Eurasian wild pig

The Eurasian wild pig is cited as one example of a wild animal whose ancestors ranged across a vast area of Eurasia. Its significance in the book is comparative: the wide distribution of potential domesticates weakens the idea that farming began because one group alone happened to live among suitable species. The account instead emphasizes the social conditions that made domestication possible, especially sedentary life and the institutions that developed around it.

Geographic Range and Domestication

A map of wild pigs, adapted from research on Sus scrofa, contributes to the book’s comparison of the ranges of wild animal ancestors. Those ancestors were spread throughout Eurasia, while wild crop species were also distributed across broad regions. Although the Hilly Flanks were particularly rich in wild crops, they were not uniquely endowed with them. The Eurasian wild pig thus belongs to a wider body of evidence against treating access to wild species as a sufficient explanation for why some societies domesticated plants and animals while others did not.

The Natufian Comparison

The book contrasts environmental opportunity with the organization of Natufian communities. Evidence from gazelle teeth at Natufian sites indicates that animals were killed in all seasons, supporting the conclusion that people lived there year-round before they began farming. At Abu Hureyra, settlement probably began around 9500 BC, and inhabitants continued as hunter-gatherers for about five centuries before turning to agriculture. This sequence suggests that settling in one place could precede farming rather than simply follow it.

Institutions and the Transition to Farming

The account links sedentism to practical advantages, including storing food and avoiding the burdens of frequent movement, but also to new problems. Permanent buildings and accumulated possessions made departure less attractive, while disputes over land, trees, and fishing places called for rules and institutions to settle them. Archaeological evidence from Natufian graves and settlements points to hierarchy and inequality before farming: some people were buried with traded obsidian and shells, and at Ain Mallaha a large, heavily plastered building near a cleared central space was likely a chief’s house. The wild pig’s broad range therefore serves as part of an argument that environmental resources alone do not explain agricultural beginnings; social arrangements shaped whether and how those resources were used.