Catching Fire: How cooking shaped mankind
by Jamie Lutton
The modern world is haunted with the mystery of our
origin. Where did human beings come from? This has been the great
question humanity asks itself, where we came from, long ago, and this
question is what drive all origin stories, and most religions.
We are surrounded by animals of all kinds, but humans are not quite
animals. We differ because we have culture. This means we talk, make
tools, and form complex societies, no matter where in the world you
go..
Scientists since before Darwin have examined first human, then
animal behavior; and tried to figure out where we are different; what
things humans do that animals do not do.
The first choice was toolmaking...until we found out
that chimpanzees, and some birds like Australian crows and even some
otters make and use simple tools. Then it was speech...but we can and do
teach some primates to 'talk', using sign language (and seen them teach
their children the same). Many animals form groups for self protection,
even those who are not mammals, and it is a learned behavior at least
in part.. Fire use was seen as an important tool, but only for defense,
etc.
Humans have been telling each other about the great day long ago
that fire came to people, in all lands and languages. This is the
story behind the Prometheus myth of the Ancient Greeks, and the Coyote
and Raven origin myths of the local Native Americans.
The answer was right in front of us all along, in what is, traditionally been women's work, so it was overlooked by men . .The author of Catching Fire,
Richard Wrangham, has a new idea about why humanity differs from the
other animals. It is the act of using, and controlling fire to cook
food that makes us human.
The author makes a good case for this hypothesis, by thoroughly
examining modern human anatomy, discussing in detail in the ways we
differ from our closest relatives, the great apes. He walks us through
our evolution from small, short hominids with brains not much bigger
than ape's, who both lived in the trees and on the ground, like Homo
Habilis, to modern human beings in our modern culture because we cook
the food we eat. .
All the possible changes eating cooked food made on human anatomy
is revealed by this author . His radical assertion, that our flat face
with a small mouth and weak teeth, our guts, our gait, our hairlessness,
our big brains, all the ways we differ from apes, all of the
differences that makes us human, came from us mastering fire, and
cooking our food.
Studies by anthropologists, observing what chimpanzees and gorillas
eat in the wild, show that humans cannot survive long on these raw
plants and fruits. The human digestive system cannot handle them, and
some ape foods are poisonous and indigestible to us. These foods
also cannot generate enough calories for our brains to flourish and
thrive. Cooking makes the food easier to digest, and extracts
more calories than raw foods. Human beings, then, evolved to have a
shorter gut - our intestine, and smaller, weaker teeth, a much smaller
mouth, and a flat face as a result. And a big brain.
The author interviewed raw food advocates, and cited studies of
them, looking at just how healthy they really are, eating food that is
not cooked. He cites studies that humans lose weight to the point of
not being able to reproduce on raw food alone. Also, that there is not
enough raw food 12 months of the year in the wild for humans to survive
in modern ecosystems. We have changed too much from our ancestors.
The all important difference we have with animals - our huge brain -
he suggests evolved because it was fed by cooked food, and cannot
thrive without it.. And it is our huge brain alone that is the big
difference between apes and humans.
Catching Fire's author examines what we know about habilines, or Homo Habilis (and Australopithecus, their direct ancestors). who
lived and thrived 1.9 million years ago. They walked upright, but had
short arms; their shoulder bones found shows that they could still swing
up into the trees . The big change is not walking upright, but when
this human ancestor had truly shed her life in the trees. This question
is in not only feet and legs, but in the shoulders; the size of the gut
and the hip bones; the arms could support brachiating in Homo Habilis,
or climbing in the trees easily. This ability was lost, in a few
hundred thousand years in a sharp leap in evolution when Homo Erectus
evolved.
.
The great question is how hominids could survive on the ground
without protection that fire gives humans from animals. No ape, except
full grown male gorillas, sleep on the ground. There were too many
predators around. Baboons get away with it, because they live in very
large groups.The author suggests that was the 'great leap' to the
ground when humanity left the trees forever, and walked upright, and
began to be able to run, losing their body hair as they had fire to keep
them warm. There is no plausible reason for humans to become hairless,
unless we had fire to keep us warm. This perhaps why human babies are
fat, while Chimpanzee babies are not; this is to retain body heat the
first critical few years.
Humans are great runners, up there with wolves and other
predators to be able to trot, run for hours, something an ape cannot
do. Homo Erectus, which evolved from Homo Habilis, was
then very like us from the neck down, even to being as tall as we are.
And their brains make a great leap, and became 40% bigger than the
Habilines, in a few short hundreds of thousands of years.
This author makes the radical proposition that homo habilis were
the first to use fire, even if she did not make it. He points out that
there is a place in Greece, a gas leak from underground that has been
burning steadily for thousands of years, which was described by Homer in
the Iliad, 3000 years ago.
Africa could have had such a place. Then, there are lightning
strikes in nature that start small fires that burn for weeks. Our
ancestors, coming across this, might grab a burning stick...to tease her
friends by waving it about. Then finding out that a burning stick was
effective at keeping big predators at bay. And wherever that
group of hominds went, they found that burnt food, such as seeds and
dead animals, was easier to eat and digest. And they learned, over
time, to made use of this consistently. In a few hundreds of thousands
of years, they changed physically as a result.
Already, apes pound on meat with rocks to make it easier to eat.
the next step, burning or cooking tough roots and meat seems a plausible
evolution in behavior.
In many origin myths around the world, a supernatural figure
arises that brings fire to hungry, unhappy humanity. To Promethius
stealing fire from the Greek gods, to Raven in local Native American
myths (and in some stories, Coyote) stealing fire to bring to starving,
unhappy ancestors, humans tell stories of the terrible time before
they had fire; and cooked food.
I recommend Catching Fire to people not only interested in
human origins, but chefs and others who like to cook, people interested
in public health, raw food advocates, Michael Pollan fans, and anyone
who likes Stephen Jay Gould's science essays. Richard Wrangham is a
professor of biological Anthropology at Harvard, and like Gould was, and
so his book is a great successor to Gould's books. I only wish
that Professor Gould had been around to read and review it. I have read
maybe 30 or 40 books about hominid evolution; and I follow all the news
stories about the latest finds.
After reading Catching Fire, I would recommend The Johanson's two books, Lucy and Lucy's Children,
for a good discussion of what early hominids looked like, and how they
lived, and how their fossils were first discovered in the 1970's.I .
also recommend The Tender Carnivore and the Sacred Game, by Paul
Shepard, for a psychological understanding of how hunters and
gatherers think. It has gone out of print, but is widely available. The
editon with the illustrations by Fons Van Woerkom is beautiful.
I recommend Catching Fire to people not only interested in
human origins, but chefs and others who like to cook, people interested
in public health, and anyone who likes Stephen Jay Gould's science
essays. Richard Wrangham is a professior of biological Anthropology at
Harvard, as Gould was 30 years ago, and so his book is a great successor
to Gould's writings on evolution. I only wish that Professor Gould had been around to read and review it.
I have read maybe 30 or 20 books about homind evolution; and all
the news stories about the latest finds. The other books are excellent
for what they are; they talk about the relationship between
Austrolpithicenes and apes and true humans. They frequently have not
only photos of what bones paleontologists have found so far, but include
reconstructions of what the hominids looked like.There is a lot of fun
reading the theories about which fossils are in the direct human linage,
as this changes from time to time sharply.
But Catching Fire can be read on its own, and is in fact a
good place to start. As a feminist, I recommend it as a 'must read' as
another example of the obvious hypothesis being overlooked, since cooking is not traditionally work men do.
I only wish the author had included drawings of human, ape and
hominid skeletons, and the human digestive tract, as this would enliven
the text. The reader will have to go elsewhere for that.
Look in any bookstore in the 'evolution' section, and there are
many fine books with beautiful illustrations, that have the latest
discoveries the paleontologists have found in Africa and elsewhere. I
strongly recommend these books to those who want to see the face of the
past.
Comments
Post a Comment