Meat-Eating and Human Evolution (Human Evolution Series)

Rating:
Summary: "Love said, come taste my meate..."
Review: "Love said, come taste my meate,
So I did sit and eate." John Donne's verse has endeared itself to countless undergraduates, not least through suspicion of a triple-entendre (at the very least). Be that as it may, the book under review is about ordinary eating of ordinary meat, specifically wild mammal meat. It supports the traditional consensus view that humans evolved from a mostly-vegetarian ape-like ancestor with a small brain, with the evolution of sociability, intelligence, and cooperation being due in large part to the exigencies of meat-eating. Meat is good food for the growing brain, among other things, but hunting--in an animal lacking fangs and claws--tends to require a great deal of cooperation. (In fact, even such fanged creatures as lions and wolves depend on exquisite cooperation within complex social systems.) Humans evolved in Africa, which seems less well endowed with easily exploited vegetable foods than some other continents, forcing more dependence on hunting and scavenging. The present book summarizes the enormous recent advances in our understanding of human evolution. A combination of archaeology, nutrition studies, and comparative studies of other primates have provided new proofs for the old model. It looks as if humans progressed (if that is the word) from near-vegetarians two million years ago to people who, at the dawn of agriculture 10,000 or 12,000 years ago, were eating anywhere from 10% to nearly 100% animal foods--average perhaps 20%. Neither the view of humans as natural vegetarians nor the view of humans as savage "killer apes" can be supported.
The book suffers from two flaws: first, over-reliance on a very few contemporary hunter-gatherer groups--especially the Hadza, who hunt with bows and metal-tipped poisoned arrows. These are a far cry from the crude stone tools of early hominids. Second, the authors seem a bit unclear on whether human advance was due more to meat as a food, or hunting as an activity, or omnivorous foraging (with hunting as only one part). I vote for the last alternative. We have evidence enough to make it reasonably clear that human skills in finding and processing vegetable food went right along with improvements in hunting. By widening their ethnographic net, the authors would have had to deal with hunter-gatherers who relied overwhelmingly on vegetable foods, often cooperatively produced, harvested, and/or processed. The Australian aboriginals and the Native Americans of what is now the western US come to mind.
The serious student of human foodways should definitely read this book! And the less serious meat-lover can revel in shoving it under the noses of those vegetarians who insist that theirs is the "natural" way.

Rating:
Summary: "Love said, come taste my meate..."
Review: "Love said, come taste my meate,
So I did sit and eate." John Donne's verse has endeared itself to countless undergraduates, not least through suspicion of a triple-entendre (at the very least). Be that as it may, the book under review is about ordinary eating of ordinary meat, specifically wild mammal meat. It supports the traditional consensus view that humans evolved from a mostly-vegetarian ape-like ancestor with a small brain, with the evolution of sociability, intelligence, and cooperation being due in large part to the exigencies of meat-eating. Meat is good food for the growing brain, among other things, but hunting--in an animal lacking fangs and claws--tends to require a great deal of cooperation. (In fact, even such fanged creatures as lions and wolves depend on exquisite cooperation within complex social systems.) Humans evolved in Africa, which seems less well endowed with easily exploited vegetable foods than some other continents, forcing more dependence on hunting and scavenging. The present book summarizes the enormous recent advances in our understanding of human evolution. A combination of archaeology, nutrition studies, and comparative studies of other primates have provided new proofs for the old model. It looks as if humans progressed (if that is the word) from near-vegetarians two million years ago to people who, at the dawn of agriculture 10,000 or 12,000 years ago, were eating anywhere from 10% to nearly 100% animal foods--average perhaps 20%. Neither the view of humans as natural vegetarians nor the view of humans as savage "killer apes" can be supported.
The book suffers from two flaws: first, over-reliance on a very few contemporary hunter-gatherer groups--especially the Hadza, who hunt with bows and metal-tipped poisoned arrows. These are a far cry from the crude stone tools of early hominids. Second, the authors seem a bit unclear on whether human advance was due more to meat as a food, or hunting as an activity, or omnivorous foraging (with hunting as only one part). I vote for the last alternative. We have evidence enough to make it reasonably clear that human skills in finding and processing vegetable food went right along with improvements in hunting. By widening their ethnographic net, the authors would have had to deal with hunter-gatherers who relied overwhelmingly on vegetable foods, often cooperatively produced, harvested, and/or processed. The Australian aboriginals and the Native Americans of what is now the western US come to mind.
The serious student of human foodways should definitely read this book! And the less serious meat-lover can revel in shoving it under the noses of those vegetarians who insist that theirs is the "natural" way.