Todd Moody wrote:
..................
> To state the paradox differently: The less grain paleolithic
> hunter-gatherers ate, the more inexplicable is the rather abrupt
> switch to grain domestication and cultivation; the more grain
> paleolithic hunter-gatherers ate, the less reason there is to
> insist that the paleolithic diet was grain-free.
>
To look at this from another angle: if grain was used extensively in
religious practices, if edible plants (wheat, barley, etc.) were viewed
as visible gifts from the Earth Mother, if it were considered a blessing
and a holy act to partake of these gifts, if fermented grains (beer) was
part of these practices it makes sense to me that eventually some
cultivation would develop.

Grain collected in the wild could be stored for future use, when game
was scarce or it was necessary to take a road trip the grain was
lightweight, easier to carry than a carcass and would keep you from
starving if for any reason you could not hunt. Hence, gifts from the
Earth Mother sent to nurture in times of hardship. If religious
practices developed to pay homage to this life saving food and we add
beer to the mix the quantities required outstrip what can be foraged in
the wild.

All through the history of man clear into this century, bread and either
beer or wine have had a prominent place in the religious practices of
the entire world. We partake of this symbolic body and blood by either
making offerings on the altars we have created or by consuming them or
abstaining in our religious practices. Every culture on this Earth has
customs revolving around food. The use of "cake" to celebrate birthdays
and weddings is very mainstream in our society. I even have seen recipes
for "election day cake" from when people thought it was important to
vote. Meat has always been considerd food but bread calls some resonant
cord deep within that goes far beyond basic food.

Perhaps our caveman went to church once too often and got addicted.

Helen