>> the mystery was and is why start cooking in the first place? Are

I have considered this, and I do believe I have possible explanations. (My
pet theories are all based on providence, or perhaps a better word would be
happenstance. In this case I would dismiss the idea that early humans would
start cooking *because* it makes inedible foods edible [why/how would they
even guess this?], but rather that they would have learned this *after*
they started cooking frequently).

First, a *fresh* kill is always warm. Some may even think it hot (caracsses
steam in the fall/winter). If early humans adapted to eating fresh kills
raw (I am assuming), there is the possibility they associated the warmth,
in general, with "good" meat. Once the meat got cold, especially in the
winter months, it would have eventually become obvious that it could be
warmed up again by placing near a fire. Sooner or later, some of the meat
would "burn", providing new smells and tastes (Aha! Time to experiment!).

Second, any other foods (fruit, veggies, nuts) would likely have been
gathered - and snacked upon - during the day when the foods were warmed by
the sun. At night, those same foods might be cold. Again, placing the food
by the fire would warm it up to preferred daytime temperatures. This could
especially become important once they started storing foods. (I know I do
not enjoy a cold salad or fruit right out of the fridge - I like it warmed
up to at least room temps).

Third, it's quite possible some early humans happened upon plants and
animals that could have perished in a wild fire. Oooh, easy pickings. And,
perhaps, not too bad to eat :) This last one is based on pure providence,
and doesn't even assume fire was "invented" first. In fact, it could
explain the compulsion to eventually tame fire (I want some more of that
barbequed caribou :)

Of course, like I say, these are just my "pet" theories. To be eaten with a
grain or two of salt :)