On Mon, 26 Aug 2002 09:33:13 +0900, Tom <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Todd Moody wrote:
>>..the Ice Man, neolithic or not,
>> would have been a vegetarian.
>Not so surprising, remember Sampson, from the Bible, was
>veg, and he lived in a similar environment. I suspect that
>neolithic, and paleo as well for that matter, had religions...
I doubt the kind of vegetarian food the ice man had had anything to do with
religion.
The ice man had a overwhelming plant based diet from grains and legumes
(exactely emmer, einkorn, lentils and barley).
Plus a little animals, hunted or livestock.
It was simply a necessity that the animal part was low, up to the middle
ages. Such a emmer field had a yield of 3 or 4-fold the seed.
That's still more than the 1000-fold per area, compared with hunting.
So they could start to build fixed houses and small villages.
But of the 4-fold 1 part was used as the next seed, 1 part ate the granary
weevils, 1 part ate the mice and 1 part the humans.
That's not enough to exchange 10 to 1 of food by feeding up livestock.
That's only possible with mass agriculture.
Stone age livestock only got some leftovers or meager meadows.
(btw the 4 to 1 ration eaten by the mice is a very good explanation for the
extreme usefulness of cats - they could double what humans got).
>But...he was wearing clothing made from the skins of half a
>dozen different animals, and carrying a powerful bow and
>arrows, hardly suggesting an animal-free lifestyle.
Yes, a bear fur cap, a little capricorn meat in the stomach,
leather jacket and leggins. Leather shoe parts.
As undertrousers a long sheet of soft goat leather.
The arrow-feathers of various wild birds.
The bow could have provided some emergency supply when escaping through the
alps. Or defend against more invaders like the ones who shot him an
arrowhead into the shoulder.
> So it is really all still up in the air.
I don't think so,not at all. The vicinity of a village only leaves very
little *percent* of animal food. Nothing else was possible.
Cheers
Amadeus S.
|
