Today we will go over Chapter 4; we are reading one chapter a week.
I encourage this to be slow blogging - the very opposite of "breaking". I will leave this on my hot list for a week, so comment any time during the week.
When we get near the end of GGS, I'll start a poll for the next book
Ground rules: I expect vigorous discussion. But I expect civil discussion. A sign I saw in a restaurant said
Be nice or leave
If you want to have a flame war, go elsewhere, please.
Chapter 4 is the first chapter in Part 2, which is called "The Rise and spread of food production".
Briefly this chapter sets up the advantages of herder-farmer societies over hunter-gatherer societies. One is that HF societies allow 10 to 100 times more food per acre. This allows for larger groups. Another is that most hunter gatherer groups are nomadic, which limits the ability to store food. Yet another is that the use of large domestic animals makes a great many tasks easier, from transport of goods and people to plowing of land to the conduct of war. Yet another is that, when people are settled rather than nomadic, more children can be supported, allowing populations to grow much faster. Further, people can specialize in the various tasks, becoming expert in them and allowing them to support groups (kings, bureaucrats, soldiers, priests, scribes) who are not connected to the production or gathering of food.
One question I have about all this: I have seen it written in many places that most hunter gatherer tribes do not work very hard - perhaps 4 hours per day. So, if some of the people worked harder (say, 8 hours a day) at hunting or gathering, could they not support other groups of people (again, priests etc.)? In fact, I think this does happen - do HG tribes not have shamans?
That wouldn't necessarily increase food per acre - it seems to me it would increase it only slightly - but it would allow more specialization.
Another question is from the beginning of the chapter. Diamond recalls working on hsi grandfather's farm in Montana, among many Whites and one Indian. He notes that the Whites were mostly a very crude bunch, but the Indian guy was not. Then Diamond says it was therefore "a shocking disappointment" to him when the Indian staggered in drunk (perhaps he was hungover?) and cursing one Sunday morning. What's up with the shocking disappointment? Is this solely because he expected better of Levi because of Levi's behavior, or is there something in the young Diamond that expected some sort of "noble savage" who would never engage in such behavior?