts of the Fertile Crescent there are suggestions that pigs were domesticated before sheep or goats. The domestication of cattle was especially important. They provided meat, milk, butter, and cheese; their hides could be made into clothing, shoes, and shields; their dung could be used as fuel or fertilizer or mixed with straw for building; their fat could be burned; and their horns could be used as weapons.
Cattle could also be used to pull carts, turn wheels to bring water from wells, and thrash grain by walking on it. It is thus not surprising that cattle have been revered, perhaps even worshiped, in many cultures, including some of the earliest cultures in southwest Asia.23
Within the Fertile Crescent, the domestication of plants and animals was not a neat, linear process. The Fertile Crescent is approximately 1,000 miles in width, and the agricultural revolution took place over a time period of 5,000 years, from approximately 12,000 to 7,000 years ago. Hunting and gathering continued to be practiced for centuries as agriculture was slowly introduced. As Karina Croucher noted, “Neolithization took place over a span of several thousand years, with variable emphasis from region to region.”24
FARMING AND PARALLEL EVOLUTION
It is believed that the domestication of plants and animals spread from the Fertile Crescent to adjacent regions but also developed independently in other places in the world. Diffusing westward, farming reached western Turkey by 9,000 years ago and was introduced in southeastern Europe, especially in the countries we now call Greece and Bulgaria, by 8,000 years ago. It continued slowly westward, reaching central Europe about 7,500 years ago, and Britain by 6,000 years ago. Recent genetic and linguistic studies have confirmed that agriculture was brought to Europe by people whose roots lay in southeastern Turkey and the Fertile Crescent, and there is no evidence that European agriculture developed independently.25
Diffusing eastward from the Fertile Crescent, agriculture spread to what is now called Iran and Turkmenistan, then to Pakistan and India. By 7,000 years ago, it had become established in the Indus Valley. In moving in this direction, agriculture was following ancient trade routes that had apparently existed for thousands of years. For example, it was reported that seashells used as personal ornaments found in a Jordanian village more than 19,000 years old had come from the Indian Ocean, suggesting “far-flung social networks” long before the agricultural revolution began. Agriculture also spread south from the Fertile Crescent into Egypt and was widely established there by 7,500 years ago.26
In addition to diffusing to adjacent regions from the Fertile Crescent, the domestication of plants and animals also took place independently at several other geographically disparate areas of the world. As summarized by anthropologists Robert Wenke and Deborah Olszewski in Patterns in Prehistory: “One of the particularly striking characteristics of the ‘agricultural revolution’ is th
at not only was it rapid and widespread, but it also happened independently in different parts of the world at about the same time.” Indeed, this fact is regarded as one of the strongest pieces of evidence in support of parallel evolution.27
Agriculture is thought to have developed at two places in China, probably independently. There is evidence of pottery making in China dated to 20,000 years ago, probably for use in cooking. Rice was domesticated in the Yangtze River Valley by about 8,900 years ago, and millet on the Yellow River flood plain by about 8,500 years ago. Chickens, goats, sheep, oxen, and pigs were also domesticated in China at an early date; for pigs, it was one of at least six times they were independently domesticated, according to genetic studies. Just as in the Fertile Crescent, there is evidence from the residue on pottery shards of the use of fermented beverages during China’s agricultural revolution. At Jiahu, in the Yellow River Valley, the residue has been dated to 9,000 years ago and identified by Patrick McGovern as “a complex beverage consisting of a grape and hawthorn-fruit wine, honey mead, and rice beer.”28
Another area where agriculture was independently developed at about this time was in the highlands of Papua New Guinea. Farming began there as early as 10,000 years ago and included taro, pandanus, bananas, yams, and sugar cane. According to archeologist Peter Bellwood of the Australian National University, the early agriculture in Papua New Guinea “qualifies to be considered as true and primary agriculture, albeit not a highly expansive system in the absence of cereals and domesticated animals.” The agriculture in Papua New Guinea did not spread to Australia, probably because the Papua New Guinea highlands are remote and physically inaccessible.29
Additional centers for the independent development of agriculture include Peru, Mesoamerica, and sub-Saharan Africa. In the highlands of Peru, “the domestication of plants, including potatoes, was well underway” by 7,000 years ago. On the coast, cotton and other plants were being cultivated by 6,000 years ago. Llamas, alpacas, and guinea pigs were domesticated later. In Mesoamerica, stretching from northern Mexico to Guatemala, evidence of the cultivation of squash dates to 10,000 years ago, followed by pumpkins and beans. Maize (corn), which would become the staple food of the Americas, was initially domesticated in central Mexico about 5,500 years ago. Finally, many experts believe that farming began independently in the Sahel region of Africa, just south of the Sahara Desert, with millet, sorghum, rice, and yams being domesticated. There is also reasonably good evidence that cattle were independently domesticated in this region.30
THE LIVING AND THE DEAD
The gradual shift from hunting and gathering to farming that took place between 12,000 and 7,000 years ago brought about profound changes in the relationship between the living and the dead. A migratory lifestyle demands that the deceased be buried or otherwise disposed of wherever they happen to die, since carrying dead persons around is obviously impractical. A sedentary lifestyle, by contrast, allows for the burial of the deceased in the vicinity of the living, and thus the gradual accumulation of the bodies of ancestors from preceding generations. It seems likely that at this time deceased ancestors became much more important to the living.
At one level, local burials facilitate the remembrance of one’s ancestors; for example, each time one passes the tree beneath which they are buried, they can be thought about. As Karina Croucher noted, “Keeping the dead close to the living may reflect a desire to retain emotional ties with the deceased, as well as aiding the transitional process of mourning.” At another level, burying deceased family members in the vicinity of the living has practical implications for land ownership and kin obligations. The land that was farmed by one’s ancestors is the same land on which they are buried and the same land that is being farmed by the present generation. According to one summary: “Often the land and the ancestors are intimately connected. Among many African tribes, ancestors are the ultimate owners or proprietors of the land.… Among Australian aboriginals, ancestors are thought to be part of the land itself.” Such arrangements inevitably led to the idea of land ownership, probably for the first time in history. The idea of land ownership in turn raised questions about who could inherit the land and how it should be divided following the death of the owner. “Under such conditions,” it has been noted, “appeal to some authority was required, and lineage ancestors provided a natural source for such authority.” In The Archeology of Death and Burial, Mike Parker Pearson described this association between land and people during the agricultural revolution:
Ancestors of specific kin groups were becoming increasingly important for several reasons. Their physical remains served to tie people to the very earth itself, during a time when the seasonal exploitation of that earth, in the planting and harvesting of crops, was becoming a principal feature of people’s lives. For such seasonal tasks, mobilization of large enough groups was essential and, in drawing on each other’s labour, people needed to recall and demonstrate the ancestral genealogies which bound the living together.31
Human burials during the agricultural revolution were sometimes accompanied by grave goods, and this became a more common practice as the agricultural lifestyle was more firmly established. Most of the grave goods were utilitarian or decorative and were sex-specific. Men, for example, were accompanied by bone tools, sickles, or obsidian blades, useful for harvesting grain in the afterworld. Women were sometimes adorned with “shell and stone beads, bone pendants worn around the neck, waist, and wrist, and necklaces, bracelets, and belts.” Karina Croucher noted that children “under the age of about four years [have] the highest number of grave goods,” including “small drinking cups” for refreshment in the afterlife.32
In addition to utilitarian and decorative grave goods, some people who were buried at this time were also accompanied to the afterworld by animals or parts of animals. Dogs were buried most frequently; this may simply indicate an affectionate relationship between the deceased persons and their dogs, or the dogs may have been buried to help their masters in the afterlife. In addition to dogs, the “remains of deer, gazelle, aurochs, and tortoise [have also been found] within graves.” In some regions, fox mandibles accompanied child burials. A concern for the deceased and one’s ancestors was thus becoming more prominent in human history at the same time that plants and animals were being domesticated. Ancestors and agriculture were evolving together.33
As modern Homo sapiens increasingly settled next to their fields, extended families built houses near one another. Such family clusters slowly grew into villages between 11,000 and 10,000 years ago, by which time a village such as Jericho had a population of approximately 2,000 people. Archeological records have confirmed that in these early villages “adjacent houses were related through kinship.” Such clustering of people living permanently together was new in human history. It allowed people to collectively exchange ideas about everything, including how to select the best seeds for planting and how to best honor one’s ancestors. As Mike Parker Pearson summarized this period: “What we appear to be witnessing in [southwest Asia] between 12,800 and 10,000 BP (before the present), when farming had its origins, is the beginning of a human obsession with the material presence of the dead among the living.”34
In the early phases of the agricultural revolution, approximately 12,000 to 10,000 years ago, it was a common practice to bury deceased family members directly beneath the floor of the family’s house. Recent excavations have also made clear that in some instances the dead person was buried first and then the house was built directly on top of the grave. In all such cases, the dead person remained physically close to the living. Indeed, “in one instance a sub-floor burial had been placed with its head resting on a stone pillow, resulting in the head protruding clearly into the domestic plaster floor above.” As Karina Croucher noted, “It appears to have been important to keep the dead physically close to the living; the living lived their lives in the rooms above their buried descendants.” It was not until the later phases of the agricultural revolution tha
t it became common to bury the deceased in common areas adjacent to the village in what essentially became the first cemeteries.35
SKULL CULTS
During the early and middle phases of the agricultural revolution, it was a common practice to exhume dead bodies weeks or months after death and to remove the skulls. The skulls were then displayed in the family’s house or in a common area in the village. According to French archeologist Jacques Cauvin: “Skulls were in effect lined up on the floor of a house along a wall. Lumps of red clay were brought into the house and served as pedestals. They were thus exposed, set out so that they could be seen.… This tendency to arrange human skulls like art objects is new.”36
Some of the skulls were painted. Others were modeled with plaster so as to resemble a human face. When plastered, “a layer of lime, gypsum, or mud plaster would be placed over the face, recreating a ‘fleshed’ appearance out of the plaster.” Eyes were created by inserting seashells, by using “a whiter plaster which makes them stand out,” or by outlining them with black eyeliner. Some of the plastered skulls “have marks that indicate tattooing, which suggests that some were made to be distinctive or individualized, perhaps imitating the appearance of individuals during life.” Karina Croucher noted that some skulls may also have had “hair, headdresses or wigs,” although this organic material has not survived.37
Evolving Brains, Emerging Gods Page 16