Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
More broadly, I'm aware that pockets of hunter-gatherers were able to hold on, particularly, as I understand it, in resource rich zones where their own population density may have been higher. I don't see that this really changes the overall picture though.
I'd also suggest that farmer-expansion could be violent without entailing wholesale massacre of the population being displaced, either by pushing them into marginal lands, or by violently incorporating them (cf. abduction warfare in pre-contact North America.)
Totally agree that evidence of "mixing" doesn't entail peaceful co-existence. I find it useful to think of the existence of people with mixed European and Native American or aboriginal Australian ancestry, and how their mixed ancestry came to be.
I guess I find it possible that HGs and farmers occupied somewhat non-overlapping ecological niches, exploiting different resources, which would act to reduce conflict. Or that the farmers' expansion was initially slow enough that there was less conflict initially.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
