Tag Archives: Environment

Environmental change may have played a role at the dawn of Egyptian history — here’s how

A depiction of a man milking a cow found on one of the walls of ancient burial tombs south of present-day Cairo dating from 2340 BC.
Photo by DeAgostini/Getty Images

Benjamin T Pennington, University of Southampton

Around 5,000 years ago (c. 3100 BC), what we know today as Ancient Egypt came into existence. A thousand years either side, and other such “primary states” had also arisen across the world, in Mesopotamia, North China, the Indus Valley and other locations.

But why did human social dynamics change so dramatically in such a relatively short space of time? Why did we stop living in smaller communities and come together into cities and “civilisations”?

In trying to answer this perennial question, archaeologists and anthropologists have historically studied the emergence of social stratification, notions of kingship, shifting identities, changing technologies, and much else. However, these studies – while looking in detail at these “human factors” – have arguably overlooked the changing environment within which the people were interacting, just at the crucial juncture. It is almost as if we have been so focused on the “actors” of the narrative, we have missed the “stage.”

Our research recognises this omission, and has sought to integrate the changing landscapes – the stage – into the discussion, recognising that actors’ choices may be influenced by the theatre or set.

So what did the “stage” look like for the emergence of Ancient Egypt, or indeed any of these other areas in which the first “civilisations” arose?

Perhaps surprisingly, until very recently, we really didn’t know.

To find out, you have to dig. For every metre you drill down into the silts of the Nile Delta, you delve about a thousand years into the past. If you then study the layers of sand and mud at that depth you can begin to piece together a picture of the landscapes from the past.

So, if you drill lots of boreholes all over the delta (2-10m deep), study the layers of sand and mud that come up in each one, you can then produce a whole series of maps showing how the delta as a whole looked at different times.

From various such drilling programmes we are now beginning to understand that in the Nile Delta the landscapes were changing dramatically just as the people here and upstream were beginning to reorganise their social structures. Intriguingly, very similar environmental changes were also taking place in Mesopotamia and North China (other locations where the world’s first state societies emerged).

Furthermore, these shifts in the landscape were not driven by people, but by an external factor: the slowing-down and stabilisation of post-glacial sea level rise. The “stage” of the theatre upon which the human story played out was indeed evolving by itself, with a natural, inescapable, worldwide driver as the cause.

Mud to monuments

But what were these landscape changes? And could they have nudged the “actors” one way or another? Did they contribute in any way to the emergence of Ancient Egypt?

Answering the first question is easy: the environments ultimately became less swampy. As sea-level stabilised, rivers started to behave differently. The landscapes gradually evolved from a network of small, dynamic streams criss-crossing a vast expanse of marshland into wider, more open, well-drained floodplains.

Answering the other questions – establishing if and how these changes impacted on the trajectory of human history – is much harder.

One way we can attempt this is by studying how people interacted with the environment to source their most basic of needs: food.

If you analyse the environment in this way, it (perhaps counter-intuitively) turns out the earlier, marshy environments were a great place for people to live. There were plenty of very varied food resources in these extraordinarily rich environments. Of course, you couldn’t farm much very easily, but you could happily fish, hunt, keep a few animals and move around in this veritable “Eden” and it would have provided for a large population.

But, as the environment changed – as the “stage” evolved – the Nile Delta gradually became much less rich in these wild food resources. Over a few hundred years we can calculate that the delta would have lost some 45% of its primary productivity (food potential). Each succeeding generation would have had a slightly harder job of supporting itself.

The obvious solution was to increase the takeup of farming. Farming is an extraordinarily efficient invention for maximising the amount of food you can get from a given patch of land. Making the shift would have been easy over a few generations – the inhabitants of the delta were in frequent contact with other societies that were farming wheat, barley, pigs and cattle, and they could have simply copied.

This is exactly what we see in the archaeological record. When we analyse what people were eating in this area between 4000-3000 BC it appears that in the swampy landscapes the inhabitants of the delta fished for their food. In the later landscapes they kept pigs and grew more crops. We can even calculate that this shift would have produced a food surplus.

So it does appear that the landscape changes may have facilitated the inhabitants of the delta farming more through the fourth millennium BC.

But what was special about this? Plenty of societies have taken up farming in a big way over the last ten thousand years, yet “civilisations” did not emerge everywhere.

Perhaps the answer has something to do with the vast size of the Nile Delta, coupled with what was happening upstream. The agricultural potential of the delta was at least 40% larger than the whole of the rest of Egypt (which by this time was a collection of rival “proto-kingdoms”). Any of the local upstream leaders who wanted control over their rivals would have realised that the economic key to power lay in controlling the vast output of the newly agricultural, highly fertile delta, just downstream. The delta’s economic surplus ultimately needed to be brought into the network of a new territorial “state” structure.

Once again, this is what we see in the archaeological record. In a short space of time, around 3100 BC, the delta’s surplus was brought under control of the world’s first “nation state” – perhaps even set up in part for that purpose. Early hieroglyphics from this time record transactions into and out of the state treasury, while the “capital” and royal court were set up at the obvious place – near modern-day Cairo – binding the agricultural powerhouse of the delta with the older centres of culture upstream.


So it seems that the natural landscape changes in the Nile Delta may have not only helped stimulate local take up of farming technologies, but might also have played a role in the emergence of the first “nation state”. Broadly similar parallels can be tantalisingly drawn up for Mesopotamia and North China – areas with similar geographies, landscape histories, shifts away from fishing and towards farming, and socio-cultural trends.

Whether such trends are evident in these other settings requires more detailed study. But in doing this we must remember not only to focus on the archaeological record of sites and settlements, but also to look at the changing landscapes. History is not complete without geography. There are ultimately no actors without a stage, and when the stage changes, actors may behave differently.The Conversation

Benjamin T Pennington, Visiting Fellow in Geoarchaeology, University of Southampton

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Trees, the ancient Macedonians, and the world’s first environmental disaster

Anthony Dosseto, University of Wollongong and Alex Francke, University of Wollongong

It’s a simple enough equation: good soil is the key to good food. And good soil starts with trees.

Alexander the Great conquered a vast empire that extended from Greece all the way to India. However, his ancestors’ fortune was a mixed bag. A new series of studies show the ancient Macedonians may have been struck by one of the earliest environmental disasters linked to human activity.

Ancient sediment records sealed in lakes for thousands of years reveals how logging may have affected erosion, which ultimately destroyed the capacity of the ancient Macedonians to grow food.

Read more:
Soil is the key to our planet’s history (and future)

More trees, on the other hand, appears to have made soil erosion less susceptible to climate change. The lessons for modern people – and our future prosperity – are clear.

Soil is a kingmaker

Something wonderful happens when rocks, formed in the guts of the Earth, come into contact with air and water: they break down into clays (and other things) to form soils. Because of their ability to store water and nutrients, soils are the food basket of land plants and all the animals that feed on them, including us.

Preserving soil has been the key for success to all past civilisations. Those who lost it would rapidly be precipitated into oblivion. This happened everywhere: the Middle East, Greece, Rome and Mesamerica.

Preserving our soil should therefore be at the centre of our concerns (although it rarely gets a look-in on the nightly news).

Erosion isn’t just a problem because the land loses soil. This soil enters waterways, increasing the sediment load of rivers. This high sediment load harms freshwater and coastal ecosystems, including fish population and, ultimately, us. We therefore need to better understand how climate change and humans shape soil erosion.

Macedonian timber and the first environmental disaster

The chemistry of sediments deposited on lake’s bottom records how the environment changed over hundreds and thousands of years. Recently, we have studied sediments from Lake Dojran, straddling the border between Northern Macedonia and Greece. We looked at the past 12,000 years of sediment archive and found about 3,500 years ago, a massive erosion event happened.

Read more:
500 years of drought and flood: trees and corals reveal Australia’s climate history

Pollen trapped in the lake’s sediment suggests this is linked to deforestation and the introduction of agriculture in the region. Macedonian timber was highly praised for ship building at the time, which could explain the extent of deforestation.

A massive erosion event would have catastrophic consequences for agriculture and pasture. Interestingly, this event is followed by the onset of the so-called Greek “Dark Ages” (3,100 to 2,850 years ago) and the demise of the highly sophisticated Bronze Age Mycenaean civilisation.

Further to the west, at the crossroads between Albania and Norther Macedonia, Lake Ohrid holds a much longer storyline: an international scientific drilling program is uncovering the past million year of climate and environmental stories locked in Lake Ohrid sediments.

We recently looked at Lake Ohrid on a more modest time scale, similar to the Lake Dojran project: the past 16,000 years.

At Lake Ohrid, there are also signs of increased soil erosion around 4,000 years ago. These results are consistent with previous suggestions of a human role on soil erosion at other lakes in Greece.

Overall, there are clear signs that deforestation and the development of agriculture precedes the Greek “Dark Ages”. While the causal link cannot be established with certainty, this timeline could represent the first negative feedback loop where humans depleted environmental resources, which in turn harmed communities.

Trees can make soil less sensitive to climate change

Lake Ohrid tells us another interesting story: until 8,000 years ago, soil erosion was closely following climate change. During dry and cold periods, erosion was shallow, probably as a consequence of dry conditions; while during warmer periods, higher levels of erosion delivered more sediment to the lake.

Around 8,000 years ago, something interesting happens: trees become the dominant type of vegetation cover. While trees were already abundant in previous warm periods (and less during cold periods), from 8,000 years ago onwards, they overwhelm the type of pollen that fell into the lake and became trapped in the sediment.

Read more:
Forest soil needs decades or centuries to recover from fires and logging

This tree dominance has an important consequence for soil erosion: after 8,000 years ago, soil erosion became shallow and remained so, even while the climate continued to oscillate. We can see soil erosion became less sensitive to climatic fluctuations.

We already knew that trees, thanks to their deep roots, help stabilise soil and prevent its loss; what we learn here is that over a certain threshold of tree cover, they also make soil erosion much less sensitive to climate change.

Lake Ohrid provides us with an important lesson, especially as we are increasingly concerned with how our soil and water resources will be affected by global warming. If we want to preserve our soils and rivers (and feed our communities) we need to ensure that enough of our landscape is covered with trees.

Planting trees and forest management should not be a concern for nature enthusiasts only, but for all us – regardless of political inclination – who enjoy eating. Understanding the past is not simply about learning from our ancestors’ mistakes so we do not repeat them, but freeing ourselves from their grip so new paths unfold ahead of us.The Conversation

Anthony Dosseto, Associate Professor, University of Wollongong and Alex Francke, Research Fellow, University of Wollongong

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

FDR’s forest army: How the New Deal helped seed the modern environmental movement 85 years ago

File 20180328 109199 ksb44t.jpg?ixlib=rb 1.1
Bridge built by CCC workers, Shady Lake Recreation Area, Arkansas.
Jerry Turner, CC BY-SA

Benjamin Alexander, City University of New York

Eighty-five years ago, on April 5, 1933, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed an executive order allocating US$10 million for “Emergency Conservation Work.” This step launched one of the New Deal’s signature relief programs: the Civilian Conservation Corps, or CCC. Its mission was to put unemployed Americans to work improving the nation’s natural resources, especially forests and public parks.

Today, when Americans talk about “big government,” the connotation is almost always negative. But as I show in my history of the Corps, this agency infused money into the economy at a time when it was urgently needed, and its work had lasting value.

Corps workers planted trees, built dams and preserved historic battlefields. They left trail networks and lodges in state and national parks that are still widely used today. The CCC taught useful skills to thousands of unemployed young men, and inspired later generations to get outside and help conserve America’s public lands.

CCC recruits at work in Great Smoky Mountain National Park, 1936.

The spiritual value of outdoor work

Roosevelt had sketched out much of his concept for the CCC well before his inauguration on March 4, 1933. Proposing the corps on March 21, he asserted that it would be “of definite, practical value” to the nation and the men it enrolled:

“The overwhelming majority of unemployed Americans, who are now walking the streets and receiving private or public relief, would infinitely prefer to work. We can take a vast army of these unemployed out into healthful surroundings. We can eliminate to some extent at least the threat that enforced idleness brings to spiritual and moral stability.”

Congress enacted the bill on March 31, and Roosevelt signed it that day. Although there was no precedent for such a vast mobilization, enrollment started a week later in New York, Baltimore, Washington, D.C., Pittsburgh and other major cities, then fanned out across the country. By midsummer, some 250,000 men aged 18 to 25 had signed up. Their six-month term might be spent at one camp or several; it might be located across the continent or, rarely, just across town.

Poster by Albert M. Bender, Illinois WPA Art Project, Chicago, 1935.
Library of Congress

Another day, another dollar

CCC recruits came from families on relief. Agents from local welfare offices screened prospects, then passed them along to the Army for a physical examination and a final decision. The Army also managed the huge task of transporting successful applicants to hundreds of work camps. The corps established operations in all 48 states and the territories of Puerto Rico, Alaska, Hawaii and the Virgin Islands, as well as a separate American Indian division.

Most enrollees were young unmarried men, but the CCC also created special companies of war veterans. This policy was Roosevelt’s response to the 1932 Bonus March, in which thousands of World War I veterans camped out in Washington, D.C., demanding early payment on promised military service bonuses, only to be evicted at gunpoint by order of then-president Herbert Hoover. (Some scholars believe this debacle helped clinch Roosevelt’s election later that year.)

CCC recruits could only bring a single trunk; tools were provided on-site. Many Corps members packed musical instruments, and some brought their dogs, which became company mascots. At the start many recruits slept in tents and bathed in nearby rivers. Those without experience in the great outdoors learned key lessons fast, such as how to avoid using poison ivy for toilet paper. Some succumbed to homesickness and dropped out, but most adjusted, forming baseball teams, music combos and boxing leagues.

Although the CCC was a civilian organization, the camps were run by the Army and bore some of its hallmarks. Dining facilities were called mess halls, beds had to be made tightly enough to bounce a quarter off them, and workers woke to the sound of reveille and went to sleep with taps. Commanding officers had final say over most issues.

At work sites, the Agriculture and Interior departments – custodians of U.S. public lands – were in charge. CCC members planted 3 billion trees, earning the nickname “Roosevelt’s tree army.” This work revitalized U.S. national forests and created shelter belts across the Great Plains to reduce the risk of dust storms. The corps also surveyed and treated forests to control insect pests and created forest fire prevention systems. Over its decade of operation, 42 enrollees and five supervisors died fighting forest fires.

Major planting areas for the Shelterbelt Project, 1933-42.
U.S. Forest Service

Corps members created and landscaped 711 state parks, and built lodges and hiking trails in dozens of national parks and monument areas. Many of these facilities are still in use today. Attractions including the Grand Canyon, Grand Teton and Yellowstone National Parks, and Civil War battlefields at Gettysburg and Shiloh bear signatures of CCC work.

For their labors, corps members received $30 a month – but as a condition of enrollment, the CCC sent $22 to $25 each pay period home to their families. Still, at Depression prices, $5 was enough to visit nearby dance halls and meet girls once or twice a week. These forays sometimes ended in fights with jealous local men, but also led to many lifelong marriages.

Ripple effects

In total, close to 3 million workers and their families received support from the CCC between 1933 and 1942. The corps also provided jobs for well over 250,000 salaried employees, including reserve military officers who ran the camps and so-called “local experienced men” – unemployed foresters who lived near the camps and were hired mainly to help supervise enrollees on the job.

Camps also hired unemployed teachers to offer informal evening classes. Some 57,000 enrollees learned to read and write during their CCC stints. Camps offered many other classes, from standard subjects like history and arithmetic to vocational skills such as radio, carpentry and auto repair.

Like other New Deal programs, the CCC had flaws. Party patronage heavily influenced hiring of salaried personnel. Although the law creating the CCC banned racial discrimination, black enrollment was capped. Many African-American enrollees were housed in “colored camps” and could only go into town for recreation and romance if black communities existed to serve them.

A racially mixed CCC Company in Pineland, Texas in 1933, with African-American members grouped at far right.
University of North Texas Libraries., CC BY-ND

The CCC also discriminated socially, enrolling young men with families but excluding rootless transients who wandered from town to town in search of work and food. These men could have reaped great benefits from the CCC, but its leaders imagined an unbridgeable cultural gap between young men who came from families and others who came from the byroads. And the corps only enrolled men, although Eleanor Roosevelt convinced her husband to let her and Labor Secretary Frances Perkins organize a smaller network of “She-She-She” camps for jobless women.

Congress terminated funding for the CCC in 1942, after the United States entered World War II, although Roosevelt argued that it still played an essential role. Many men who had gained physical strength and learned to handle Army discipline in the CCC later entered the armed forces.

The tree army’s legacy

Beyond its physical impact, the corps helped to broaden public support for conservation. In the 1940s and 1950s, youth groups such as the Oregon-based Green Guards volunteered in local forests clearing flammable underbrush, cutting fire breaks and serving as fire lookouts. Others, such as the Student Conservation Association, advocated for wilderness protection and conservation education. Hundreds of former CCC enrollees helped lead these efforts. Today many teenagers work in national parks, forests and wildlife refuges every summer.

The ConversationAlthough it is hard to picture a CCC-style initiative winning political support today, some of its ideas still resonate. Notably, the Obama administration’s economic stimulus plan and some proposals for upgrading U.S. infrastructure present federal spending on projects that benefit society as a legitimate way to stimulate economic growth. The CCC combined that strategy with the idea that America’s natural resources should be protected so that everyone could enjoy them.

Benjamin Alexander, Lecturer in social science, New York City College of Technology, City University of New York

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

%d bloggers like this: