Re: Olmec technological innovations supposedly derived from the Egyptians iRe: Parallels - Olmec Beard Counts:

On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 20:44:48 +0100, Doug Weller
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 15:48:18 -0500 (CDT), in sci.archaeology, Larry Athy
>wrote:
>
>>- Specific Egyptian technical innovations at the first Olmec sites
>>demonstrate that the Egyptians had been there. There is no other logical
>>explanation for those sudden developments. ++

Larry when I see this kind of post I almost want to reach
through the screen and punch your lights out. Are you such 
a F-ing bigot. Is it possible for you to turn of the bigot
gene for a moment and think about what you say before you
make a complete ass out of yourself?

>Larry replied
>>+++ I have cited them several times before.  They include terracing,
>>irrigation, moving very large stones for long distances, carving stones,
>>etc., all unknown in North America previously. 

But not unknown is asia, in fact terracing started in asia
before it appeared in the west, and if it was developed in
asia, and the west why not the new world?

>And Larry responded
>>+++  All are evident at the earliest known Olmec site, San Lorenzo, in
>>its early stages.  All of these techniques were known only in the
>>eastern Mediterranean area at that time.
>
>This is not very helpful.

Thank You. 

>1. We really need the earliest dates sites for irrigation, terracing, etc.
>and to know what specifically about these sites shows they are Egyptian.
>Larry can't give us either the dates, the actual sites, or any evidence
>that they were specifically Egyptian techniques that were used.
>
>Irrigation, for instance, is almost certainly older.
>
>Eg, from the Athena Review:
>http://www.athenapub.com/nwdom1.htm
>To document early transplantation, it must be demonstrated that a species
>occurs in prehistoric sites outside of its natural habitat. Good evidence
>for this practice exists from some occupation strata in the dry cave sites
>of the Tehuacán Valley .from at least 3500 BC and perhaps much earlier
>(with dates for wild avocado proposed for ca.7000-6500 BC). Archaeologists
>agree that the remains of avocado, ciruela, coyol, zapote blanco and
>zapote negro represent exotics introduced by humans into the Tehuacán
>Valley. All of these species are native to considerably more mesic
>(wetter) environments, and their establishment in the semiarid Tehuacán
>area would have required some irrigation (McClung 1992; Pearsall 1995; C.
>Smith 1987).

And I would add that there is the possiblity that the
culture that domesticated mexican bean may have been brought
from asia 10,000 years ago, a similar lental was found in
the Jomon pots of Japan, the evidence I saw dated to the
early Jomon period about 13000 years ago. The same lentil
was found close to a paleoamerind tool kit in alaska but 
did not persist in that region/ 

http://www.indiana.edu/~origins/teach/P380/P380Agric.html

There is some argumentation as to when Jomonese had
agriculture; however by the middle Jomon period they are
practicing slash and burn preparation for agriculture.
There is a huge debate whether the planted crops
within natural settings as a number of Jomon pots
were uncovered that looked to be long term storage of
lentils. 

Many people offer up the Jomon as the only pottery producing
culture that was not agricultural; however I beleive that
they practiced a form of agriculture that was compatible
with the 'most luxiorious hunter gatherer' culture in the
world. They did not become dominantly agricultural simply
because this was not as productive as light agriculture.
Again I think they had been playing with these legumes for 
at least 10,000 years. 

PLANT GENETIC RESOURCES
Genetic Diversity and Population Structure of Wild Lentil
Tare. Man Kyu Huh* and Hong Wook Huh  

"
In the hierarchical analysis, the large variance exhibited
among populations with respect to regions  and a large
component of the value was explained by variance among
regions with respect to the total , a result consistent with
the strong geographic effect indicated by UPGMA and Mantel's
test (the correlation between geographic and genetic
distances). Although genetic diversity was not significantly
correlated with regions (rs = 0.514, Spearman rank
correlation), measures of genetic diversity for the Japanese
populations were lower than those for Korean populations
(Table 1). As revealed by earlier studies (Yamamoto and
Plitmann, 1980; Potokina, 1997; Weber and Schifino-Wittman,
1999; Zhang and Mosjidis, 1998), the genus Vicia could have
originated in the Mediterranean region and Western Asia. If
this hypothesis is correct, it is possible that the Japanese
V. tetrasperma populations trace to introductions from
Western Asia via Korea or China. 
"

"
Identification of the lentil‘s wild genetic stock  
Ladizinsky G.1  
  
 1.Hebrew University, Faculty of Agriculture, P.O. Box 12,
Rehovot 76100, Israel (E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED])  
?? 
  The origin of lentil from the taxon Lens culinaris subsp.
orientalis has been proved by morphological evidence and
breeding experiments. This wild form exhibits variation in
many characters and is distributed over a vast area from the
Middle-East to central Asia. Characters that are polymorphic
in the wild progenitor but monomorphic in the cultigen can
be utilized for better identification of the genetic stock
which gave rise to the domesticated lentil. Three characters
of that kind have been identified in lentil: chromosomal
architecture, crossability potential and restriction pattern
of chloroplast DNA. Nearly all accessions of the cultivated
lentil tested to these three characters have been found
monomorphic, but considerable polymorphism exists in the
wild accessions. Three subsp. orientalis accessions have
been shown to share the above characters with the cultigen
and hence can be regarded as members of the genetic stock
from which lentil was domesticated. These three accessions
originated from eastern Turkey and northern Syria.
"

Interpretation, Japanese and Korean so-called wild
lentils are to genetically homogenous to be consider
as longer term local derivatives, they were likely
introduced by humans. The appear in association with
Jomon pots about 13,000 years ago. And I understand from 
my wife that the wild Japanese lentil grows best
on the island of Hokkaido, were apparently the first
non-oceanian/southeast asia humans first arrive in Japan.
So according to the experts Jomonese conducted agriculture
late, but the the seeds found in their Jomon pots came
from turkey and probably with them. Uhm I think someone
is missing an important connection here. lol.

I beleive this lentil was first found in association
with toolkits in alaska. It is possible that related peoples
brought the legumes to the new world but found they did 
not prosper in south american, as a result they cultivate
species in south america. 

"
Structure of Genetic Diversity among Common Bean Landraces
of Middle American Origin Based on Correspondence Analysis
of RAPD 
S. Beebea, P.W. Skrochb, J. Tohmea, M.C. Duquea, F. Pedrazaa
and J. Nienhuisb 
a Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT), A.A.
6713, Cali, Colombia
b Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison, Dep. of Horticulture, 1575
Linden Drive, Madison, WI 53706-1590 USA 


More than 60% of common bean production worldwide is derived
from cultivars of Middle American origin. Understanding the
diversity of these will facilitate their use in genetic
improvement. The objective of this study was to analyze a
collection of 269 landraces of common bean (Phaseolus
vulgaris L.) by correspondence analysis of random amplified
polymorphic DNA (RAPD) data to determine the genetic
structure of the Middle American gene pool of cultivated
bean. One hundred eighty landraces originating in Mexico,
the remainder in Central America and secondary centers of
diversity within the Americas, and two checks were studied.
DNA was extracted, RAPD reactions carried out, and
polymorphic bands were scored as present or absent on the
basis of 39 primers. Groups were formed which in part
corresponded to races defined previously by morphological
and agroecological criteria. However, tropical small-seeded
Race M was composed of two groups: one largely Mexican that
included most small-seeded black beans of upright plant
habit; and one Central American with landraces of various
seed colors. Most non-black small-seeded germplasm of Race M
phenotype from secondary centers grouped with the Central
American landraces, except for cream-seeded and
purple-seeded accessions from Brazil. Races D and J could be
distinguished and within races D and J further divisions
could be recognized which were related to geographic origin.
The more commercial Race D landraces formed a genetic group
that was predominant in the western part of the Mexican
highland plateau. Another Race D group was concentrated at
the eastern extreme of the neovolcanic axis and was
differentiated morphologically as well. Guatemalan germplasm
contained accessions of climbing bean that did not group
with any of the previously defined races and should be
considered a separate race. Thus, Middle American germplasm
of common bean is more complex than previously thought, and
contains diversity that remains to be explored for its
practical value. 
"

"
Lectin and lectin-related proteins in lima bean (Phaseolus
lunatus L.) seeds: biochemical and evolutionary studies.

Sparvoli F, Lanave C, Santucci A, Bollini R, Lioi L.

Istituto Biosintesi Vegetali, Milano, Italy.

Lectin-related polypeptides are a class of defence proteins
found in seeds of Phaseolus species. In Lima bean (P.
lunatus), these proteins and their genes have been well
characterized in the Andean morphotype, which represents one
of the two gene pools of this species. To study the
molecular evolution of the lectin family in Lima bean we
characterized the polypeptides belonging to this multigene
family and cloned the genes belonging to the Mesoamerican
gene pool. The latter gene pool contains components similar
to those of the Andean pool, namely: an amylase
inhibitor-like (AIL), an arcelin-like (ARL) lectin and the
less abundant Lima bean lectin (LBL). These proteins
originate from an ancestor gene of the lectin type which
duplicated to yield the lectin gene and the progenitor of
ARL and AIL. In this species. ARL represents an evolutionary
intermediate form that precedes AIL. Phylogenetic analysis
supports an Andean origin for Lima bean. The molecular
evolutionary studies were extended to the genes of common
bean and demonstrated that true lectin genes and the
ancestor of lectin-related genes are the result of a
duplication event that occurred before speciation. Lima and
common bean followed different evolutionary pathways and in
the latter species a second duplication event occurred that
gave rise, in Mesoamerican wild genotypes, to arcelin genes.
"

IOW Phaseoli beans were domesticated 2x in mesoamerica and
andean bean were domesticated separately. No cultivar
connection between mesoamerican bean domestication and
andean. Therefore not only was the bean domesticated once in
the new world, it was domesticated at least 3 times. 
  In fact this appears to be a common theme in asian as well
as Native american agriculture, while Japanese tended to
grow crops domesticated elsewhere it appears that the
Jomonese tended to focus on legumes that were best suited to
climates of different regions. While the lentil appears to
have reached alaska, the legume consumption of native
americans of north american appears to be focused on
regionally adaptive varieties. Jomonese had in use many
varieties of the Vigna sp. and most of these were wild
stocks developed locally. By comparison, a number of native
american medicines and recreational hallucinagens come from
the beans of legumes specific to north america. 
Thus it appears there was a transition between the cultivars
that putatively arose in syria and the use of legumes from
the Jomon to south america. It is possible that the radical
change in climate north of hokkaido forced people to adapt
or the lentils of the old world simply could not withstand
the insects/diseases of the new world. One of the things I
noted in reading the literature is some of the east asian
and native american cultivars have substantially higher
levels of phytotoxins than do the old world cultivars,
suggesting that these cultivars, while more adverse to human
consumption than old world cultivars had substantially
higher survivability in the new world. 
  The above theory would make sense, it appears that the
mexican bean was domesticated in many places in the new
world suggesting that the planting of the beans was
something that native americans anticipated their
domesitication. Each of the native cultivars appears to be
resistant to insects and disease that are abundant in the
areas where they were domesticated. IOW the americas were a
tough place if you are a legume, the pharmoactive properties
of these legumes may be a result of the selection. In
addition the diversity of beans in each cultigroup is deep
suggesting that domestication occurred
early in mesoamerican culture. Note All domesticars of the
mexican bean originated from the new world.

In addition while bovidae meat was the protein staple of the
middle eastern/meditteranean diet, the mesoamerican diet is
distinct and similar to Jomonese in the use of both fish and
legume as the staple of the diet, and decrease of ground
foraging herbavores. Only part of the northern Jomonese
appeared to be heavily dependent on large game predation.
The presence of acorns in the Jomonese diet indicates that 
the presence of trees in Japan was a factor selected into
what cultivars might have been grown early on. 
 Again this is comparable to the situation in mesoamerica  
mesoamericans have a deep rooted adaptation toward more
vegetarian diets with many cultivars and a lower reliance on
range animals. Range animals being primarily important close
to the Rio Grande and in the highlands, wereas in the forest
there tends to be a greater variety of animals (fewer
mammalian biomass, more reptilian, avian) as well as more
arboreal mammals that result in less food per kill. Thus the
similarities of these two cultures could be the result of
common cultural relationship with the Jomonese or it could
be the result of adaptation to the heavily forested
environment with complex terrain where large range animals
were not present in a monotonous abundance. 

IOW I think you are right to infer the mesoamerican
cultivars are probably older than we give credit, corn may
be a later domesticant and other crops like beans, which are
more useful as a staple in a mostly vegetarian diet relative
to corn may have been domesticated first. 

>http://anthroclass.com/lectures/sbarch8/class8.html
>The Tehuacan Valley of Mexico has been extensively studied over the past
>30 years by archaeologists looking and subsistence changes. One of the
>most famous of the researchers is Richard MacNiesh. MacNiesh and others
>have divided the early history of the Tehuacan Valley into several
>cultural phases.
>
>1.     Ajereado Phase – 12,000 – 9,000 ya, hunters and gatherers
>
>2.     El Riego phase – 9,000 – 7,000 ya, increased reliance on plant
>foods

Expect the first cultivar during or before this period. 

>3.     Coxcatlan phase – 7,000 – 5,400 ya, shift to larger settlements and
>group size
>
>4.     Abejas phase – 5,400 – 4,300 ya, first appearance of domesticates
>with emphasis on wild foods
>
>5.     Purron phase – 4,300 – 3,500 ya, introduction of pottery
>
>6.     Ajalpan phase – 3,500 – 2,850 ya, increased sedintism, construction
>of irrigation canals, domesticated maize, beans, and squash.

The genetic evidence indicates beans were domesticate well
before this. 

>So there goes his irrigation claim.

Doug, with all due respect to the above, in looking at the
archaeologist interpretation of Jomon agriculture I found
many instances of Archaeologist blowing off Jomon
agriculture despite evidence of slash and burn agriculture,
the fact they had pottery and despite the fact that the
sorted seeds of various types into this pottery. The some
types of legumes found clearly indicates that at least one
seed was brought from central asia and planted, if not
routinely planted from 13,000 years ago. Thus absolute proof
of agriculture may not do justice to indirect correlates of
agriculture. And in Japan it begs the question, agriculture
did not bloom because people lack the ability to convert
their culture, or was the culture so successful as mostly
H/G that non-destructive (or non-sustainable) agriculture
was marginally more productive than what they were doing.
The staple of mesoamerican diet probably shifted with corn
and this was probably the result
of a longer domestication history, suggesting that a
'full'-out grain agriculture may be something only plausible
after trial and error process with some of the more
aggressively producing crop species. If we remove corn
from the mesoamerican picture do we say this is an
non-agrarian society because grain production is the
standard of measuring agrarian society or does agrarian
societies begin once the first seeds are carried from point
a to point b with the intent of planting them and harvesting
the seeds.