Also you need geographical barriers to nomad invasions so any tribe that settles isn't destroyed or pushed out after a time. mountains, and deserts work wonders for these. Which is why egypt, sumer, indus, and china were the first.
Also you need geographical barriers to nomad invasions so any tribe that settles isn't destroyed or pushed out after a time. mountains, and deserts work wonders for these. Which is why egypt, sumer, indus, and china were the first.
domoviye said:The main problem in the Mississippi seems to be the lack of meat. Shortly after agriculture was developed, the population expanded pretty quickly and then crashed hard after a few hundred years. Skeletal remains from the time period showed the people were smaller and more fragile than they had been before agriculture, meaning they lacked protein.
Okay agreed, the cradle of civilisation could not have been in Africa.
You don't want to separate the people. You want them well mixed so that ideas can freely flow. If not you get the situation of the Americas where potential draft animals are in a different area to the inventors of the wheel and the two are not talking to each other.Actually, I like the idea of the wetter Sahara. You'd get a lot of rivers, probably with fertile soil immediatly surrounding it, some lakes, maybe a really large one. And then some highlands and areas of poor soil keeping the peoples separate. The mix of domesticates would probably be very similar to the fertile crescent.
You could have a lot of competing river valley civilizations there.
Actually, I like the idea of the wetter Sahara. You'd get a lot of rivers, probably with fertile soil immediatly surrounding it, some lakes, maybe a really large one. And then some highlands and areas of poor soil keeping the peoples separate. The mix of domesticates would probably be very similar to the fertile crescent.
You could have a lot of competing river valley civilizations there.
This isn't the best source, but the only link I have to the older more detailed one is on my old broken computer. I may be able to find it in the next week or so.Source? I am a little skeptical, but I also hope that you're right because I'm a fan of alternate domesticates timelines and if this is true, that makes the suspension of disbelief for an EAC domesticate much lower.
The reasons for possible cultural degradations at the end of the Middle Woodland and the subsequent emergence of the Late Woodland are poorly understood. There are several possible explanations. The first is that populations increased beyond the point of carrying capacity of the land, and, as the trade system broke down, clans resorted to raiding rather than trading with other territories to acquire important resources. A second possibility is that a rapid replacement of the Late Archaic spear and atlatl with the newer bow-and-arrow technology quickly decimated the large game animals, interrupting the hunting component of food procurement and resulting in settlements breaking down into smaller units to subsist on local resources. This ended long distance trade and the need for elite social units. A third possible reason is that colder climate conditions about 1,600 years ago* might have affected yields of gathered foods, such as nuts or starchy seeds, thereby disrupting the trade networks.
A fourth and possibly interrelated reason is that intensified horticulture became so successful that increased agricultural production may have reduced variation in food resource availability between differing areas. This reliance on horticulture, involving only a few types of plants, would have carried with it a risk where variations in rainfall or climate could cause famine or shortages.
As I understood it...
If the mississippi had any nearby beasts of burden/ ranchable animals, it could potentially have produced a civilization, possibly even a permanent one.
is this true, or total b.s.?
I'm leaning towards bs, since AFAIK the plant life isn't adequate
Capybaras, and I remember a species of plant from Let`s Rewrite History.
And then, as the region starts to dry out, a diaspora spreading the various crops and technologies...
Not really, they might be able to carry small packs, but they're basically more agreeable pigs.Are capybaras viable as beasts of burden? If so, they could make the Rio de la Plata a cradle.
1. What crops?
2. The Saharan pluvial was largley without organized agriculture. We have knowledge of trading, herding, and the Garamantes had chariots. Beyond them(note that their zenith was after the Saharan pluvial; they benefited from aquifers that had been formed when the water receded underground.
3. There is no way to prevent the end of the Saharan pluvial, as it is caused by oscillations in the monsoon, which is a natural cycle and cannot be altered under short-term geographical circumstances. The end of the Pluvial would destroy any culture, as it was a more sudden, few hundred year thing, not a long recession that would allow cultures to retreat slowly north and south.
The end of the Saharan pluvial forestalled the development of the Sahel as a center of civilization.
A bit of research came up with this beast. A vegetarian, bison-sized rodent which lived in Rio de la Plata and just might make the place into a cradle of civilization. I have to wonder whether or not it would be domesticable, and it would have to survive the Holocene extinctions, but a timeline centering on J. Monesi would be a great read.
1. What crops?
2. The Saharan pluvial was largley without organized agriculture. We have knowledge of trading, herding, and the Garamantes had chariots. Beyond them(note that their zenith was after the Saharan pluvial; they benefited from aquifers that had been formed when the water receded underground.
3. There is no way to prevent the end of the Saharan pluvial, as it is caused by oscillations in the monsoon, which is a natural cycle and cannot be altered under short-term geographical circumstances. The end of the Pluvial would destroy any culture, as it was a more sudden, few hundred year thing, not a long recession that would allow cultures to retreat slowly north and south.
I don't think so. Apart from the polar regions Burrough's Mars was covered in a ubiquitous mossMost of the Sahara is a stone desert rather than a sandy one, I think. It is sort of like an image from Burroughs Mars.