It seems like we are misunderstanding each other. Let me try and reorganise my thoughs.
[...] in an online community where actual knowledge of subsaharan Africa is slim you could get away with a lot but that doesn’t mean you should.
1. First I would like to address the question of me disregarding African food norms. I have read the article you linked and it's very interesting and informative. One thing that was evident, though, is that the broad area that the paper examines has different conditions to the very specific area I want to talk about. As an African myself, I am interested in the peculiarities that have made Subsaharan Africa what it is today, and I certainly have a
great interest in making this TL realistic, but I'm also not talking about Subsaharan Africa in this ATL.
The region I identified as Lake Tritonis would be one of the first areas to be cut off from the the southern Sahara as the range of the African Monsoon becomes more limited and the strongest climatic influence in the area becomes the Mediterranean, as it is today. Between 7000 and 5000 BC, the area would shift from wet and luxuriant under the influence of the southern monsoon to semi-desertic and with sparse winter rains as it is today (maybe slightly wetter because of the presence of a large body of water). So while the region was part of a network (ecological and perhaps cultural) that linked it to what is today Subsaharan Africa, the appearance of the Desert would cut it away from it. It's pretty easy to see, thus, that the reactions to this change might be very different from the ones that developed (later than my POD) in Subsaharan Africa. The title of this Timeline might as well be: "A different reaction to the desertification of the Sahara in a small territory surrounding the Chotts Megalake". It was a bit of a mouthful, though.
I'm not saying that the entirety of the Sahara is overcome by an agricultural revolution, I never said that: agriculture sprouting in a small area with very particular conditions is not invalidating the fact that semi-nomadic pastoralism is the main and most productive source of sustenance in that wider region – both in OTL and in this ATL. My POD does transform Lake Tritonis in a haven of agriculture and fishery in a land where desertification is creating great shifts in the environment. Around Tritonis, though, where the lush savannah is turning into semiarid grassland, the domestication of cattle, ovines etc. will remain the dominant mode of sustenance.
But what I'm focusing on is not the grasslands, it's the lake (hence the title). The people around the lake weren't pastoralists, not until they had no other choice because the lakes dried up. The ate snails, the fished, they gathered local plants and they hunted. This lifestyle of these "acqualithic" cultures allowed them to live rather comfortably, and in less strenuous conditions than nomadic pastoralist cultures would allow – rock art and Neolithic remains from the area suggest as much.
So what is stopping me from theorising how these people could develop in a different direction from what happened in ATL? With chufa cultivation and fishing as their main modes of sustenance, they would be a very strong incentive to focus their resources on the maintenance of the lake through canals, earthworks and dikes as it starts to dry out in the 5th millennium. It's a realistic shift that, in my opinion, doesn't require ASB or leaps of logic and that can be realistically and logically engineered. Is it the most likely course? Maybe not. Is it the least likely? I'm sure it isn't. And it's the POD that most realistically allows me to develop what I am interested in developing.
I can not be convinced that an early adoption of agriculture around a body of freshwater by people who practice intensive fishing is
impossible just because people in a very different but neighbouring environment went in another direction
. I'm aware that what I was discussing as I threw ideas around could sound a bit far-fetched but, to be fair, I have not written the first chapter yet, and nothing of what I'm writing so far is written in stone.
2. Now let me clear up a point about Sorghum.
Sorghum as a grain arose in the ripirian edge and summer rainfall regions of the green Sahara.
[...]
the spread of Sorghum will be limited without intensive water works in the Mediterranean littoral and is very counter to initial forms of agriculture which relied on rain-fed food systems to spread.
This comment about the spread of Sorghum is definitely right, but I must say I have misunderstood you initially. I had a lot to read and it was fairly early in the morning, so I must have missed your point – I apologise. Yes. Sorghum would
not spread in the mediterranean littoral - not until the Atlantean civilization has agricultural and land management practices that are advanced enough (and they might never have, considering that according to my timeline they will not survive the end of the Bronze age).
You, in turn, misunderstood my comment: I have no intention for Atlantic Sorghum to be a mediterranean winter-rain species, it was just another denomination that distinguished it from OTL's sorghum that was domesticated later and in the Sahel.
Putting Sorghum aside, Chufa, which you so kindly directed me towards is a much more suited founder crop for this culture: it has a high yield, high caloric content and does well in the wet sandy soil that would surround Lake Tritonis. If the Capsians were to become more sedentary around the 8th Millennium (when Pastoralism wasn't yet widespread in the area ad hunter-gatherer lifestyles still dominated) this would probably be the first plant they domesticate, their "powerhouse", so to speak. It would grow next to the banks where they fish and gather snails and it could integrate what is missing in their diets fairly well.
That being said, it could not, and would not be the
only plant they domesticate. As they shift to sedentism other wild plants would be brought closer to their village, and that would include Sorghum and Signalgrass which at the time were still widespread in the area. Yes, Sorghum would not be suited for the mediterranean coast – and I'm not proposing that it would be – but it would be suited to the northern shores of Tritonis: the people living on the southern slopes of the Aurès mountains today still grow it as their main crop. So with chufa, sorghum and signalgrass before 7000 BC, when animal domestication spread in this particular region why would they change their food norms so abruptly, if the lake provides them with what they need? As the paper you linked me explains, the modes of food production in Africa are very different and varied: what's best around a lake isn't what's best in the open grassland.
3. I do have a lot to do today, so follow up posts about my reasoning behind the adoption of forestry will have to wait a while but I'm very interested in hearing your response. First though, I want to bring attention to one thing you wrote – and that I thought it wasn't very fair.
But worse it’s thinking the world works like Guns, Germs and Steel; plays into an all too common Eurasian based ways civilization develops and simplifies the way African populations *could* have reached what some call “civilization” if they just did or had ________.
This is not at all my intention in creating this timeline. I do realise the variety and complexity of human culture and I never said that agricultural urban societies were the "right" or "only" way for humans to develop. You yourself have written a timeline in the past about an agricultural society developing in the Namib - does that mean you invalidate the peculiarities, complexity and food norms of the pre-agricultural people living there? No, again it's a thought excercise.
I don't want agriculture around Tritonis to develop in the same exact way as it did in the Levant. This particular thought excercise started with me wondering about what the area would be if the people inhabiting it had dedicated their resources to the maintenance of the freshwater lake around it – early agriculture and a civilization that is able to organize the labour necessary for that to happen was the best bet.
I'm writing here because this forum is a place where people who want to create an ATL come to hear the opinions of people who know OTL. I'm always glad to receive feedback, but I think you're being unfair in how you're characterising me. I'm here to learn and create an interesting, fleshed out and realistic timeline.