Ancient hunter/gatherers were "vegan"

[Graeme M]

I've seen quite a few articles in recent years casting the diets of ancient hunter/gatherer populations as anything from vegan to vegetarian to omnivore to hyper-carnivore. Of course, this simply reflects that different groups ate differing diets depending on where they lived. Here in Australia, indigenous peoples in the past ate diets that varied from coast to inland deserts, with some being almost 80% vegetarian and others more like 60-70% animal eaters.

But it seems to me these arguments and claims etc miss the point. Vegans wanting to show that ancients ate mostly plants are up against it because people have always eaten animals to some extent or another. What if we think about it a different way?

The aim of veganism is fairness - that we should be fair to other animals when we can do that. The goals are really just two: for all animals to be free, and for us not to be cruel to them whenever we can do that.

Sooo... the ancients lived before agriculture and domesticated animals even existed. Thus, all animals were free. The animals they hunted and ate, were free. The main goal of veganism was realised. Of course, the ancients were likely cruel to the animals. Spearing them, trapping them, driving them over cliffs is essentially cruel in effect. But, let's be honest, they had few alternatives, likely sought to despatch animal prey as quickly as possible in the circumstances, and likely tended not to simply kill as many animals as they could at any given time. Their cruelty hardly exceeded that of other predators and likely was rather less so.

It seems to me that all our ancient hunter/gather ancestors lived lives that were - in practice - consistent with the goals of veganism. And at the least, much more so than modern folk. We don't have to prove what they did or did not eat.

 

[Lou]

I too, find this an interesting topic of discussion. And I also agree that most of the discussions misses the point but maybe for a different reason that you do.

For me veganism is an intention. and the intention has to do with compassion - compassion for animals.

I also think that there is a difference between a plant based diet and the vegan lifestyle. It might be just in the details but again I feel it mostly has to do with intention.

Several early societies did not eat meat. And although I'm sure that they felt compassion for animals that was not their stated primary reason. Many of these cultures believed in reincarnation. You didn't eat kill animals (or even bugs) because that animal may have been your uncle Eddie. or you might come back as a lamb.

 

[Graeme M]

For me veganism is an intention. and the intention has to do with compassion - compassion for animals.

Yes, that's true. That's why I didn't say ancient peoples actually were vegan. My point is that their lifestyles was actually consistent with veganism, far more so than most modern people's lifestyle. Veganism wants animals to be free and us not to be cruel, whenever that's possible. That's exactly how things were to the extent it was possible for the people who lived then. Of course they didn't specifically intend to be vegan, but I think they did intend to have perhaps a fairer regard for the other animals we often don't have now. I think that in many cases, other animals ("nature") was woven into their mythologies and cultural beliefs, in such a way that they had a deeper respect for the lives of other animals than we seem to encourage.

In this article about the Plains Indians of North America, the author highlights how the buffalo was an intrinsic part of both diet and culture with the people revering the animal as a gift from the Creator.

While the diet of these people was high in animal content derived from bison, deer, elk, antelope and others, they also ate what plant foods were available such as hazel nuts, wild plums, prickly pear, wild onion etc. They ate judiciously from their surrounds, used all of the animals they killed for food and other resources and treated both the animals and the environment as vitally important and inherent to their spiritual outlook.

We could say that in this way, the Plains Indians - and many other ancient hunter/gatherer societies - were fundamentally fair in their relationship with other species. And it's fairness that we are aiming for with veganism. Compassion might be the driver, however it's not mere kindness we are wanting but an actual state - that of fairness and justice for other species. So I'd argue - with good reason, I hope - that ancient hunter/gatherers lived far more consistently with the aims of veganism than we do today. That's why there is no reason to spend any time whatsoever trying to prove what diet ancient people ate (because they never ate just plants).

Buffalo and the Plains Indians

The buffalo were essential to the Plains Indians, and other Native American nations, as they were not only a vital food source but were regarded as a sacred gift the Creator had provided especially...

www.worldhistory.org

 

[veganfortheanimalss]

It's all about the options you have and the choices you make. If you have the option of buying plant based food in your supermarket but instead buy flesh or go out and hunt animals for food, you are not a vegan. If you had plenty of hazel nuts, wild plums, prickly pear, wild onion etc, in the wild but still chose to hunt animals for their flesh then you are not a vegan. If the above wild plant based foods were less in quantity then you have no option than to hunt for animals, which would be ethically vegan. It's all about the options you have and the choices you make. I bet that these hunter folks wouldn't have give up their animal hunting even if there was plenty of wild plant based food available, so I would not consider them vegan.

A best candidate for historical vegans would be jains. Back in the day, in BCE, jains were vegan. Of course they drank milk, but the cows were treated extremely well to the point of worship(compared to the factory farming cows of today whose milk these current day non-vegan jains drink). They didn't kill the male calves but used them(after they grew up) as transport and for tilling the soil . Of course they had no option, but to have milk because there was no B12 supplements back then, or cars and tractors. So you could say there were vegans way way back. But they were not primitive hunter gatherer folks but from advanced agricultural civilizations. Ofcourse their intent might be different, as it's less to do with empathy and more to do with reincarnation, but the historical jains would still be considered vegan, as some vegans of today are still by definition vegans not because of empathy for animals but because of health and other selfish reasons.

 

[Graeme M]

I bet that these hunter folks wouldn't have give up their animal hunting even if there was plenty of wild plant based food available, so I would not consider them vegan

OK, but I didn't say that ancient hunter/gatherers were vegan. I said that in their lifestyles - what they actually did - they were far more consistent with the goals of veganism than most folk today. We don't need to prove what they ate - that's irrelevant to what we do today. But we can point out the fact they were more like vegans than most moderns.

I believe there are just two goals of veganism - for animals to be free to live their own lives and for us not to be cruel to them, whenever we can do that. So, to what extent were those goals achieved 20,000 years ago, compared to today? Just to be clear, I'm not saying that hunter/gatherers were all making fair and kind choices, not by any stretch of the imagination. They just lived their lives. But the end result was much more like what veganism is about than how most of us are living today, when we look at things from the point of view of other animals.