Neolithic Revolution: The Benefits Of Farming

The emergence of agriculture was a major stepping stone in human history. During this birth of agriculture, also known as the Neolithic revolution, humans began inhabiting permanent settlements, grow their own crops, and domesticate both plants and animals for food (Weisdorf, 2005). Considering humans have been hunter-gatherers for the majority of their approximately 7 million years of existence, the emergence of agriculture in the Old World only occurring 10,000-5,000 years ago, marks a significant transformation in food sustenance techniques (Weisdorf, 2005). However, this turning point in history is associated with both positive and negative implications. There is much controversy over whether or not the introduction of

The development of writing came from the need of central governments to organize and record public works projects. It was mainly the need to record taxes that funded these projects that promoted writing.

All throughout history, humans have come up with innovations that have brought both positive and negative changes to the way people live. This all started around 10,000 BCE, when people developed agriculture. The first nomads started off by moving from place to place, hunting and gathering food… but as people developed agriculture, they saved a lot more time. After agriculture developed, the humans learned many things such as farming and taming wild animals for their own use. This time in history was called the Neolithic Revolution… which lasted about 6,000 years, until 4,000 BCE. The big change in the way people got their food and how they lived, resulted to positive and negative changes of human innovations of the Neolithic Revolution. So,

The main idea of Howell’s arguments about the Neolithic Revolution is that the adoption of agriculture is beneficial because hunting life makes nature in control of humans. Nature controls the limit on animals and plants. When it reaches its limit in a given place, humans are forced to move to survive. Nature requires humans to spread themselves out across the land and limit the number of people they band themselves with to not use all the natural resources in short amount of time. Moreover, the limited resources cause groups to kill off the young, sick, and elderly to lower the amount of humans exploiting the land. As a result of isolation amongst each other, humans rarely become civilized or social and the sexual division of labour does not change. As a result of agriculture, food is domesticated and grown rather than gathered. Also, humans are able to create civilizations with hundreds of people.

The Neolithic revolution was a period of time that occurred during 10,000 - 9,000 B.C.E. Humans made the transition from hunting and gathering and being nomadic to being sedentary. During the neolithic revolution humans also developed social classes where the people who watched others work were at the top and the people who worked at the bottom. People have different opinions on the shift from hunting and gathering to agriculture during the neolithic revolution. Thinking about all of the things humans received from the neolithic revolution, it was not worth it. Human society would have been better off without the disease, the social classes, and starvation. Therefore, while the neolithic revolution brought many beneficial things to human society such as agriculture, and permanent housing, it brought more harm than good like modern day diseases and social classes.

The first reason of why agriculture is a better way of life, is because according to document 1 farmers were less violent. Hunters and gatherers on the other hand were in constant state of tribal warfare. This resulted in 25-30% of adult males dying from homicide. Warfare was necessary to keep population density low. This was due to the fact that a certain place only had so much food to support one person. Farmers on the other hand could use a small piece of land and plant crops that could support many people. They do not have to fight over food therefore less war and violence.

The Neolithic Revolution made food easily accessible. Document 3 states, “But it means, rather, a state of culture in which food is planted and bred, not hunted and gathered — in which food is domesticated, not wild.” This shows that the Neolithic Revolution was a time in which people moved from

Over 10,000 years ago humans’ lives were spent hunting and gathering just to survive. That all changed when some humans figured out how to capture animals and plant wild seeds so that they could control their food supply. This change in how people lived is known as the Neolithic Revolution and it ultimately led to the beginnings of civilization. The Neolithic Revolution is considered a turning point in human history because it led to permanent settlements, improvements in technology and the development of social classes and job specialization.

In modern days, a division of labor has developed into doctors, architects, teachers, etc, to help our health, shelter, education and many other things, we need to live and survive. Therefore, the Neolithic Revolution had a positive impact on people by trade and a division of labor

The sort of changes that farming brought were: people benefiting from a further steady and dependable food source, settling down and building vaster communities, concentrating on contemporary skills (architecture, arts and crafts, social organization), and elaborated societies eventually emerging.

Hunter-gatherers were fine without agriculture, and they lived many years without it. Agriculture may have provided a more effective way of more food, but along with it brought non-nutrient diets, social inequality, and the risk of disease spreading easier because the population is

The Agricultural Revolution also referred as the Neolithic Revolution was the transition of many individuals going from a lifestyle of hunting and gathering to one of agriculture and settlement, allowing them to provide for a larger population. In these settled communities humans examined and worked with plants and learned how they grew and developed. As a result, Riley states how the discovery of agriculture, which at the beginning was recognized to be a positive step by women, was by the end of the period to have had unforeseen, and unfortunate, consequences for

One of the greatest revolutions in the history of homo sapiens was the adoption of agriculture, which changed the face of communities at every level of class. Though this change was built upon new ideas and allowed us to provide more food for more people, was it in fact a positive change at the time? Today in 2017, we can all look around and see where the agricultural revolution has gotten us in the long run, but authors such as Yuval Noah Harari (2011) claim that during the infancy of the agricultural revolution, life for the average citizen was often a worse one than that of the common forager. A change in food production created many other changes, such as permanent human settlement, biologically unconventional labor, and a larger population density. This paper explores the pros and cons of the agricultural society and the hunter-gatherer society

The Neolithic revolution had a big impact on the society. However, instead of focusing on the good, as follow are some social disadvantages of this big transition. To start with, agriculture is considered much harder work than hunter gathering is, and individuals had to work much longer hours farming. This reduced the land availability for living on by handing it to farmers. It reduced space for wild animals and plants, which were used for food, meaning that, the fauna was becoming less diverse and animals were becoming weaker since

When societies began farming, food surpluses were often developed. This caused an urgency to develop proper food storage so food could be kept until needed. These surpluses meant that societies would always hold enough food to feed everyone, so that no one would starve or be forced to skip meals. With proper food storage, food could be kept longer than it had been until this point. Again, though, for each of these positive results of agriculture there is a negative one to counterbalance it.