--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski
<piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:
> 18-01-04 17:46, ehlsmith wrote:
>
>
> > I understand the need to clearly differentiate between plant
> > production and animal production when discussing Neolithic
cultures,
> > which was why I wondered if the exclusion of animal husbandry
> > from "agriculture" was a specialized usage in anthropology. It
would
> > be very convenient if that is in fact the case. If it is not the
case
> > however, unilaterally coming up with such a definition for use on
> > this list could lead to more confusion, not less. Quotes from
other
> > sources could include the broader definition while listmembers
might
> > assume only the narrower definition was meant. Is the
> > term "horticulture" appropriate for all non-livestock farming? I
have
> > seen it used for various cultures, including maize-growing ones.
> > Could it be used for any plant-producing, non-livestock-raising
> > culture?
>
> "Horticulture" is the cultivation of gardens and orchards (as
opposed to
> fields) and the production of vegatables as well as fruits
(pomiculture,
> if you need a precise term) and flowers (floriculture).
Hi Piotr & all,
That is certainly the definition of the general use of the term, but
as I had mentioned I had seen it applied to maize-growing societies
too, and so suspected that it might have a slightly different
definition in anthropology. I have since found a couple anthropology
course websites which state:
"Horticulture involves the growing of plants in the absence of
irrigation, fertilization, or the plough. Instead, simple tools such
as digging sticks are used to turn soil, plant and weed."
<
http://www.ucs.mun.ca/~jerwin/Week9.html >
And "A horticultural society is one in which the main subsistence
strategy relies on the cultivation of domesticated plants by using
hoes" <
http://www.unm.edu/~nvaldes/326/lect3.html >
Thus it would seem to apply to early grain-producing cultures too.
On the other hand, "An agricultural society relies on crop
cultivation by the utilization of irrigation, plows and draft
animals" [ibid.] Thus agriculture, as used in anthropology, implies
the presence of livestock, at least as draft animals if not always
food.
> ... It never hurts to be precise,
Again I agree, but it also never hurts to be consistent either, and
if the discipline of anthropolgy uses these terms in these precise
ways, it would probably be wise to follow them. After all, if we
decide to follow our own idiosyncratic definitions here instead of
adhering to the ones already standard in the field, we would hardly
be in a position to complain if somebody else started using their own
idiosyncratic definitions for things like creoles or what not, would
we? :-)
Ned Smith