Mime-Version: |
1.0 |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Wed, 23 Jul 1997 06:06:46 -0600 |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="us-ascii" |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
>Paul Getty wrote:
>> >Regarding this last point... why couldn't primitive hunter/gatherers
>> >have occasional access to milk? They're killing and eating large
>> >mammals, and are apparently selecting the choicest portions, based in
>> >part on fatty taste. Surely some (maybe even about half) of the mammals
>> >killed were female, and some would have been carrying milk.
>>
>> That's true. Of course it would have been hell trying to get that milk
>> from a wild animal! But there must have been some experience with milking
>> these animals before domestication came about or else they wouldn't have
>> domesticated them for milking (Well, they may have domesticated them for
>> some other purpose first, then stared milking them.).
>
>Actually, I meant that primitive peoples might have consumed whatever
>milk was in the animal when it was killed.
>
>Toby
A longtime European instincto reportedly tried precisely that and found
that the milk in the teat was not stored inside a "bladder" but in tiny
sacs and a branching system which made it hard even to extract a few drops.
Cheers,
Kirt
Kirt Nieft / Melisa Secola
[log in to unmask]
|
|
|