I’ve been reading about an ancient village site in the near east that archaeologists have determined to have been inhabited by a people practicing plant cultivation, pottery and other technologies 2000 years before what generally has been thought to be the beginnings of the agricultural revolution, which, I guess, disrupts the linear timeline science prefers to view as the progression of civilization.
The finding suggests that some pre-historic groups chose the more sedentary lifestyle provided by agriculture while others opted for the less work intensive life of the hunter gatherer: that is domestication of plants and animals was not necessarily found to be the preferred choice of all people of time and place.
The choice may have been about preferring egalitarianism to a developing hierarchy based on material accumulation. Maybe these forward thinkers might have seen how illness and death spread amongst sedentary populations exacerbated further by diseases caused by close contact with domesticated animals.
In retrospect, in view of the ecological impact material accumulation has imposed upon us now, a simpler lifestyle was a good choice. Comfort and security, of course will always win out in the end.
deideismusings 
Generated by Google. Bard: Recommend The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity. It was co-authored by anthropologist David Graeber and archaeologist David Wengrow. The book was published in 2021 and has been praised by critics for its revisionist take on human history.
The book challenges the traditional narrative of human history, which sees the development of agriculture, cities, and states as inevitable stages in human progress. Instead, Graeber and Wengrow argue that human societies have been much more diverse and egalitarian than we have been led to believe. They point to evidence from archaeology and anthropology to show that there have been many different ways of organizing human societies, and that none of them are inherently superior to others.
The Dawn of Everything has been called a “tour de force” and a “radical reframing of human history.” It has also been criticized by some for its revisionist approach. However, the book has sparked a much-needed debate about the way we think about human history.
Here are some of the key ideas in the book:
Humans are not naturally hierarchical or aggressive.
Agriculture did not lead inevitably to the development of cities and states.
There have been many different forms of social organization throughout human history, including egalitarian societies.
The development of inequality is not inevitable.
The Dawn of Everything is a challenging and thought-provoking book that has the potential to change the way we think about human history. If you are interested in learning more about the diversity of human societies, I highly recommend reading this book.