Right, but back to the agricultural revolution and why it occurred. Historians don't know for sure, of course, because there are no written records, but they love to make guesses. Maybe population pressure necessitated agriculture even though it was more work, or abundance gave people leisure to experiment with domestication, or planting originated as a fertility right, or, as some historians have argued, people needed to domesticate grains in order to produce more alcohol. Charles Darwin, like most 19th century scientists, believed agriculture was an accident, saying, "...a wild and unusually good variety of native plant might attract the attention of some wise old savage." Off topic, but you will note in the coming weeks that the definition of savage tends to be, not me. Maybe the best theory is that there wasn't really an agricultural revolution at all, but that agriculture came out of an evolutionary desire to eat more. Like, early hunter-gatherers knew that seeds germinate when planted, and when you find something that makes food, you want to do more of it.