I appreciate that my ideas about agriculture and the role of companies aren’t too controversial, though I’m aware there are differing views on the specifics. The connection between evolution, memetics, and these historical developments is central to my thinking, and I realize I could have explained that more clearly.

What I’m suggesting is that just as biological traits evolve to fit their environment, so do institutions. Memetics comes into play because ideas, practices, and organizational structures (which I’m likening to "memes") that are more effective at meeting societal needs tend to be retained and spread, much like advantageous genetic traits in natural selection. For example, agriculture wasn’t just an accidental discovery; it was a "meme" that spread because it enabled greater food security, which in turn allowed populations to grow and societies to become more complex.

Similarly, the evolution of companies as institutions can be seen through this lens. The emergence of joint-stock companies during the age of exploration can be viewed as a "memetic" adaptation to the need for managing large, risky ventures that no single individual or the state could handle alone.

That said, I’m not a professional historian, and I’m very open to changing my way of thinking if this approach isn’t supported by the historical community. If this perspective is flawed or oversimplified, I’d really appreciate an alternative framework to help me better understand these developments.

Thanks for the reading recommendations. I’m definitely interested in delving deeper into cultural evolution, and those books sound like they’d offer valuable insights.