What was the net effect the domestication of this animal had

ANON WANT MILKY!

>>42527577
MOOOO

>>42527577
It was a staple food of every significant Western empire from the first nomadic Aryans to America. The Roman army fed itself with non perishable hard cheese; just as their decedents would do a millennia later on expeditions to the new world. So yeah a mundane, yet key factor to the dominance of Western man we know and love today.

>>42527727
didn't Chinese, Africans, and Indians also have cows?

>>42527752
>Chinese
Not in large numbers and moreso used as oxen/ beasts of burden and they got them from Indians
>Indians
Yes, because they were conquered by the Aryans who brought herds of cattle, domesticated horses, and chariots with them. (Also why there is a chariot wheel that looks like an anus in their flag and they consider cows sacred)
>Africans
Again not near the widespread use of cattle and definitely not the full use of the animal like the west did (milk, dairy, meat, clothing, adhesives, etc.)

>>42527727

Roman and the modern idea of "the west" are not the same people, as much as white people want it to be. the roman's influenced the Arab-speaking world far more significantly than it did the Germanic or Nordic speaking world, for example.

Also, everyone ate beef. In the Old world, at least. Im ignorant on the American cultures if they had domesticated cows.

>>42528322
No domesticated cows in the Americas until European colonization. Your interpretation of ancient history is flawed and myopic. Yes, the Mediterranean cultures did have more in common with each other than they did with northern German Europe. However, both groups shared the common ancestors of Aryans (also called proto-indo-europeans to distinguish them from Nazi propaganda Aryans) Germanic tribes learned cheese making from the Romans too. Southern Europeans and northern Europeans are like first cousins and the Indian ruling class is like their 2nd cousin in common.

>>42528470
> Pajeet WEWUZing
> on /fit/

now I've seen everything

File: IE_expansion.png (168KB, 450x275px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 450x275px

>>42528470
Forgot pic

>>42528228
There are isolated ethnic groups in Africa that are lactose tolerant and basically live off dairy. Unsurprisingly, they are taller than all other ethnic groups, too.

>>42528480
Naw I'm not a pajeet just somebody who enjoys lifting and ancient history... In my opinion the Indo Aryans kinda fucked up and never reached their potential by worshiping instead of killing cattle.

Positive for nomads, negative for agriculturalists. Civilisation and farming are final boss gains goblins.

>>42528496
>>42528496
Well of course there are Africa is the motherland. There is every type of genetics expression there if you look long enough at every tribe and obviously full utilization of the domestic cow isn't the ONLY key to success. I'm wondering what the point of your comment is.

carrying it up hills from a very young age to make gainz as it grows up

>>42528480
He's right though. The difference is that the Proto-Indo-Europeans completely wiped out the population of Northern Europe, which was sparsely populated by settled farming communities with very little ability to protect themselves from raiders on horseback. Southern Europe, the Balkans, Anatolia, and the Caucasus were much more densely populated and saw significant replacement with some admixture from the people who were there already. The Indo-Iranians (the subgroup who eventually settled in India, Iran, and the Stans) stayed nomadic for much longer and arrived in India when it was already very heavily populated, so they had a much smaller genetic impact. This is why some Indians, Persians, and People from the Stans have much lighter skin and fairer hair than others - particularly in very remote regions. Some people from traditionally pastoral groups in the Stans are so fair they could easily pass for Europeans.

>>42528509
It has nothing to do with it being Africa. Lactase persistence is a very useful mutation that has likely arisen more than once in separate areas. For instance, it likely appeared so dominantly and so early in Indo-European groups because they were drinking mare's milk rather than cow's milk. The indo-Europeans domesticated horses somewhere in the eastern part of the Eurasian steppe, likely long before they first came into contact with domestic cattle by raiding societies to the west and south. Cattle were domesticated in the near east and Anatolia, and spread with the spread of agriculture from those areas. It's likely that a less pervasive lactase persistence mutation also existed in these groups too, because of the cows. However, since they generally had access to a wider variety of food staples and the hotter climate meant that most would only consume dairy in the form of cheese - which generally has less lactose in it than raw milk - the mutation wouldn't have been as necessary. Our horse-raising nomad ancestors however had fuck all to eat on the steppe unless they stole cattle from their neighbours, so lactose tolerance would've been necessary to their survival. Especially since mare's milk is significantly higher in lactose than cow's milk.

Africans have had domestic cattle in some areas since classical times, but only in specific areas. It would make sense that the groups that depend on them for survival would have very quickly developed lactase persistence, while the majority who only came into contact with dairy on a large scale very recently still haven't. (Africa is massive, its interior is a bitch to navigate, and contact between different parts of it overland is still very tough even today.)

>>42528880
Ok but what's your point?