The Case of the missing inventions.

One thing that has always interested me is the "Case of the missing inventions".Sometime, about 10-20,000 years ago, people moved from EurAsiaAfrica to the Americas. This was the last of the great migrations (long after the migration of the sea peoples to the islands of the South Pacific and Australia/New Zeland). These people, those in the Islands and those in the Americas were effectively cut off from the vast populations of the older continents.From the evidence left by the earliest of these wanderers we can see that they were very similar at the time of migration to folks anywhere else. Technologically, they had all the things the others had, stoneworking, fire, cooperative societies. We can also see similar intellegence and a very similar growth pattern, they built cities, invented govenments, studied the skies, discovered and charted planets and stars, developed languages and writing.But there are three inventions that were made on the old land mass that were never duplicated in either the Island peoples or the Americas. And those three inventions made all the difference.The first is the wheel. Neither the Islanders or those in the Americas ever invented the wheel. Even the potters wheel was unknown and we see this in the pottery shards found throughout the area. They made pots and utensils but they were all slab and coil, much slower to make and so far more valuable. Pottery never became a commidity item.The second great missing invention is the bellows. This simple device was esential if man was to move beyond the softer hammered metals, copper, and utilize Iron or high strength bronze. Without a bellows mankind was limited to stone as the best and sharpest cutting instrument and when Europeans arrived in the Americas they found a people still effectively in the stone age.The third and perhaps biggest missing invention is the draught animal. The two closest examples found in the Americas are the domesticated llama used as a pack animal and the dog sledge in the far north or the travois. This lack of draught animals limited what could be done to human power alone. It was sufficient for creating magnificent edifices but limited farming. The peoples of the Americas never made the jump from lever as digging stick to the plow.Why were these three things NOT reinvented when so many other things were? I don't have a clue where this might go

Jar, have you ever read "Guns, Germs, & Steel" by Jared Diamond. His book answers your third question about draught animals. It appears you can only domesticate animals that have the ability to be domesticated. The zebra is one animal that comes to mind as they are so similar to horses but are just too mean and stubborn to do what you want then to do.As far as the wheel in the Americas, it appears that some indians used them on toys and that in South America they may even have had potter's wheels. Link: http://www.trends.ca/~yuku/tran/xwh.htm

Intriguing, let me give it a shot...I think your third point answers your first point.The cultures that crossed water or land bridges were not ones that would have been able to, much less desire to use, draught animals. Sure it might be nice to have something to carry your belongings, but it was better to be able to carry it youself, or within a canoe (boat). And they were basically hunter-gatherers which meant they did not need to domesticate animals for ploughing as there was no ploughing to be had.Without draught animals, or the need to carry massive amounts of supplies over land, the wheel was essentially useless. They may have understood circles or that hoops might role, but an axle and wheel would not be much use (except perhaps as a wheel barrow).The largeness and diversity of the landscapes may have also ruled out wheels. They would not help on water, up and down wild mountains, through forests, etc etc.I can't guess why the bellows were not developed, other than wood and stone were enough for most people's needs. They also moved a bit, often in smaller numbers than a normal ancient "urban" environment and so no one really had time to commit to looking at materials engineering.That said, I thought some native americans had bellows of some sorts to stoke fires, even if not for smelting operations.Does this make sense? Pure speculation of course.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

I saw that book back when it came out and really wanted to read it, then it left my to do list. Is it a good book, would you recommend it re-enter my to do list?

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Well I thought it was an excellent book! I also liked his "The Third Chimpanzee" and I'm currently reading his latest "Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed". I would definitely recommend reading "Guns, Germs, and Steel".

There are a few examples of wheels shown on pottery objects such as toys or votive offerings but none beyond that. There are also indications that logs were used as rollers, but the wheel with axle never seemed to catch on. I suspect that the lack of draught animals may have played a part, but again, why that step wasn't taken is a mystery to me.There were potential candidates, for example deer and elk. Reindeer were utilized as draught animals in areas of Europe, but the concept never seemed to happen in the Americas.One good example is that the concept of a mill never seemed to catch on in the Americas. Right up until the European invasions corn was still ground by hand. The millstone never appears, and I imagine that lack of motive power might have been one reason.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

To me, the big step in use of horses would be in domesticating them for riding/packing. That is, how do you go from "That looks like supper" to "I think I'll ride on that"?Once people were riding horses, it was a small step to dragging things - e.g. teepee poles - behind them, and another small step to piling baggage on the poles.It would have been a larger step to building a permanent wheeled conveyance. Maybe there just wasn't enough baggage to make that step necessary.As for dogsleds, they are just a small step from a travois. They are a permanent conveyance, but much simpler than a wheeled vehicle. And of course, wheels would have been less efficient on snow.The small steps could be reinvented as necessary by ordinary people, but the big steps would require an exceptional thinker.

---

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

No horses when man was here or in the islands.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Well, I was referring to domestication in general, wherever it occured, and a similar scenario would/could apply to dogs.The point I was trying to make is: little steps is easier than big steps. The little steps could be repeated whenever and wherever. The big steps required a stone-age "Einstein".

---

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

Not sure if you saw my response on that or not. I think it was mainly their nature as hunter-gatherers, whose territories and movements precluded taking animals or domesticating them longterm... much less use a wheel for some kind of vehicular movement.Certainly even a mill for grinding corn seems to require a sedentary life which most really didn't have, or not for long enough to make mills feasible.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

No, I saw it. But that seems to ignore that there were some rather large cities here, certainly as large and as advanced in most ways as anything in Europe at the time. Whether we're talking about the Mississippian culture in the south east, the Anasazi or Pueblo cultures in the south west, the various city states like the Toltecs, Maya, Inca or Aztec in south and central america or the civilizations of the north west, there were examples of large scale sedentary communities. The irrigation systems built by the tribes of the south west were as extensive as any built anywhere in the world and many of todays canals in Arizona simply follow the routes of ones built by earlier peoples.Chaco and Canyon de Chelly were impresive, but for me, the high rise at Casa Grande was even more startling. Here is a three or four story building in the midst of nowhere with indications of an extensive supporting community. When I lived in the south east I got to visit many of the older sites, and frankly, it was an eye opener. These were not just short term residences, but whole cities covering many, many acres.The hunter-gathers certainly existed but they existed alongside agricultural ones. The terraced farming found in Peru is still functional today, yet nowhere did the leap from lever as digging stick to lever as plow happen. No where did the leap from log as roller to wheel and axle happen. Nowhere did the leap from hammered to smelted metal happen. Nowhere did the leap from mano and matate to millstone happen.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

But not all natives of the Americas were hunting-gathering nomads. There were quite a few well established civilizations that thrived for centuries, sometimes even thousands of years, without the wheel.

Did horses only come with white man? That's not right is it?? . .And . . has any one else actaully been on the Anasazi sites? I had a choice between GC and Anasazi and I'm glad I chose the cliff-dwellers! Truly awesome archeological site. GC's next though . .This message has been edited by Tranquility Base, 06-16-2005 10:57 PM

The horses only returned with Europeans. They had been in the Americas earlier (much earlier) but had become extinct long before, sometime around the end of the last ice age and the arival of humans.AbE:I was lucky enough to live in the area and so get to wander around most of the sites in Arizona, New Mexico, Utah and Colorado. I've also been lucky enough to spend time around the Mississippian relics and explore the shell mounds of the south east.This message has been edited by jar, 06-16-2005 10:01 PM

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Yes - I was pretty sure that horse series had an American component! I'd never put two-and-two together that they came and went.