# So why are there still primitive societies? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [January 4, 2007, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-why-are-there-still-primitive-societies/386698 "2007-01-04T15:49:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2017, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-why-are-there-still-primitive-societies/386698/61 "2017-03-01T19:06:39Z")
The Wikipedia footnote leads me to this abstract: > [@](#): > > As a result of research carried out over the past decade, eastern North America now provides one of the most detailed records of the origins of agriculture available. Spanning a fill [full?] three millennia, the transition from forager to farmer in eastern North America involved the domestication of four North American seed plants during the second millennium B.C., the initial emergence of food production economies based on local crop plants between 250 B.C. and A.D. 200, and the rapid and broad-scale shift to maize-centered agriculture during the three centuries from A.D. 800 to 1100. So domestication, partial agricultural practices, yes. many transitional societies have this. “Initial emergence of food production economies” around 0AD give or take, about the time maize/corn made an appearance. Says BRUCE D. SMITH, Curator of North American Archaeology, Department of Anthropology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC 20560 Notice at this point, the economies exploded; the central Mississippi mound builder societies were boasting towns of tens of thousands and giant earthworks within a thousand years or so after, once this level of food production became feasible. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2017, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-why-are-there-still-primitive-societies/386698/62 "2017-03-01T19:28:29Z")
:smack: It’s like you have some kind of weird selective blindness: > [@](#): > > **the initial emergence** […] **between 250 B.C. and A.D. 200** […]\*\* shift to maize-centered agriculture during the three centuries from A.D. 800 to 1100\*\*. That’s _at least_ 600 years, possibly as much as a millennium, where corn was a minor crop (since they didn’t have cold-adapted varieties). That is not fucking “partial agricultural practices”, and you have provided zero evidence that agriculture was not the mainstay of subsistence between domestication and the switch to maize. ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2017, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-why-are-there-still-primitive-societies/386698/63 "2017-03-01T20:05:38Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > To live primarily on agricultural products, a high-volume starch staple seems to be generally needed. Jerusalem artichokes have about as much carbohydrate per fresh weight as potatoes, although it’s not in the form of starch. North America has native chestnuts as well which are also a carbohydrate source. ---
**Author:** ![hibernicus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hibernicus/32/2802_2.png) [@hibernicus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hibernicus)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2017, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-why-are-there-still-primitive-societies/386698/64 "2017-03-01T21:26:28Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > In “primitive” societies, the country’s government had either no money, no the firepower, or no urgency to force this transformation onto the locals. They may have managed to enforce some basics - i.e. Diamond mentions that the New Guinea government enforces the “no tribal warefare” rules, even if they can’t do a lot more for everyone. This is one of the key reasons why non-state societies eagerly welcomed state control, according to Diamond’s _The World Until Yesterday_. He mentions how happy people were that they no longer had to live in a state of perpetual warfare with their neighbouring villages. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2017, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-why-are-there-still-primitive-societies/386698/65 "2017-03-01T22:42:46Z")
> [@](#): > > **Late Woodland period (500–1000 CE)** > The late Woodland period was a time of apparent population dispersal, although populations do not appear to have decreased. In most areas construction of burial mounds decreased drastically, as well as long-distance trade in exotic materials. At the same time, bow and arrow technology gradually overtook the use of the spear and atlatl, and agricultural production of the “Three Sisters” (maize, beans, and squash) was introduced. _While full scale intensive agriculture did not begin until the following Mississippian period_, the beginning of serious cultivation greatly supplemented the _gathering of plants_. > > Late Woodland settlements became more numerous, but the size of each one (with exceptions) was smaller than their middle Woodland counterparts. The reasons for this are unknown, but it has been theorized that populations increased so much that trade alone could no longer support the communities and some clans resorted to raiding others for resources. Alternatively, the efficiency of bows and arrows in hunting _may have decimated the large game animals_, forcing the tribes to break apart into smaller clans to better use local resources, thus limiting the trade potential of each group. A third possibility is a colder climate may have affected food yields, possibly affected by Northern Hemisphere extreme weather events of 535–536, also limiting trade possibilities. Lastly, it may be that agricultural technology became sophisticated enough that crop variation between clans lessened, thereby decreasing the need for trade. Italics mine… Sounds like “somewhat agricultural”, not full-scale agriculture. There seems to be a debate over how sedentary vs. nomadic the settlements were at this time. I don’t claim there was NO agriculture, only that the agricultural production does not seem to have resulted in significant surplus (to be put to use for culture, infrastructure, and war - the usual civilizing activities 🙂 ) The question is how much the tribes had converted from nomadic to stationary agricultural lifestyles. This seems to be a debate. I recall Diamond mentioning that the long life cycle of nut trees (he mentioned acorns) meant that generally they have not been domesticated, grafting is the preferred method of controlling quality. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2017, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-why-are-there-still-primitive-societies/386698/66 "2017-03-01T22:49:55Z")
Jerusalem Artichokes: > [@](#): > > The tubers are sometimes used as a substitute for potatoes:[14] they have a similar consistency, and in their raw form have a similar texture, but a sweeter, nuttier flavor; raw and sliced thinly, they are fit for a salad. Their inulin form of carbohydrates give the tubers a tendency to become soft and mushy if boiled, but they retain their texture better when steamed. The inulin cannot be broken down by the human digestive system[15] but it is metabolized by bacteria in the colon. _This can cause flatulence and, in some cases, gastric pain_. The natives always snuck up on settlers from downwind. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2017, 4:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-why-are-there-still-primitive-societies/386698/67 "2017-03-02T04:29:47Z")
It’s not like Hunter Gatherer/Agriculturalist is a binary thing. Pretty much every agricultural society supplements their diet with hunting/fishing and gathering. I mean, I live in the 21st century US, and I know people who fish and hunt game. So saying, “Well, these people hunted, therefore they couldn’t have agriculture” isn’t one of those arguments that hold up. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2017, 5:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-why-are-there-still-primitive-societies/386698/68 "2017-03-02T05:58:17Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > Sounds like “somewhat agricultural” There’s no such thing. They were a fully agricultural society. That they hunted and gathered wild plants doesn’t preclude this, any more than peasants gathering haws from hedgerows and lords hunting deer made 14th C England only “somewhat agricultural” Similarly, “sedentary” vs “nomadic” is irrelevant to whether a group is agricultural or not. Many pastoralists are are semi- or fully-nomadic, but they are nonetheless _fully_ agricultural cultures. ---
**Author:** ![Johanna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johanna/32/8318_2.png) [@Johanna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johanna)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2017, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-why-are-there-still-primitive-societies/386698/69 "2017-03-02T15:52:06Z")
> [@Darren\_Garrison](#): > > Haven’t read the sleepy-snake book, but I’m reminded of [a book about](https://www.amazon.com/Savage-Life-Times-Jemmy-Button/dp/0312252137) the three Tierra del Fuegans taken taken to England by Fitzroy on the _Beagle._ When they were returned to TdF, there was an attempt to set up the Fuegan “Jemmy Button” with a farm plot, but the other Fuegans insisted on eating the seed crops immediately rather than having the delayed gratification of the harvest. (Of course, the environment probably wasn’t right for the crops in the first place.) Ya think? Perhaps the British explorers told themselves that of course agriculture could work at 55ºS latitude, since after all they grew plenty of crops (potatoes and oats) at 55ºN in Great Britain and Northern Ireland. If that was the idea, they didn’t take into account how Scotland and Ireland benefit from the warm North Atlantic Current… and how TdF has nothing to shield it from freezing Antarctic winds. Brr. ---
**Author:** ![Johanna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johanna/32/8318_2.png) [@Johanna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johanna)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2017, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-why-are-there-still-primitive-societies/386698/70 "2017-03-02T15:55:34Z")
> [@Johanna](#): > > Ya think? > > Perhaps the British explorers told themselves that of course agriculture could work at 55ºS latitude, since after all they grew plenty of crops (potatoes and oats) at 55ºN in Great Britain and Northern Ireland. If that was the idea, they didn’t take into account how Scotland and Ireland benefit from the warm North Atlantic Current… and how TdF has nothing to shield it from freezing Antarctic winds. Brr. That story was dramatized in the [BBC miniseries](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=705904&highlight=Darwin) on Darwin’s _Beagle_-era adventures. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2017, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-why-are-there-still-primitive-societies/386698/71 "2017-03-02T16:40:50Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > It’s not like Hunter Gatherer/Agriculturalist is a binary thing. Pretty much every agricultural society supplements their diet with hunting/fishing and gathering. I mean, I live in the 21st century US, and I know people who fish and hunt game. So saying, “Well, these people hunted, therefore they couldn’t have agriculture” isn’t one of those arguments that hold up. Exactly - the articles about some of the Woodlands crops mentioned they tended to grow more easily than other plants in disturbed areas - garbage heaps, fir-cleared land, etc. -so would become most obviously the candidates for agricultural domestication, and would be found by nomadic groups revisiting seasonal camps. (Although with selection, they became modified/domesticated for easier yields) Plus, the bit on Jerusalem Artichokes mentioned their tendency to take over garden plots and spread to the exclusion of other plants. So, it’s almost like these plants were already screaming “ooh, ooh, pick me, pick me!”. But no, there is no dividing line between hunter and agricultural except the absolute one - so cultivated there is no appreciable wildlife habitat, or at the other extreme no appreciable fields or gardens. Even the difference between sedentary and nomadic is arbitrary - as Mr. Dibble points out, animal herders are often nomadic. Partially/mainly hunters may follow a seasonal routine returning to the same camps every year; making planting, and building more permanent structures a worthwhile endeavor. Even in Europe, IIRC, it’s not unusual for agriculturalists to move to the “high pasture” for the summer in some locales. Even the tribes like the Iroquois… They had longhouse towns of hundreds or even thousands. The did slash and burn field clearing; they moved every few years when their fields were exhausted. During the summers, the main villages (towns) could empty out to a significant degree as people left for much smaller hunting camps. Without large domestic herd animals, they got much protein from hunting (and beans…). But they grew corn, it was a major part of their diet, and they used the same fields for several years without moving. So by any definition, they were settled agriculturalists. And it also illustrates the process we’ve been describing to the OP. The less technical less populous, quasi-nomadic (less well armed) Iroquois were displaced by the Europeans, as happened to most of the inhabitants of North America. Those were pushed off into marginal lands, by force as necessary at the time. Canada and the USA have the financial surplus and (questionable?) altruism to help pay for some of the displaced peoples’ integration into modern society, but for the more remote types - Alaska and Northwest territories/Nunavut, this happened only recently. For less affluent nations, they do not have the wherewithal to push into their remote areas simply to integrate their more remote populations. This will happen when the money is available. ---
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2017, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-why-are-there-still-primitive-societies/386698/72 "2017-03-02T18:47:23Z")
Gotta stand up for my man Jared Diamond here. Part of his book that sometimes gets forgotten is his look at sub-saharan Africa, where he uses language distribution maps and numerous other clues to argue that these allegedly primitive peoples living on marginal lands were _displaced to there_ from more desriable lands and held in poverty by stronger neighbors (using “farmer power,” Diamond’s shorthand for the combination of agriculture and animal labor and disease resistance and population surplus that eventually took over most of the world). He makes a persuasive case that the likeliest reason is that they haven’t so much chosen this lifestyle as been attacked or driven into marginal circumstances by stronger neighbors disinclined to share. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2017, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-why-are-there-still-primitive-societies/386698/73 "2017-03-02T19:34:24Z")
> [@Sailboat](#): > > Gotta stand up for my man Jared Diamond here. Part of his book that sometimes gets forgotten is his look at sub-saharan Africa, where he uses language distribution maps and numerous other clues to argue that these allegedly primitive peoples living on marginal lands were _displaced to there_ from more desriable lands and held in poverty by stronger neighbors (using “farmer power,” Diamond’s shorthand for the combination of agriculture and animal labor and disease resistance and population surplus that eventually took over most of the world). He makes a persuasive case that the likeliest reason is that they haven’t so much chosen this lifestyle as been attacked or driven into marginal circumstances by stronger neighbors disinclined to share. See my post[#38](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=20029825&postcount=38)for a local example. ---
**Author:** ![Johanna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johanna/32/8318_2.png) [@Johanna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johanna)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-why-are-there-still-primitive-societies/386698/74 "2017-03-03T15:41:05Z")
> [@Sailboat](#): > > Gotta stand up for my man Jared Diamond here. Part of his book that sometimes gets forgotten is his look at sub-saharan Africa, where he uses language distribution maps and numerous other clues to argue that these allegedly primitive peoples living on marginal lands were _displaced to there_ from more desriable lands and held in poverty by stronger neighbors (using “farmer power,” Diamond’s shorthand for the combination of agriculture and animal labor and disease resistance and population surplus that eventually took over most of the world). He makes a persuasive case that the likeliest reason is that they haven’t so much chosen this lifestyle as been attacked or driven into marginal circumstances by stronger neighbors disinclined to share. After years of anthropologists practically throttling one another in the contentious controversy over the Tasaday people, it finally shook out that what you describe is exactly what had happened to them. Their great-grandparents’ generation had been driven off their land by more numerous groups of farmers. The Tasaday still went to work seasonally as hired farmhands. They lived primitively in the jungle because they lost their land and were too poor to live anywhere else, but they weren’t _primitively_ primitive, so to speak. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-why-are-there-still-primitive-societies/386698.md?page=3)