And let’s not forget cooties!!!
Influential? then my vote is for the snake, hands down.
The bacteria that live in our guts and help us digest our food. Without them we’d have gone extinct long ago.
.:Nichol:.
Gotta be the snake. The whole thing with Adam and Eve.
I’d say the most influential animal in the history of humanity is man, but you know, I tend to go toward the blatently obvious answer.
<d&r>
I’ll throw in a random vote for the humble earthworm, without which little soil would be usable for continual farming, or for agriculture in general.
Although, this cite states this:
It may well prove to be the goat.
The damage done to our environment by goats could eventually require extermination of this species to the point of forced extinction. Unlike sheep, whose close cropping of grass and churning of the soil with their hooves, and the damage they do, goats are even more nimble. Their ability to climb trees in order to browse makes their swath of destruction even wider. David Brin’s book, “Earth,” posits this forced extinction just to preserve the more delicate sub-tropical climes.
Per what animal has promoted human survival the most, it’s a tossup between the cow and the dog. Cows are a source of nutrition and utile implements, most definitely a plus. However, the security that dogs have routinely provided helped humans to avoid predation which might have caused the decline of our species as well. Dogs also assisted in hunting, something cows just aren’t up to snuff on. I support the notion that the domestication of dogs ocurred before sheep. Long before livestock were domesticated, hunting was pivotal for our survival. Dogs promoted that early critical phase of human evolution and just may well have tipped the scales in favor of our continuation as a species.
Rather a tough call.
Incidentally, it may not have been the hunting of horses to extinction in North America that led to technological stagnation for the Amerinds. Another cogent theory mentions the extremely limited origination and application of the wheel as a reason for lack of development. Quite an interesting idea, I’d say.
ah, crap! That was exactly my response…almost verbatim, including the “blatantly obvious” remark.
As a close second, I’m going with the Mayfly whose short lifespan periodically reminded mankind to make the most out of their time allotted 
I’m going by this question, “Which had the deepest impact over the development of human civilization to date?”, so as to avoid “influential”. Also using my definition of “animal”, which in this case doesn’t include microbes, insects or humans. Okay, terms more or less defined (except for maybe “deepest”… aaaarrrggghh).
Now, considering the timelime and the other posts, plus what I know about dogs, I am choosing dogs. I can see why some people would say horses, but just considering the timeline alone, you’d have to agree that horses had nothing to do with humankind’s early successes. Coming in so late in the game puts them in second place at best.
I agree with Jennalynn, horses are too much of a (relative) latecomer to be counted as the most influential.
Several people have mentioned that the horse is important due to the advantage it provides in battle, but this is a relatively recent innovation. Mounted soldiers were not useful until the invention of the stirrup. IIRC, the stirrup was invented around the 5th century AD in China - I don’t remember exactly when it was introduced to Europe.
Prior to the invention of the stirrup, warriors may have ridden horse to the battle, but then they dismounted and fought on foot. Stirrups allow the mounted rider to have better control over the animal while wielding their weapons, and provide better leverage. If you’re hacking at someone with your sword, stirrups ensure that you stay on your horse.
So although horses have been very important in human history, including transportation (chariot c. 3500BC, four-wheeled carts, etc…), they’ve only been used on the battlefield in the last 1500 years.
I think that the goat/dog would probably tie for the most influential animal throughout human history, closely followed by the horse.
I think I would go for the various types of cattle (oxen, watter buffalo, bison, etc.) as the most influential animal.
A little bit of supporting evidence is in a past Cecil column (which I can’t locate right now, dangit) about the order of letters in the alphabet.
A - alpha means house or tent (it even looks sort of like a tent).
B - beta means oxen (and it looks rather like the collar used for a pair of oxen).
Placing a symbol for oxen second in their list of symbols that eventually became the alphabet seems to imply that these early literate people put a high stake on their cows!
I’d like to know more about the goat in terms of this situation. Why do you think the goat would tie with the dog?
Another vote for the dogs. First, dogs alerting on the outskirts of human habitations, pre-domestication, would have helped early human populations. Second, actual domestication and all the advantages that entailed: guarding, herding, hunting, protection, companionship, etc. Third, the megafauna. Packs of domesticated dogs, still armed with serious teeth, would really have helped with animals like that. Throw in humans with fire and stone weapons, that’s a great combination.
What a fantastic deal for the dogs also. Aside from the obvious, a massive dog population. Dogs have also ridden alongside humans for millenia, being pampered and anthropomorphized to the point of becoming like our surrogate children in many cases. Medical care, special food, grooming, shows, acting jobs…
Working dogs–with real dog jobs like sniffing, herding, guarding, or hunting–have a wonderful existence as well, for the most part. Greyhounds and some fighting dogs might disagree. Mine sniffing leaves something to be desired.
Well, I think the dog is important for pretty much the same reasons as Beagle lists above.
Goats were domesticated at approximately the same time as dogs, so they’ve been an important part of human history for a long time. I think they’re so important because they’re useful for many different reasons.
They were the first domesticated animal for the materials they supply (food, milk, hair). Dogs may have been useful for herding - and they were probably herding goats. Goats are a useful source of meat protein, but they may be even more useful as a source of milk, and as a source of hair for wool and textiles. Goats were the first species to be domesticated for these reasons, and perhaps this experience helped lead to the eventual domestication of other animals with similiar uses such as sheep and cows. And these later domesticates (ie. cattle) were later useful as beasts of burden after the invention of the wheel.
Basically the domestication of goats was useful for many reasons, and it may have gotten the ball rolling on domesticating other animals. After you’ve domesticated one or two species and started to settle down more as a pastoralist and/or farmer, it makes it much more likely that you’ll pursue other related innovations.
Literacy is such a comparatively modern innovation with respect to the whole of human evolution (unless you’re a creationist), that the order of letters in any alphabet only signifies what sort of importance much more recent societies placed upon bovine livestock.
After much consideration (~3 minutes), I’m betting the farm on dogs. As I mentioned in my earlier post, they were recruited for hazardous duty long before any other animal. It’s really hard to imagine herding and guarding sheep without a dog. The domestication of sheep relied upon the symbiosis of humans and dogs, if only to assuage canine predation upon the captive herds.
Dogs were quite possibly pivotal for early human survival. Whilst protohominids grunted in the night around the campfire (with their all-important eyes dazzled), the dogs had their ears cocked for the least disturbance at the camp’s perimeter. Ever notice your dog attentively track the (unheard) footsteps of someone walking past your house while you were paying attention to something else? That sort of early warning was a lifesaver in the days of crude and ineffective weapons. The dog represented a weapon in and of itself as well.
Dogs valiantly interposed themselves in dangerous situations. They were exceptionally useful in flushing out game (small and large), thus enabling hominids to get a clear shot without approaching the prey and putting themselves in danger. The efficient harvesting of protein bearing animals was one of the most critical survival tools evolved by man. Dogs were indespensible for this task and the extra measure of nighttime protection they provided was pure gravy.
Dogs it is.
Thanks. I didn’t know anything about the goat’s history. Unless I’ve read something wrong, though, cows and sheep were, according to our timeline, domesticated earlier. Since they could also provide milk, meat, and skin/hair, wouldn’t that put the dog back on top?
Several people have mentioned the dog as guard/watchdog. However, nobody has specifically mentioned the dog as BABYSITTER. Who knows how many infant/toddler hominids, aztecs, romans, greeks, natives, and settlers owed their survival to a loyal canine?
I would say it is a close tie between horses and dogs, but heavily leaning more towards the horse.
Horses allowed for travel, hunting, and status improvement. They also provide quite a lot of meat in hard times.
Dogs were domesticated to hunt, protect, eat, and also many people use them to carry loads.
Chickens, like other birds, provide eggs, meat and feathers that can be used for many uses. Were chickens influential to history? I seriously doubt it. People did not settle just so they could raise chickens. Chickens were kept after people settled.
I cannot BELIEVE that nobody has yet mentioned the most obvious animal: The hampster.
Because as we all know, if the hampster did not exist, the SDMB would not exist. And the entire Purpose behind human evolution was the creation (and maintenance) of the SDMB.
ALL PRAISE THE HAMPSTERS!!! [insert several genuflections & prostrations]
Well, the thing is that hampsters don’t exist. It’s true. There is no such thing as a hampster.
Now, if you had talked about hamsters then I’d agree with you.
