Great Human Odyssey

1. What subfields of Anthropology are represented in the documentary? Provide example.


2. What did you understand about the evolution of humans? Provide one illustration of each important piece of information (When? Where? Why? How?).


3. What role climate change has played in the early human migration patterns? Do you see climate change playing a role in current human migrations?


4. What is the role of language in the process of hominization?


5. What is the role of the environment in humans’ history?


6. How do you understand biological and cultural adaptations as it is explained in the documentary. Provide examples.


7. If you read already the chapter on subsistence, what can you say about the role of labor/work in human history?

Evolution Of Modern Humans Documentary 2017 FULL HD NEW​

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkX-hLiU_r8 [youtube.com]

Perspectives: An Open Introduction to Cultural Anthropology PERSPECTIVES: AN OPEN INTRODUCTION TO CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY Nina Brown, Thomas McIlwraith, Laura Tubelle de González 2020 American Anthropological Association 2300 Clarendon Blvd, Suite 1301 Arlington, VA 22201 ISBN Print: 978-1-931303-67-5 ISBN Digital: 978-1-931303-66-8 http://perspectives.americananthro.org/ This book is a project of the Society for Anthropology in Community Colleges (SACC) http://sacc.americananthro.org/ and our parent organization, the American Anthropological Association (AAA). Please refer to the website for a complete table of contents and more information about the book. SECOND EDITION Perspectives: An Open Introduction to Cultural Anthropology by Nina Brown, Thomas McIlwraith, Laura Tubelle de González is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted. Under this CC BY-NC 4.0 copyright license you are free to: Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material Under the following terms: Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ 5 5 SUBSISTENCE SUBSISTENCE Isaac Shearn, Community College of Baltimore County [email protected] http://ccbcmd.academia.edu/IsaacShearn Learning Objectives Learning Objectives • Identify the four modes of subsistence and describe the major activities associated with obtaining food in each system. • Explain the difference between wild and domesticated resources and how plants and animals are domesticated. • Explain the relationship between the subsistence system used in a society and the amount of private property or wealth differ- ences that develop. • Assess the ways in which subsistence systems are linked to expectations about gender roles. • Categorize the social and economic characteristics associated with agriculture and describe the benefits and drawbacks of the agricultural subsistence system. • Analyze the ways in which the global agricultural system separates producers from consumers and contributes to wealth differ- ences. • Appraise the ways in which human intervention in the environment has made it difficult to separate the “natural” from the human-influenced environment. Think about the last meal you ate. Where did the ingredients come from? If it was a cheeseburger, where did the cow live and die? Now think about all the food you consume in a normal week. Can you identify the geographic origin of all the ingredients? In other words, how much do you know about the trip your food took to arrive at your plate? How much you know about where your food comes from would tell an anthropologist something about the subsistence system used in your community. A sub- sistence system is the set of practices used by members of a society to acquire food. If you are like me 96 http://ccbcmd.academia.edu/IsaacShearn Figure 1: Carrying Capacity: The area in the orange box, which is not under cultivation, might provide enough resources for a family of four to survive for a year. An equivalent area, marked by the blue box, could provide enough resources for a significantly larger population under intensive agricultural cultivation. and you cannot say much about where your food comes from, then you are part of an agricultural soci- ety that separates food production from consumption, a recent development in the history of humans. People who come from non-agricultural societies have a more direct connection to their food and are likely to know where 100 percent of their food comes from. Finding food each day is a necessity for every person no matter where that person lives, but food is not just a matter of basic survival. Humans assign symbolic meaning to food, observing cultural norms about what is considered “good” to eat and applying taboos against the consumption of other foods. Catholics may avoid meat during Lent, for instance, while Jewish and Islamic communities forbid the consumption of certain foods such as pork. In addition to these attitudes and preferences, every society has preferred methods for preparing food and for consuming it with others. The cultural norms and attitudes surrounding food and eating are known as foodways. By studying both the subsistence system used by a society to acquire food and the foodway associated with consuming it, anthropologists gain insight into the most important daily tasks in every society. STUDYING SUBSISTENCE SYSTEMS Since the need to eat is one of the few true human universals, anthropologists have studied subsis- tence systems from a variety of perspectives. One way to think about the importance of food for human populations is to consider the number of calories an individual must obtain every day in order to sur- vive. Anthropologists use the term carrying capacity to quantify the number of calories that can be extracted from a particular unit of land to support a human population. In his 1798 publication An Essay on the Principle of Population, Thomas Malthus argued, “the power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man.”1 He suggested that human populations grow at an exponential rate, meaning the population climbs at a rate that is constantly increasing. How- ever, the availability of resources in the environment increases at only an arithmetic rate, which means that left unchecked human populations would soon outstrip the environment’s ability to provide sus- tenance. Malthus famously argued that war, famine, and disease were “good” or at least “functional” in the sense that they kept populations from growing too large. While Malthus presented a grim view of humanity’s future, research suggests that the rate of human population growth, currently about one percent per year, is actually slowing. It is also not necessarily true that population growth has an entirely negative impact on human communities. The Danish economist Ester Boserup, for example, argued that human history reveals a connection between popula- tion growth and cultural innovation, particu- larly innovation in farming techniques. Because necessity is the mother of invention, she reasoned, the pressure of having more mouths to feed could be the dynamic that dri- ves societies to develop new solutions.2 Modern anthropological studies of subsistence systems draw on insights and perspectives from sev- 97 https://pressbooks.com/app/uploads/sites/47044/2019/01/subsistence_figure_one.jpg https://pressbooks.com/app/uploads/sites/47044/2019/01/subsistence_figure_one.jpg eral different fields, including biology, chemistry, and ecology, as well as a range of ethnographic techniques. This interdisciplinary perspective allows for cross-cultural comparison of human diets. In several decades of anthropological research on subsistence systems, anthropologists have observed that the quest for food affects almost every aspect of daily life. For instance, every person plays a role in soci- ety as a producer, distributor, or consumer of food. In the journey of a fish from the sea to the plate, for instance, we can see that in some societies, the same person can fill more than one of those roles, while in other societies there is more specialization. In a small fishing village, the same person might catch the fish, distribute some extra to friends and family, and then consume the bounty that same day. In a city, the consumer of the fish at a fancy restaurant is not the same person who caught the fish. In fact, that person almost certainly has no knowledge who caught, cleaned, distributed, and prepared the fish he or she is consuming. The web of social connections that we can trace through subsistence provide a very particular kind of anthropological insight into how societies function at their most basic level. Figure 2: These images show how fish are harvested in two different subsistence systems. Consider the amount of investment and labor that went into the development of technologies that make mass fish farming, or aquaculture, possible compared to fishing with simple nets. MODES OF SUBSISTENCE Like all human systems, a society’s subsistence system is intricately linked to other aspects of culture such as kinship, politics, and religion. Although we can study these systems in isolation, it is important to remember that in the real world all aspects of culture overlap in complex ways. Consider harvest rit- uals, for example, which are religious ceremonies focused on improving the food supply. These rituals are shaped by religious beliefs as well as the demands and challenges of obtaining food. Likewise, sub- sistence systems are the economic base of every society. Working to put food on the table is the essential task of every family or household, and this work is the basis of a domestic economy that interacts with the modes of production and modes of exchange described in the Economics chapter. When anthropologists first began to examine subsistence systems, they started like all scientists do, with classification. Early on, anthropologists saw the benefit of grouping similar societies into types, or categories, based on the range of practices they used in the quest for food. These groupings allowed for comparisons between cultures. At a basic level, societies can be divided into those that have an imme- diate return system for finding food and those that use a delayed return system. The residents of a small fishing village who eat the fish they catch each day have an immediate return on their labor. Farm- 98 PERSPECTIVES: AN OPEN INTRODUCTION TO CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY https://pressbooks.com/app/uploads/sites/47044/2019/01/subsistence_figure_two.jpg https://pressbooks.com/app/uploads/sites/47044/2019/01/subsistence_figure_two.jpg ers who must wait several months between the time they plant seeds and the time they harvest have a delayed return system. Beyond this basic division, anthropologists recognize four general types of food system known as modes of subsistence. The four modes of subsistence are foraging, pastoralism, horticulture, and agri- culture. Each mode is defined by the tasks involved in obtaining food as well as the way members of the society are organized socially to accomplish these tasks. Because each mode of subsistence is tai- lored to particular ecological conditions, we can think of each culture’s subsistence system as an adapta- tion, or a set of survival strategies uniquely developed to suit a particular environment. Because culture shapes the way we view and interact with the environment, different societies can adapt to similar environments in different ways. Foraging, sometimes known as hunting and gathering, describes soci- eties that rely primarily on “wild” plant and animal food resources. Pastoralism is a subsistence sys- tem in which people raise herds of domesticated livestock. Horticulture is the small-scale cultivation of crops intended