Specialist pastoralism
Having identified some key differences between mixed farmers and those who live principally from grazing livestock, let us investigate different forms of animal exploitation and pastoralism in economic terms.
According to Tim Ingold, in his influential book Hunters, Pastoralists and Ranchers, there are four key economic modes in which one can live from herds: as a hunter, a meat pastoralist, a milch pastoralist, or a rancher.[272] A meat pastoralist exploits only the products that can be gained from a dead animal, including meat and fat for food, and hides, bones, and sinew for clothing, tools, and other material culture. Zooarchaeologists define these foods and materials as being ‘primary products'. But ‘primary products' are also the main concern of any hunter, so what is the difference? Many would see a simple dichotomy between hunters living off wild animals, and pastoralists herding domestic ones, but Ingold sees this slightly differently. The biological definition of a domestic animal is one that has, as a result of human actions, become genetically separated from its wild progenitor species.[273] Under this definition a pastoralist would have to have had sufficient control over animals to prevent interbreeding with wild stock. Such a clear separation may hold largely true for some species, such as sheep and cattle, but matters are much more complicated for other animals, pigs and reindeer in particular. If we shift our emphasis away from genetic, biological domestication to think more about economic modes of subsistence within human cultures, we soon come across examples of types of herding that pay scant attention to breeding control, but yet differ significantly from hunting.Peoples of the northern forests of Siberia essentially herd wild reindeer that breed freely, but they are husbanded nonetheless.[274] [275] [276] [277] Temporary fences are used in some cases to keep herds in a particular area, or the use of salt licks encourages animals to stay nearby.
Animals are often captured by lasso and slaughtered near the camp, rather than hunted down and killed with projectiles. Such slaughter will be selective to ensure the continued health of the herd. Some individual reindeer may be captured young and tamed for use in pulling sleds. What defines the pastoralist is their interest in the future progeny of the herd, and the husbandry they employ to promote future viability. There is clearly something of a continuum between pure hunting and meat pastoralism. There are clearly examples of hunters who just take what they want from nature, leading to stress and even extinction of species, others who take care to leave viable herds, and meat pastoralists who aim to ensure future herd health through husbandry, with or without control of breeding. Other reindeer pastoralists will milk tamed or domesticated females, and hence become ‘milch pastoralists'.11Zooarchaeologists define milk as a ‘secondary product', meaning something that can be repeatedly exploited from a live animal.12 Another key secondary product is wool, and a less common one is blood. The Maasai pastoralists of central East Africa, among others, extract limited quantities of blood from animals, for use as a protein-rich food, without killing them.13 The benefits of exploiting secondary products are clear enough. Significant yields of food can be obtained without the need for killing stock. Furthermore, milk can be processed into a wide range of preservable dairy products, allowing for both storage and trade in foodstuffs. Exploitation of wool, accompanied by either weaving or felting technology, produces warm clothing, bedding, and, in case of the use of structures like yurts, housing. It too is a valued trade commodity. A ‘milch pastoralist' who exploits secondary products is clearly operating a more intensive economy, much more likely to support larger populations.
The last of Ingold's categories is ranching. Pastoralists exploit their herds as part of their basic subsistence economy.
While a limited amount of produce may be traded, perhaps even with neighbouring agriculturalists for grain, the majority of what is produced is for the consumption of the group. Ranchers, however, operate within a cash economy, and the vast majority of what they produce is for sale for money. The ranchers support themselves from that income, not from the animals directly. While the word conjures images of cowboys and beef cattle, in principle Ingold's definition would apply also to modern industrial dairy farms too. Ranching is a feature of the last few hundred years, therefore, and ‘meat pastoralism' that is not part of a mixed farming regime is a relatively limited phenomenon in terms of species and geography. ‘Milch pastoralism', with exploitation of secondary products, strongly dominates archaeological and ethnographic examples of those who live mainly from grazing herds. When and how did this particular economic adaptation develop?