Agriculture

     I thought it was interesting how the Neolithic or Agricultural Revolution occurred not in one area specifically, but separately and independently from one another throughout the entire world. Also, the fact that there are pieces of evidence that some Paleolithic societies had already demonstrated some knowledge and practiced certain aspects associated with the Agricultural Revolution even before the revolution itself began. It's amazing to me how this revolution all began with the digging stick or hoe. Considering how different the world is and how landscapes and terrains are different in other parts of the world, the fact that they all implemented horticulture, albeit with some variations, is simply astounding. I'd also like to note that while talking about the Fertile Crescent and how that was the area that first experienced a full Agricultural Revolution, Strayer again intentionally refers to the area as Southwest Asia rather than what we call it today: the Middle East. I love how he really tries throughout this book to remove the male Eurocentric point of view that we all hold in modern society and try to see things for what they really are. The Middle East is geographically Southwest Asia, so why do we refer to it as the Middle East? Because Europe is our reference point? That shouldn't be  how it is. Europe isn't the center of the world, so it shouldn't be our reference point.  Another point that Strayer is trying to emphasize is recognizing females as equal counterparts to men. Strayer has constantly tried to drive this point home, and not only does he provide solid, concrete examples to do so, he changes the language and vocabulary that we already know into what it truly is. For example, we've always been taught that the Paleolithic people were hunter-gatherers, with the male Eurocentric view again in place, even though Strayer notes that the females, or gatherers, provided seventy percent of the food and were essentially the breadwiners. Therefore, Strayer refers to the Paleolithic people as GATHERER-hunters, since they were, in fact, gatherers first, hunters second. I think it's great that Strayer is giving credit where credit is due, and if it were the men who had brought in the most amount of food, then Strayer would correctly refer to the male role first. He isnt placing females first constantly and disregarding the men. It just so happens that that's what he has to do since the male writers of history has constantly put men first and disregarded the women. Strayer is just being fair to history and honoring their memory correctly.

     Referring back to the chapter, I thought it was interesting how those in the Americas managed to be part of the Agricultural Revolution, especially since they lacked the domesticated animals native only in Eurasia. Granted, they focused mainly on hunting and fishing and eventually domesticated plants like corn and maize, since they didn't have wild wheat and cereals native exclusively in Eurasia. I think we also have to keep in mind is the fact that the Americas had a north/south orientation, which made it harder for them to spread agricultural practices and adapt to different climatic and vegetation zones. Eurasia, on the other hand, had an east/west orientation, which meant that agricultural practices were able to spread more quickly because they were entering similar environments. Overall, it's amazing to me how the globalization of agriculture spread, albeit slowly and taking at least 10,000 years to complete, from the Fertile Crescent and resulted in the creation of chiefdoms, village societies, and pastoral societies.