WI: The First Civilization is in Australia...

ok, but here we're talking about thousand of years, unlike geography culture varies in such a long timespan. In 10000> years you'll find the innovative australian tribe who will find a way to exploit the local staples and build a civilization provided that this is possible

I disagree. We only poorly understand the development of agriculture. Put this way. In the last 12,000 years, we have perhaps 9 independent events where Agriculture was discovered or developed.

This suggests that Agriculture or civilization is not a unique fluke, but a fairly high probability potential event. Despite this, we have hundreds, thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of cultures within this time period who do not develop agriculture.

Even within the general climactic and biological framework, there are literally hundreds of cultures which do not develop agriculture for every one that does. The oversimplified thesis that is attributed to Diamond that sees agriculture an inevitable outcome of the right biological opportunities, and lack of agriculture a function of the wrong opportunities is almost certainly false.
 
I think kangaroos aren't really 'farmed', more that they are a wild population that is harvested regularly, since they breed fast and aren't particularly dangerous... but I don't know for sure, maybe one of the board's Aussies can tell us more...

Yes as a matter of fact there is farming of both Kangaroos and Emus. It is a relatively new farming method when compared to traditional farming methods with cows and sheep and it is a very small industry.
Both Kangaroo and Emu meat is very lean - kangaroo is very much like venison and Emu is comparable to chicken. However their farming isn't just for the meat but also everything from hides for leather products, paws for back scratchers and testicles for coin pouches. :rolleyes:
Roos can be pretty dangerous - particularly male bucks during breeding season and the 'Big Reds' can be very agressive animals. :eek:
These aren't the only large native Australian animal that can be farmed - there is also the crocodile. The meat is an acquired taste for some but there are also other uses with hides etc.
As Oba pointed out there is a whole plethoria of native food crops that can be farmed commercially and importation of further food sources from nearby New Guinea it's easy to imagine a whole range of healthy food sources of both meat, fruit and vegetables.
IMHO I think the most likely location for a budding civilisation to florish in Australia is the tropical north from present day Cape York in the east to the Kimberleys in the west. It's the wettest with the regular monsoons, most fertile for agriculture production and close to neighbouring cultures.
In hindsight after reading Diamonds story I find it suprising that the Polynesians didn't make contact with the Australian mainland. Their incredible boat building and navigational skill surely must have brought them to the Australian east coast if they tried after they colonised almost the entire Pacific Ocean.
But who's to day they didn't... but nothing came of it over the mists of time....
 
Yes, with the right staples otherwise you keep hunting and the population will remain low. Same with livestock.
You have read what I and DrewsDragons have said or what is in any of my many links, have you not :rolleyes:? Australia's northern wet tropical region has plenty of plants that could be domesticated and contact with New Guinea could bring even more crops to the area. I and several others have put information on why it is perfectly feasible for the tropical rainforests of Australia to develop agriculture and civilization.

BTW, lack of agriculture did not stop the people of Norte Chico nor the people of Poverty Point from developing complex socieites, the former of which was the first high civilization in the Americas and one of the earliest in human history. And there are several examples of people who lacked agriculture and, though they did not develop civilization, had high population densities: The Pacific Northwest Coast of North America, much of California and the Calusa of southern Florida spring to mind immediately.

Obviously, agriculture makes it much easier to develop complex societies and is essential in many regions if one wishes to move beyond bands and tribes, but it is not essential by any stretch of the imagination to be settled.
 
Yes, with the right staples otherwise you keep hunting and the population will remain low. Same with livestock.

I'm not sure you're paying attention. It's demonstrated that there were hundreds or thousands of cultures with access to the 'right staples' that did not move on to agriculture.

As to whether every potential viable plant domesticate that could constitute a staple was domesticated, that's really an unverifiable assertion.

Demonstrably, we can identify some instances where a domesticate plant was abandoned. Consider the Eastern Agricultural Complex.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Agricultural_Complex

Jared Diamond is a starting point, not an end.
 
You have read what I and DrewsDragons have said or what is in any of my many links, have you not :rolleyes:? Australia's northern wet tropical region has plenty of plants that could be domesticated and contact with New Guinea could bring even more crops to the area. I and several others have put information on why it is perfectly feasible for the tropical rainforests of Australia to develop agriculture and civilization.

BTW, lack of agriculture did not stop the people of Norte Chico nor the people of Poverty Point from developing complex socieites, the former of which was the first high civilization in the Americas and one of the earliest in human history. And there are several examples of people who lacked agriculture and, though they did not develop civilization, had high population densities: The Pacific Northwest Coast of North America, much of California and the Calusa of southern Florida spring to mind immediately.

Obviously, agriculture makes it much easier to develop complex societies and is essential in many regions if one wishes to move beyond bands and tribes, but it is not essential by any stretch of the imagination to be settled.

Maybe agriculture is just one of the requirements needed to develop a civilization above a certain level of complexity at least at the beginning. Ex: river irrigation and easy transportation.
Probably Australia and other areas like New Guinea were lacking in this regard but this is still a geographical not a cultural restriction

Regards
 
Top