OnceAgainfromtheBeginning:TheRoleofHistoricalInquiryintheAnthropocene

CamilaPuigIbarraDepartmentofHistory,BarnardCollege

ProfessorJoséMoyaApril19th,2017

2

TableofContents

Acknowledgements........................................................................................................................3

Introduction...................................................................................................................................4

Chapter1:ExpandingtheTemporalLimitsofHistory..................................................................10

Chapter2:FromtheNeolithicRevolutiontotheIndustrialRevolution......................................22

Chapter3:TowardstheAnthropocene........................................................................................35

Conclusion....................................................................................................................................44

Bibliography.................................................................................................................................48

3

AcknowledgementsFirstofall,Iowethemostthankstomyparents,withoutwhomIwouldnothavemy

educationand,thus,Iwouldhavenotbeenabletodothisproject(historicalcausation!).Manypeoplesupportedmethroughoutthisyear.IespeciallywanttothankmyadviserJoséMoyawhopatientlyandexcitinglytalkedmethroughhowtobestwriteahistoryofallknowntimeandShannonO’NeillintheBarnardArchiveswhoassuredmethatthereisnosuchthingastoomuchambition.ThankyoutoProfessorLisaTiersten,whosegoodhumorandinvaluableadvisinghasmadebecomingaHistorymajorthatmuchmoreenjoyable.IalsowanttothanktheTowFoundationforgrantingmeafellowshiptopursuemyresearch.

Finally,IwanttothanktheBarnardstudentswhohavetaughtmeresilience.Among

manyotheraccomplishments,studentsonthiscampushavewonfossilfueldivestmentand$15hourwages,joinedthefightforafaircontractforadjunctfaculty,producedoriginalscholarship,andcontinuedbeanactivevoiceonbehalfofthePalestinianpeople.

4

Introduction

Scholars,scientists,andpeopleacrosstheglobeagreethatclimatechangeisanissueof

unprecedenteddangerthatneedstobeapproachedfromaninterdisciplinaryviewpoint.

However,historianshavehadadifficulttimediscussingitbecauseitdoesnothaveaclearend

andbeginningorbecausehistorianshavenotovercome“thedifficultiesofcraftingnarrativesin

theabsenceofanyclearmomentsofclosure.”1Whatmanyscholars–fromphilosophersto

biologists–haveattemptedtoansweriswhyhumans,unlikeanyotheranimal,canreproduce

beyondthenaturalcarryingcapacityofspecificenvironmentsandoftheplanetasawhole.

Thereisnot–andmightneverbe–adefinitiveanswertothatquery,so,ashistorians,we

struggletofindourplaceintheconversation.Post-colonialhistorian,DipeshChakrabarty

arguesforanewtypeofhistory:aspecieshistory.Hesuggeststhatabrandnew

epistemologicalframeworkthatcombineshumanandnaturalhistorybutismorethanthesum

ofitspartsisnecessarytobridge“thedistinctionbetweenhumanandnaturalhistories—much

ofwhichhadbeenpreservedeveninenvironmentalhistoriesthatsawthetwoentitiesin

interaction,”which“hasbeguntocollapse.”2

Ourdistinctspecies,HomoSapiens,haswalkedontheEarthforabouttwohundred

thousandyearsofourplanet’sfourandahalfbillion-yearhistory.Formuchofthattime,our

specieshadtoadapttotheenvironmentforsurvival.Naturewasahumblingforcewithharsh

weathers,punishinglandscapes,fiercecreaturesstrongerthanus,andconstantbalancing

checks,whichcontinuouslyadjustedourmeansofsubsistence.Thisnaturalstruggleisnot

1ClaireBondPotterandReneeCRomano,DoingRecentHistory:OnPrivacy,Copyright,VideoGames,InstitutionalReviewBoards,ActivistScholarship,andHistoryThatTalksBack,(Athens:UniversityofGeorgiaPress,2012)5

2DipeshChakrabarty,“TheClimateofHistory:FourTheses.”CriticalInquiry35(2009):207

5

singulartothisspecies;ourexistencewithinanddependenceuponbioticcommunitiesiswhat

signalstotheneedtounderstandhumaneventswithinthecontextofaworldecosystem.3

Eventually,millenniaafter,thehumanspeciesbegantorebelagainsttheforcesofnature

throughflexibility,cooperation,resourcefulness.Thehumanspeciesisdistinguishedbyaseries

ofprocessesincludingthecaptureoffire,craftingoftools,conqueringoflandandlanguage,

collectivelearning,andremarkablepopulationgrowth.

Bothscientificandnon-scientificevidencesuggeststhatdefinitelybytheendofthis

century,possiblybytheendofthisdecade,thehistoryofplanetEarthwillbedrastically

rewritten.Humanbeings,throughamixtureofpioneeringtechnologies,fossilfueluse,mass

agriculturalproduction,andunabatedpopulationgrowthhavebecomethesingledominant

forceofchangeontheplanet;anunprecedentedfeatforasinglespecies.

Byoutlininghowthehumanspecieshascometobeanunprecedentedgeologicalforce,

probablythreateningthespeciesitself,Idonotwanttosuggestthattheidealistoreturnto

pre-industrial,orevenpre-agriculturaltimes,thereforepossiblyfallingwithintheintellectual

trapsofwhatWilliamDenevancallsthe‘PristineMyth,’whichromanticizesapre-colonialworld

ofnatural,‘virgin,’landscapesuntouchedbyhumans.4Instead,theintentionistofinda

frameworkthroughwhichthefieldofhistorycanbeausefultooltounderstandthecurrent

momentofaclimatecrisisandtheseeminglyunrulypathtowardsenvironmentaldegradation.

3J.DonaldHughes,AnEnvironmentalHistoryoftheWorld:Humankind’schangingroleinthe

communityoflife,(NewYork:Routledge,2001),64WilliamM.Denevan,“ThePristineMyth:TheLandscapeoftheAmericasin1492,”Annalsof

theAssociationofAmericanGeographers,82(1992):369

6

Therearetwofieldsofhistoricalstudythatconsiderenvironmentalandscientific

knowledgeessentialtounderstandinghumanhistory,andoftenchallengehistoricalnarratives

likeeconomicandpoliticalhistoriesthatplacenatureandtheenvironmentassecondaryto

humanagency.Philosopherandenvironmentalist,AldoLeopoldwrotein1935:

Oneoftheanomaliesofmodernecolog[icalthought]isthatitisthecreationoftwogroups,eachofwhichseemsbarelyawareoftheexistenceoftheother.Theonestudiesthehumancommunity,almostasifitwereaseparateentity,andcallsitsfindingssociology,economicsandhistory.Theotherstudiestheplantandanimalcommunityandcomfortablyrelegatesthehodgepodgeofpoliticsto“theliberalarts.”Theinevitablefusionofthesetwolinesofthoughtwill,perhapsconstitutetheoutstandingadvanceofthepresentcentury.5

Combiningthetraditionsofenvironmentalhistoryandbighistorytooutlinehowthehuman

specieshasreachedthecurrentmomentofunprecedented,human-inducedchangesinthe

climate,Iwilllookathowscholars,fromarangeofdisciplines,haveconsideredkeymomentsin

timeasaturningpointforourspecies.

Traditionally,historianshaveself-classifiedintermsofnation-states,ahistorianof

Mexico,France,Indiaetc.Thisclassificationhasimportancebecauseoflanguage,continuity,

andsimplicity.Usually,archivesareorganizedbynationalgovernmentsororganizationsthat

havedocumentsthatpertaintothelocationwheretheyare.Forenvironmentalandbighistory,

suchaclassificationfitspoorlygiventhatthenaturalphenomenaunderstudydonotbehave

accordingtopoliticalborders.Environmentalhistory,asaself-conscioustermwithinthefieldof

history,cameaboutinthe1970s,butithasintellectualrootsdatingmuchfartherinthepast.

AnexampleistheEpicofGilgameshatextdealingthecuttingofcedarforestsintheLevantand

5AldoLeopold,“Wilderness,”LeopoldPapers10-6,16,1935.QuotedinCurtMeine,Aldo

Leopold:HisLifeandWork,(Madison:UniversityofWisconsinPress,1988)359-60

7

oneofthefirsttextsaboutenvironmentalchangegeneratedbyhumanaction.6Beforethefield

ofenvironmentalhistoryassuch,scholarshavelookedtotheenvironmenttobetter

understandhumanbehaviorinworkssuchasthatofIbnKhaldun,aNorthAfricanArab

historian(1332-1406),Montesquieu,aFrenchEnlightenmentphilosopher(1689-1755),and

GeorgePerkinsMarsh,anAmericanphilologistandpioneerenvironmentalist(1801-1882)

whose1864bookManandNaturesetthebasisformuchofAmericanenvironmentalism.7

TheworkoftheAnnalesschooland,mostnotably,Braudel,includedhistoriesof

medievalEuropethatconsideredthegeographyandenvironmentoftheMediterraneanas

essentialtotheirtexts.Theenvironmentalaspectthatthesescholarswerefocusedonwasnot

thehumaneffectontheenvironmentbutamoregeographicalunderstandingoftheregion

wheretheywouldwriteessentialtextsonharvestsandepidemics.

ForsomecontemporaryhistorianslikeA.T.GroveandOliverRackham,thatshouldbe

thepurposeofenvironmentalhistory:tofocusonclimate,geologyandgeomorphology,not

livingthings.8Others,maintainthatthefocusofenvironmentalhistoryshouldbe,asJ.R.

McNeilldefinesit,“thehistoryoftherelationshipbetweenhumansocietiesandtherestof

natureonwhichtheydepend.”9

Thestudyof‘bighistory’arguesthatthedisciplineofhistoryismarkedbyalimitedview

oftimethatlargelyfocusesonthemostrecentcenturiesandignoresamorecomprehensive

viewofdeeptime.HistorianDavidChristianfirstusedthephrase‘bighistory’inthe1980s

6FiSandars,N.K.1972.TheepicofGilgamesh.Harmondsworth:Penguin.7GeorgePerkinsMarsh,ManandNature;or,PhysicalGeographyasModifiedbyHumanAction,

London:Low,1864,6028JDonaldHughes,Threedimensionsofenvironmentalhistory,9J.R.McNeill,“TheStateoftheFieldofEnvironmentalHistory,”inAnnualReviewof

EnvironmentandResources,Vol.35:345-374

8

whileteachingacourseatMacquarieUniversitythatbroughtacademicsfromastronomyto

historytospeakaboutanall-encompassingpast.10Thisbeganarevolutioninhistoricalthinking

inwhich,ashistorianFredSpierputsit,“humanhistoryisplacedagainstthebackgroundofa

coherentoverviewoftheentireknownpast,fromthebeginningoftheuniversetolifeonEarth

today.”11Theideaofbighistorycomesfromacriticismofthetraditionofthehistoricalfield.

Itisthroughthosecriticismsandtheirresultingscholarlyoutcomesthatwebegintofind

thenecessaryexpansionsofthehistoricalfield,whichallowforabroader,morethorough

understandingofthehumanrelationshiptonaturethatunderenoughscrutinycanpotentially

leadusclosertoanexplanationofhow–andwhy–wehavelefttheHoloceneepochand

transitionedtotheAnthropoceneepochandaneraofclimaticuncertainty.

InthefirstchapterofthispaperIfocusonthatexpansion;historyhaslargelybeena

historyofliterarysocietiesandalthoughattemptsaremadetoexpandthesubjectsconsidered

withinthehistoricalfield,fewerattemptshavebeenmadetoexpandthetemporallimitsof

historicalstudy.Bothbighistoryandenvironmentalhistoryprovethenecessitytoconsider

whatiscommonlyreferredtoasprehistory.Inthesecondchapter,FromtheNeolithic

RevolutiontotheIndustrialRevolution,Izoomintothetransformationsinhumansocietythat

manyconsidertohavebeenflashpointsofchangeinthehuman/naturerelationship.The

adoptionofintensivefarminggloballyhashadundeniableconsequencesonhowpeople

understandthelandaroundthem,howtheytreatit,andhowtheyorganizetheirsocieties.The

IndustrialRevolutionisathresholdmomentwhenhumansharnessedfossilfuelsforenergy

10FredSpier,BigHistoryandtheFutureofHumanity,(Chichester,U.K.:Wiley-Blackwell,2010),111FredSpier,"BigHistory:TheEmergenceofanInterdisciplinaryScience?,"WorldHistory

ConnectedOctober2009<http://worldhistoryconnected.press.illinois.edu/6.3/spier.html>(9Mar.2017)

9

productionandforever-alteredthehumanimpactonatmospherictemperatures.Ingeological

records,thisisanessentialmomentofchange.Therefore,thetimebetweenthesetwo

revolutionsisessentialbecausetherateofprogressanddevelopmentinbothtechnologicaland

intellectualwayswasneverbeforeseen.Finally,inthechapterTowardstheAnthropocene,I

discusstheevolutionofhumanbehaviorwhichhasturnedourspeciesintonolongerjust

biologicalagentsbutintoageologicalforcecapableofdrasticallytransformingthebiological

processesoftheplanetaryecosystem.ScholarlydebatesonwhattheAnthropoceneisand

whenitstartedinformthisprojectbecausetheyreflectdifferentviewstowhenpeoplebegan

havingradicaleffectsonthenaturalworld.Iwanttoargue,inthechapterandthroughoutthis

work,thattheveryevolutionofourspeciesmanifestsaspecificrelationshipbetweenhumans

andtheirsurroundingenvironmentwhichthefieldofhistoryhasthetoolstouncoverbut

needstoexpandortranscendbothitstemporalanddisciplinarylimits.Theargumentisnot

deterministic,thatclimatechangeisinherenttoourevolution,but,instead,thathistorical

inquiryintoourspecieshistorycanaddlayersofevidencetoscientificstudyandcommunicate

ahistoryofclimatechangethatcanoffernewwaysofthinkingaboutthefuture.

10

Chapter1:ExpandingtheTemporalLimitsofHistory

“Notonlydoesprehistoryextendwrittenhistorybackwards,itcarriesonnaturalhistoryforwards.”12

Thehistoricalfieldgoesthroughsimilartransformationstotheonesitobserves,

documents,andtells.Historicalknowledgeismadeupofpackedlayersthatcanbeobserved

individuallybutcannotexistwithoutoneanother.Atthebottomisthestudyofwhatiscalled

deeptime,ortheearliestperiodwhichadisciplineconsiders.Paleoanthropology,forexample,

defineshowarchaeologistsandevolutionarybiologistsobservethesocietiesofthePaleolithic.

Thesedisciplinesfocusondevelopmentslikestonetoolstounderstandthesepasttimesfor

whichdocuments,whichconventionalhistorylargelyrelieson,arenotavailable.Thedeep

timeofhistoriansiscommonlyrelatedtothebeginningofwriting,oftenintheso-calledFertile

CrescentbetweenMesopotamiaandtheNiledelta.13Althoughancientcivilizationsandthe

archeologistunderstandingofdeeptimestandwidelyapartintime,theyprovidethebedrock

onwhichthedisciplinesbasetheirnarratives.

Forhistorians,thearcheologicalorevolutionarybiologicalviewisconsidered

prehistory—beforehistory.HistorianMottGreeneobservesthatdespitecontemporary

transformationsinthehistoricalfield,thetermprehistoryhasproveddifficulttoletgoof;“to

abandonprehistory,wouldbetopostulatecontinuitybetweenthebiologicaldescentof

hominidsandthe‘ascentofcivilization’oftheabstract‘mankind’ofhumanistichistorical

12VGordonChilde,ManMakesHimself,(London,UK:Watts&Co,1936),913Shryock,Andrew,andSmail,DanielLord,DeepHistory:TheArchitectureofPastandPresent,

(Berkeley,US:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,2011)

11

writing.Prehistoryisabufferzone.”14ProminentprehistoryscholarVGordonChildearguesfor

theimportanceofprehistoryasa“bridgebetweenhumanhistoryandthenaturalsciencesof

zoology,paleontology,andgeology,”andurgesthehistoricalfieldtoovercomethetendencyto

underrate“prehistoricrevolutions,”becausewelackwrittenevidenceorbecausethe

epistemologicalchallengeofnarratingthedeeppastgivestheimpressionthat“theireffects

haveceasedtooppressusindividually.”15Abovethisbedrockwefindthestudyofcomplex

societies.Here,historiansbegintotrace“earlymodern”societies.Aviewofhowsocieties

begantointeract,move,andconquer.Thishistoryisthesupportforahistorynotmorethana

fewcenturiesinthepastmarkedbythegreatshifttopostcolonialmodernity.Itisastudyof

war,empire,politicization,andeconomicdevelopmentthatisconsideredthemostrelevant

historicalknowledge.16

When,in1859,CharlesDarwinpublishedOntheOriginofSpecies,hesparkeda

revolutionthatproblematizedtheunderstandingofhumanorigin.Likewise,philosopherGeorg

WilliamFriedrichHegel,viewedhumanhistoryasatrajectoryofhardwonprogress,through

whichhumansleftastateofnatureintooneofpoliticalactivityandawareness.Itrequireda

transformationofhumanoriginfromabrandofspeculativebutbiblicalphilosophytoascience-

basedenquiry.AnewhistoryusedtheviewofprogresscreatedduringtheEnlightenment,in

whichhumanoriginandtheriseofcivilizationismarkedbyatriumphofmanovernature.This

newtraditionrejectedthetimelineofcreationbutmaintainedhumanexceptionalism.Asa

14MottGreenequotedin,DavidChristianandWilliamHMcNeil,CaliforniaWorldHistory

Library:MapsofTime:AnIntroductiontoBigHistory,(Berkeley,US:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,2004),18

15Childe,ManMakesHimself,916DavidChristianandWilliamHMcNeil,CaliforniaWorldHistoryLibrary:MapsofTime:An

IntroductiontoBigHistory,35

12

historianoftheearlytwentiethcenturyexplained,thisnewhistoricalnarrativedescribes“the

processbywhichthechaoticchatterofanthropoidapeshasbeenorganizedinthewonderful

fabricofhumanspeech.”Itoffersapanoramicvisionofman“ineverystageofhislongclimbup

fromhisfeebleandbrutishbeginning.”17Thereligiousaspectwasthereforereplacedbyanew

typeofexceptionalismthatwaspresentedthroughavocabularyofprogressand

modernization.Themetaphorsandlanguagethatpreviouslydescribedareligious,

chronologicallylimitedhistoryofhumanoriginwastransformedintoasecular,butalmost

equallyexceptionalstory.Asbighistoryproponentsexplainit,“theGardenofEdenbecamethe

irrigatedfieldsofMesopotamia,andthecreationofmanwasreconfiguredastheriseof

civilization.”18Thisnewperceptionofhumanhistoryhadatitscorethathumanshadovercome

thelimitsofnaturebecauseofagreatabilitytodominatetheirsurroundings,whichallowed

mantoprogressandbecomesocialized.

Thebiologicalandbehavioralsciencescouldadapttheframeworkrejectingcreationand

theideathathumansandnatureareatodds,assuming,rather,thathumansystemsarenatural

systems.Thiswasnotthecaseforthefieldsofhistoryandculturalanthropology,asthe

equationbetweenculturalandnaturalsystemsrequiredashiftinthehistoricizingthat

dominatednineteenthcenturywriting.Awritingthatcenteredhumanhistoryastheconquest

ofnatureandbirthofapoliticalsociety.RenownedFrenchhistorian,JulesMichelet,outlined

thenineteenthcenturylogicas:“Whentheworldwasborntherebeganawarthatwilllastuntil

theworld’send,andthisisthewarofmanagainstnature,ofthespiritagainsttheflesh,of

17GeorgeR.Coffman,“TheMedievalAcademyofAmerica:HistoricalBackgroundandProspect,”

SpeculumI,1929,5-1818DavidChristianandWilliamHMcNeil,CaliforniaWorldHistoryLibrary:MapsofTime:AnIntroductiontoBigHistory,(Berkeley,US:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,2004)

13

libertyagainstdeterminism.Historyisnothingbutthestoryofthisendlessconflict.”19Michelet,

in1843,pinpointedtherationaleofahomocentrichistorythatprevailsevenashistorianstryto

extendthetemporallimitsofthefield.

ThewarthatMicheletproposesissingulartohumanswho,unlikeotheranimals,donot

liveinharmonywithnature.Forearly-twentiethcenturythinkers,thiswarismarkedbythe

momenthumansmastertheabilitytoconquernature,becominganactiveagentandleaving

theprimitive,passivewaysofourancestorsbehind.Thislogicisseamlesslyexplainedthrougha

1912workcalledTheConquestofNature,“barbaricmaniscalledachildofNaturewithfull

reason.HemustacceptwhatNatureoffers.Butcivilizedmanisthechildgrowntoadultstatue,

andableinamannertocontrol,todominate—ifyoupleasetoconquer—theparent.”20That

moment,inwhichthecivilizedmanconquersnatureandacquirespoliticalagency,iswherethe

studyofhumanhistoryisfocused.

Theculturalandsocietaltraumasandtransformationsofthetwentiethcentury;

includingtwoworldwars,thecollapseoftheEuropeancolonialorder,andthethreatofnuclear

devastation,createdascholarlydisillusionmentwithEnlightenmentandVictorian-styleideasof

socialevolutionism.Historians,amongotherscholars,weredisabusedwiththeseideologies

thathadbeenhistoricallyusedtojustifyracism,classprivilege,andglobalimperialism.The

movetocreateamoreholisticnarrativeofhumanhistorymeantexpandingthethemes,

subjects,andevidencethathistorydependson.Whilethisexpandedthesubjectsandthemeof

historicalstudybeyondthefocusonelitesandpowerrelationsconductedbymostlywhitemen

19JulesMichelet,IntroductionaL’histoireUniverselle,suividudiscoursd’ouverturepononcéala

facultédeslettresle9janvier1843.2nded.Paris:Hachette,1834,920HenrySmithWilliams,TheConquestofNature,(NewYork:Goodhue,1912),6

14

andtowardsthestudyofwomen,theworkingclass,immigrants,andothersubalternsubjects,

modernculturalhistorynarroweditstemporalfocusofstudy.Inanattempttodisassociate

withtheracistpastofhistoriesofsocialevolution,thestudyofhumanevolutionanddeeptime

washandedofftootherdisciplinesincludingarcheologists,paleontologists,andhistorical

linguists.

Thelimitsofthedisciplineofhistoryhavemadethehistorians’toolsinsufficientto

understandthecurrentclimatecrisis.21Althoughnotexclusivetothefieldofhistory,this

insufficiencyrequireshistorianstoconsideranewexpansiontoaprofoundlymultidisciplinary

approachandseriousconsiderationoftheimplicationsofdeeptime,trendsthathavebeen

separatelybeguntobeusedbythesubfieldsofenvironmentalandbighistory.Tobetter

understandwhatdistinguishesourspecies’relationshiptotheenvironmentsincedeeptime,

weneedtolooktothefieldsofpaleontology,linguistics,andarcheologyThetheoriesofthe

geographicalbeginningsofhumansarelargelyinfluencedbythefactsthattheearliesthominid

fossilshavebeenfoundonlyineastandsouthAfricaandthatgeneticandlinguisticresearch

coincidesinplacingthegenesisofbothhominidsandHomosapiensinthisregionoftheplanet.

Theevidencepointstoanoriginstorythatislargelyacceptedaboutwhereourspecies

originatedandhowitspread,butthisscholarlyconsensuswasnotreachedseamlesslyandis

notindefinite.Thenecessaryevidencetouncovertheoriginsandearliestdevelopmentsofthe

humanspeciesisscantandscarcelyspreadacrosstheEarth.Interpretationisbasedon

fossilizedbonesthatarerarelybiggerthanatoothorpoorlypreservedsymbols.Thus,

21Chakrabarty,Dipesh.2012.“PostcolonialStudiesandtheChallengeofClimateChange.”New

LiteraryHistoryVol.43.

15

deductionsaredifficultandoftenresultinconflictbetweenexpertsthathavedifferent

explanationsaboutthemeaningofandrelationshipbetweenthedifferentbutfewremaining

indicatorsofhumanactivityindeeptime.

Agoodexampleoftheheatedcontroversiesthatresultfromthescantevidenceof

remainsisthedebatebetweenVillmoareetal22andHawksetal23abouttherecentdiscoveryof

afossilmandibleandteethintheAfarregionofEthiopia.Agroupofresearchersaffiliatedwith

ArizonaStateUniversity,Villmoareetal,foundthisfossilandafterthoroughanalysisconcluded

thattheremainslikelywerefromaHomospeciesandtheydatedthefossilto2.80-2.75ma,24

whichisextremelyimportantbecauseit“extendsthefossilrecordofHomobackintimea

further0.4millionyears.”25Astheauthorsrightlystate,thisconclusionhassignificant

consequencesonhypothesesabouttheoriginsoftheHomo.Thispaperreceivedalotof

attentionaspeoplefromvaryingdisciplinesconsideredtheimplicationsofthesefindingson

ourunderstandingoftheoriginofourspecies.Inadissentingresponse,Hawksetal,agroupof

expertsfromtheInstituteofHumanEvolutioninJohannesburg,SouthAfrica,arguedthat

Villmoareetalfailedtoconsiderandaccuratelyexperimentthepossibilitythatthemandible

belongedtospeciesknowntohaveexistedinthattimeperiodthatarenotofthegenusHomo.

Hawksetalarguethatthecharacteristicsoftheremainscouldbeattributedtoanumberof

otherspeciesandshouldnotbe“unequivocallyassignedtothegenusHomo,”since“atpresent

22B.Villmoareetal,“EarlyHomoat2.8MafromLedi-Geraru,Afar,Ethiopia,”Science347

(2015):1352–1355,accessedFebruary11,2017,doi:10.1126/science.aaa134323J.Hawksetal,“Commenton“EarlyHomoat2.8MafromLedi-Geraru,Afar,

Ethiopia,””Science348,(2015):1326,accessedFebruary11,2017,doi:10.1126/science.aab059124“Ma”isaunitoftimeusedindisciplinessuchasgeologyandpaleontologytorepresentonemillionyearsagofromthepresenttime.‘Ago’isusuallynotexplicitlyincludedbutitisimplied.

25Villmoareetal,“EarlyHomoat2.8MafromLedi-Geraru,Afar,Ethiopia,”1352

16

wecannotbecertainwhattherestofthedentition,skull,orskeletonofLD350-126mighthave

lookedlike.”27Inastronglywordedrebuttal,Hawksetalreaffirmedtheirfindingsthatthe

certaincharacteristicsoftheremainswereclearlynottraitsfoundinnon-Homospeciesthus

rendering“Hawksetal.’sobjectionstoourtaxonomicconclusionsregardingLD350-1logically

incoherent.”28Thisdebatepointstothedifficultyofdealingwithaneraofwhichlittleremains

andourlimitedcapacitytoenvisionatimesodrasticallydifferentfromours.

Thetoolswehavetogetclosertothoseanswers–archeology,anthropology,linguistics,

historyetc.–arethemselvesproductsofahistoryofknowledgeproductionthatdealspoorly

withdissent.Anexcellentexamplefromourpastwasthetensionbetweeneighteenthand

nineteenthcenturythinkersaboutthepossibilityofspeciesextinction,aconceptthatisnow

consideredafact.InTheEconomyofNature,thebotanistLinnaeus,whosesystemofspecies

classificationisstillusedtoday,outlinedtheperceptionthateveryspecieshasan“allotted

place”withinthechainofnatureandfunctionswithinthelargereconomyofnature.29This

belief,basedontheconceptofnaturaltheology–thestudyofthenaturalworldtounderstand

God’sworlddesign–waswidelyspreadandhadtheconsequencethatforgenerationstocome

thenaturewasseenasstaticsinceeverythinghadapurposeassignedbyGodhimself.This

influencedhowgreatthinkersofecologylikeThomasJeffersonwereunabletoconceptualize

26LD350-01isthetaxonomicclassificationofthefossilmandiblefragmentfoundintheAfarregionofEthiopia.

27Hawksetal,“Commenton“EarlyHomoat2.8MafromLedi-Geraru,Afar,Ethiopia,””132628Villmoareetal,"ResponsetoCommenton“EarlyHomoat2.8MafromLedi-Geraru,Afar,

Ethiopia”,"Science348,no.6241(2015):1326-1326,AccessedFebruary11,2017,doi:10.1126/science.aab1122

29Linnaeus,“TheOeconomyofNature,”inMiscellaneoustractsrelatingtonaturalhistory,husbandryandphysick:towhichisaddedtheCalendarofflorabyBenjaminStillingfleet,4thedition(London:1791),96

17

speciesextinction.Jeffersonspentdecadestryingtofindthe‘incognitum’basedonafossilhe

hadfound,hedescribedthisanimaltobesimilartoa“Mammoth,orbigbuffalo,”and

potentially“sixtimesthesizeofanelephant.”30Hisjourneytotrackdownthisanimalisan

exampleofhowreligiousfervorinearlynaturalistsdidnotpermitthemtounderstandthat,

“speciescouldnotgooutofexistenceorcomeintobeingwithoutfundamentallythreatening

thatnaturalorder.”31SimilarlytoDarwin’stheoryofevolutionandtheexampleoftheEthiopian

fossilizedmandible,whenselectthinkersbegantosurfacetheconceptofextinction,theywere

metwithharshcritiquesbecauseitradicallychallengedwidelyacceptedtruthsabouthuman

origin.

Intraditionalpursuitsofhistoricalknowledge,humanoriginisnotastartingpoint.

Instead,thefieldofhistorytendstofocusontheoriginsofspecificcivilizations,ideologies,or

behavioraltrends,notourwholespecies.Butliketraditionalhistory,tounderstandapointin

time,inthiscaseourspeciesorigin,wemustturntotheprocessesleadinguptothatspecific

point.Inbighistory,specificmomentsintimethatchangedfunctionsoftheEarthSystemare

calledthresholdmoments,andeachthresholdmomentcreatesanincreasedlevelof

complexity.32Forcomplexitytoemerge,theremustbeexactconditions,thisiswhatFredSpier

callsthe“GoldilocksPrinciple.”33Basedonthefamousfable,theGoldilockstheorymeansthat

eachnewformofcomplexityrequiresdifferentconditions,forexample,theconditions

30ThomasJefferson,NotesontheStateofVirginia,ed.WilliamPeden(ChapelHill:Universityof

NorthCarolinaPress,1955),4531MarkBarrow,"BonesofContentiontheAmericanIncognitumandtheDiscoveryof

Extinction,"inNature'sGhosts:ConfrontingExtinctionfromtheAgeofJeffersontotheAgeofEcology,(UniversityofChicagoPress,2009)ChicagoScholarshipOnline,2013.AccessedFebruary11,2017.doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226038155.003.0002,24

32Spier,BigHistoryandtheFutureofHumanity,4333Spier,BigHistoryandtheFutureofHumanity,43

18

necessaryfortheemergenceofhumansarenotthesamefortheformationofstars.TheBig

Historyargument,then,becomesthatwemustanalyzethe‘perfect’conditionsthatallowed

thedevelopmentoflifeonearthinordertounderstandwhyenvironmentalchangecanhave

irreversibleeffects.34

HomoerectusisconsideredthemostdirectancestorofthemodernspeciesHomo

sapienssapiens.35Fossilsofthisancestorspecieshavebeendatedto2-1.5Maandtheyinclude

characteristicsthat“foreshadowedthoseofmorerecentHomosapiensandincludedlarge,

linearbodies,elongatedlegs,largebrainsizes,reducedsexualdimorphism,increasedcarnivory,

anduniquelifehistorytraits(e.g.,extendedontogenyandlongevity)aswellastoolmakingand

increasedsocialcooperation.”36However,whatareseemingly‘humantraits,’likewalking

uprightcanbeseeninfossilsfromasfaras3.5MabuttheclassificationHomohasonlybeen

giventofossilsfromabout2.5-2.3Ma.WhatmakestheHomoerectusdifferent,andwhyitis

consideredtobeourspeciesmostdirectancestor,isthecalculatedbrainsize,whichislarger

thanotherspecieswiththegenusHomoandbasedoncranialfossilsfrom1.9and1.5Ma,

believedtobeintherangeof546to1067cm3(forcomparisontheHomosapienssapienshasa

brainsizeof1300cm3).37Fromtheavailablearcheologicalevidence,itisassumedthatthe

erectusemergedinAfricaandliveduntil200,000yearsago,whenwefindthefirstremainsofa

speciesthencalledHomosapiensand,subsequently,themoredevelopedskeletonsofthe

34Spier,BigHistoryandtheFutureofHumanity,6335"Homoerectus,"InTheAmericanHeritageStudentScienceDictionary,editedbyEditorsofthe

AmericanHeritageDictionaries,HoughtonMifflin,201436Ernst,Mayr,"Ontheconceptsandterminologyofverticalsubspeciesandspecies,"National

ResearchCouncilCommitteeonCommonProblemsofGenetics,Paleontology,andSystematicsBulletin,2(1944):11-16,12;SusanC.Antónetal,"EvolutionofearlyHomo:Anintegratedbiologicalperspective"Science345,no.6192(2014):1236828.

37Antónetal,"EvolutionofearlyHomo:Anintegratedbiologicalperspective,"Box1,1236828-2

19

Homosapienssapiens30,000yearsago.38Understandingthegeographicallocationsofthese

firstgroupsisdifficultgiventhattheymostlikelydependedonthegatheringofnuts,seeds,and

plantswithsomedeadanimalscavenging,whichhasnotleftsufficientecologicalevidenceto

suggestthatthesesmall,thinlyspreadgroupswereanywherebeyondhabitatsfrommodern

dayEthiopiatoSouthAfrica.HuntingandgatheringwasthewayoflifeforallgenusHomountil

around10,000BCEwiththeemergenceofagriculture.Expertshaveconcludedthatpeople

livedinsmallmobilegroupsthatpermittedthemflexibilityandcontinuedsubsistenceand

causinglittledamagetoecosystems.

Despitethisseemingasanevolutionarycontinuationoftheanimalkingdom,essential

mutationsoccurredduringtheformationofHomoSapienssapiens,makingthemdistinctfrom

otherprimatesandtheirabilitytointeractwiththeenvironmentunparalleled.Thesemutations

permittedthespeciestobeginspreadingacrossareas,beyondthetropicalAfricanhabitats

wheretheyfirstevolved,atratesthatbecameuniquelyhuman.Humans’abilitytosettleinthe

temperate,andevenartic,beltsoftheplanet,whichhadclimatesandenvironmentsmarkedly

differentfromthoseoftheirnativetropicalhabitats,differentiatesthemfromallother

primates.

Aseriesofspecifictraitsexplainthisphenomenon.Standinguprightwasthefirstto

evolve.Bipedalismenableourancestorstowalk,unlikeotherprimates,longdistances.Italso

freedtwoextremities,whichalongwiththeevolutionofopposablethumbs,enabled

toolmakingandthusaccesstothewiderrangeoffoodstuffsthatpermittedthe

disproportionategrowthofourbrains.Anunintendedbiologicalbyproductof

38LouisLeakeyetal,"ANewSpeciesoftheGenusHomoFromOlduvaiGorge,"Nature202

(1964):7

20

erectness/bipedalism(thenarrowingofthepelvicopeningoffemales)andofbiggerbrains

(biggerheads)combinedtoturnusintoanaltricialspecies,basicallyprematurefetalapes.39

Thisledtomostcranialdevelopmenthappeningoutsidethewomb,andthuswhile

experiencingtheoutsideworld,andtolonglonger-terminfantdependencymakingchildrearing

anincreasinglysocialprocess.40Thiscombinationexplainsourunmatchedcapacitytolearnand

transmitthatlearning,theemergenceofcomplexlanguage,symbolicandabstractthinking,

allomaternalcare,andhighlevelsofsocialcooperation.41

Theexactformofsocialorganizationoftheearliestpeopleshasnotbeendistinctively

deducedbutisinferredgiventhat,asoneofthefirstspecialistsofearlyhumanpopulations

GordonChildewrote,“acreaturesoweakandpoorlyendowedasmancouldnotinisolation

successfullyhuntthelargeorfierceanimalsthatquiteearlyprovidedanimportantiteminhis

diet.”42Next,istheabilitytocommunicatethroughspeechallowedcomplexityinsocial

organizationandsimplifiedthespreadofculturaladvances.Althoughitisnotclearwhen

speechfirstemergedgiventhatitcouldnotbepreserved,symbolsgiveagoodindicationof

whencommunicationmethodsstartedtobecomemorecomplex.Astotools,whileprimates

andotheranimalsdohavethecapacitytousethem,onlyhumanscreatethem.Archeologically,

tooluseandmakinghasbeentracedto2.58-2.0Ma.43

39LauraTobiasGrussandDanielSchmitt,“TheEvolutionoftheHumanPelvis:Changing

AdaptationstoBipedalism,ObstetricsandThermoregulation,”PhilosophicalTransactionsoftheRoyalSocietyB:BiologicalSciences370.1663(2015):20140063,PMC.Web.2Mar.2017,2

40GrussandSchmitt,“TheEvolutionoftheHumanPelvis:ChangingAdaptationstoBipedalism,ObstetricsandThermoregulation,”9

41Karin,IslerandCarelP.vanSchaik,"Allomaternalcare,lifehistoryandbrainsizeevolutioninmammals,"Journalofhumanevolution63,no.1(2012):52

42Childe,ManMakesHimself,5243Antónetal,"EvolutionofearlyHomo:Anintegratedbiologicalperspective,"1236828-8

21

Thecombinationofthesebiologicalevolutions(bipedalism,freedhands,bigbrains,

prematurebirth)andculturaltraits(language,abstractthought,toolmaking,systemsof

cooperation)allowedourspeciestohaveagreaterimpactontheplanetthatanyothereven

beforetheadventofagriculture.Itistruethatwestillmostlylived,likeallotheranimals,from

whatwasinnature.Butalreadywehadan“artificial”capacitytohunt,notwithclawsandtusk,

butwithflints,arrows,traps;tofishnotwithourhandsbutwithhooksandnets.Bycontrolling

fireandusingpeltsasclothing,wehadbeenabletomovebeyondourtropicalnaturalhabitats,

eventhoughwehadnotevolvedenoughbiologicallytodoso.Asaresult,bytheeveofthe

Neolithicrevolution,10-12thousandyearsago,ourprimaterelativeswerestillfewinnumbers

andlimitedtothetropicalbeltoftheplanet,mainlytoourcommonAfricancradle,butwehad

surpassedthefourmillionmarkandspreadtoallofEarth’scontinentsandlatitudes.

22

Chapter2:FromtheNeolithicRevolutiontotheIndustrialRevolution

Insofarasman’sphysiquewasconcerned,nothinghenceforthneededtobecomeafixedcommitmenttoacertainclimate.Whereasuntilthenmutationhadbeenthesourceofevolutionaryadaptation,afterthispointinventionhad

tofillitsplace.44

Thepracticesofhunting,gathering,andherdingwereprincipaltoascatteredhuman

populationformillenniabeforetheemergenceofnewandintensificationofothertechniques

toproducecropsanddomesticateanimals.Manyconsiderthetransitionoffoodproduction

thatoccurredinaspaceofafewthousandyearsintheMiddle-East,south-westAsia,China,

andMesoamerica,thedefinitiveflashpointofhumanhistory.Whatoccurredinthistransition,

nowreferredtoasthe‘NeolithicRevolution,’wasamixtureofhumanchoicesand

environmentaltriggersthatpermittedtheproductionofmuchlargerquantitiesoffoodin

smallerareasandtheemergenceofsettledandcomplexsocieties,enablingpopulationgrowth.

Unlikeothereventsthatarelabeledandstudiedasrevolutionsinhistory,thetimescaleofthis

‘revolution’isofafewthousandyears.Theradicaltransitionsthattookplacetoshifttheglobal

economyintoanagriculture-centeredonecanonlyviewedthroughalensofdeephistoryand

observingthechangesfromtheperceivedmomentthatpracticesbegantochangeincertain

places–notallatonce–about10,000yearsagooverthousandsofyears.Inaddition,totruly

understandhowtraditionsthathadbeenpracticedbymembersofthehumanspeciesforabout

2millionyearsshiftedtoanarguablylessenergyefficientandlessnutritioussystemoffood

44PhilipL.Wagner,“TheConceptofEnvironmentalDeterminisminCulturalEvolution,”in

OriginsofAgricultureed.CharlesA.Reed,(Berlin/Boston:DeGruyter,1977)AccessedMarch8,2017,ProQuestEbookCentral,60

23

production,theenvironmentalcontextisinseparable.45Thereisscholarlycontentionoverhow

muchclimaticandenvironmentalchangescatalyzedthetransitiongiventhatclimaticchanges

occurreddifferentlyinplacesacrosstheworldwhereintensivefoodproductionbeganto

emergeinsimilarways,butthereisaconsensusthatthosefactorsneedtobeconsidered.

Historicaltraditiondefinesarevolutionasaneventthathappenedsuddenly,sometimes

violently,andoftenasanoverthrowofpreviouspractices.Withthisinmind,‘Neolithic

Revolution’mightbetheincorrecttermforthisperiodbecauseitwasnotsuddenorcontained

anditwasn’tnecessarilyabreakwiththepast,distinguishinghunter-gatherersocietiesfrom

agriculturalones,butanintensificationofpracticesthatalreadyexploitedtheenvironmentfor

humanbenefit.Expertsinthestudyofdeeptimehavefoundevidencetosuggestthatsome

communitiesfromtheUpperPaleolithicpracticedsomeformsofcultivation,andbeganthe

processesofplantandanimaldomesticationcharacteristicofagriculturalcivilizations.What

occurredbetweenhumansandtheirenvironmentduringthisperiodhasbeensummarized

effectivelyby‘prehistory’archaeologistVGordonChildeinhis1936bookManMakesHimself,

ThroughoutthevasterasoftheIceAgesmanhadmadenofundamentalchangeinhisattitudetoexternalNature.Hehadremainedcontenttotakewhathecouldget,thoughhehadvastlyimprovedhismethodsofgettingandhadlearneddiscriminationinwhathetook.SoonaftertheendoftheIceAgeman’sattitude(orratherthatoffewcommunities)tohisenvironmentunderwentaradicalchangefraughtwithrevolutionaryconsequencesforthewholespecies.46

Therevolutionaryconsequencestookshapeasseveralphenomena;atransitiontoan

intensifiedagriculturethatmajorlyalterednaturalecosystems,thegrowthofsettledsocieties,

45CharlesA.Reed,OriginsofAgriculture,(Berlin/Boston:DeGruyter,1977)AccessedMarch8,

2017,ProQuestEbookCentral,88446Childe,ManMakesHimself,66

24

theemergenceofcitiesandcraftspecialization,andtheriseofpowerfulreligiousandpolitical

elites.

Revolutionsdonotoccurinisolation;theyaretheclimaxoflong,pre-existingprocesses

andwritteninhistoryinregardstotheircausesandconsequences.InthecaseoftheNeolithic

Revolution,muchscholarshiphascenteredaroundthespecificconditionsthatcreatedasingle

eventoftransitionfromhuntingandgatheringtoagriculture-basedfoodproduction,insteadof

observingthecombinationofsteps,humanandnon-human,intentionalandnot,thatallowed–

insomecasesforced–thetransition.Hunter-gathererpracticesdidnotaltertheenvironment

inthesamedrasticways,buttheydidinterferewithecosystemstobenefithumansinmanners

thatsetthestageforagriculturaltransformations.Withthetoolsandskillsthathadbecome

possiblebybiologicalevolution,theHomosapiensadoptedgatheringandhuntingpractices,

throughwhichfirewasusedtoclearground,certainplantsandanimalswerepreferredfor

consumption,andprimaryformsofcultivationwereused.Interveningwiththeenvironmentto

getfoodisnottheparticularityoftheNeolithic,itisabouttheintensificationofintervention.

Manyofthecustomsconsideredcharacteristicallyagriculturalhadbeenadoptedbydifferent

groupsspreadacrosstheglobeatsomepointortheotherbeforethestartofwhatisnow

consideredtheNeolithic.Consideringthatfoodproductioninhunter-gatherercommunitiesis

muchmorediversified,requireslessenergyoutputfrom,andthedietismuchmorenutritious,

thereisnothingtosuggestthatatransitiontoagriculturewaspreferable.47Instead,humans

foundawaytocreatemorefoodwithlessland.

47PeterJ.Richerson,RobertBoyd,andRobertL.Bettinger,"WasAgricultureImpossibleduring

thePleistocenebutMandatoryduringtheHolocene?AClimateChangeHypothesis,"AmericanAntiquity66,no.3(2001):388doi:10.2307/2694241.

25

Human–andmostotheranimal–generativelevelsdependcompletelyontheir

environment;suitableenvironmentsareconducivetofasterratesofpopulationgrowthand

viceversa.Archaeologistsestimatethatin10,000BCEtherewere4millionpeople,spread

acrossmostoftheworld,ittookHomosapiens200,000yearstoreachthisnumber.48By1,000

BCE,it’sestimatedthattherewere50millionpeople,aten-foldincrease,whichjustcontinued

togrowresultingintheover7billionpeopleoftoday.Althoughmuchoftheincreasehas

happenedinonlythelasttwocenturies,thesedrasticratesofincreaseareaconsequenceof

theintensificationofagriculturewithwhichalotmorefoodcanbeproducedfromasmaller

landareathanthroughhuntinggatheringpractices.Butpopulationgrowthcombinedwith

environmentalconstraintsisalsoarguedtohavebeenacausefortheNeolithictransition.49As

thehumanspeciesbecamemorelikelytosurvivebecauseitcouldadapttodifferentclimates

andcreatetoolstodefendthemselves,populationsgrew,andtheamountoffoodyieldedfrom

onlyhuntingandgatheringpracticesbecameinsufficient.Inhuntingandgatheringsocieties,ifa

groupreacheditscarryingcapacity,somememberswouldseparateandcreateanewgroup.As

populationpressureincreased,itmeantthatnewgroupswouldbeforcedontolessproductive

territorieswheretheyhadtoexertmoreeffortandcreativitytoyieldenoughfood.Intime,to

feedthemselves,peopleusedtheirincreasedabilityforinnovation,permittedbytheunique

biologicalcharacteristicsoftheHomoSapiens(braindevelopment,cognitiveskillsetc.)and

startedtouseagriculturaltechniques.

48EdwardS.DeeveyJr.“TheHumanPopulation,”inManandtheEcosphere,(W.HFreemanand

Company,SanFrancisco:1960)49BennettBronson,“TheEarliestFarming:DemographyAsCauseAndConsequence,”inOrigins

ofAgriculture,ed.CharlesA.Reed,45

26

Thismomentcoincideswiththeretreatofglaciersoftheglacialperiodthatlastedfrom

around40,000BCEuntil11,000BCE,markingtheendofthePleistocene.50Duringtheglacial

period,precipitationandtemperaturefluctuation,inaccordancewithchangesincarbon

dioxideandmethanelevelsintheatmosphere,occurredintimescalestooquickforthe

sustenanceofagriculture“becauseagriculturalsubsistencesystemsarevulnerabletoweather

extremes,andbecausetheculturalevolutionofsubsistencesystemsmakingheavy,specialized,

useofplantresourcesoccursrelativelyslowly.”51BecauseofthePleistoceneclimate,some

scholarshaveconcludedthat“agriculturewasimpossibleduringthelastglacial.”52Oncethe

glacialperiodwasover,theclimatestabilized,becamewarmer,andkeyregionsdampened,

creatingfavorableconditionsforasensitivebutland-effectivesystemlikeagriculture.

Consideringonlytheclimaticchangesasexplanationforthechangesleadingtothe

Neolithichasbeencriticizedandlabeledas“environmentaldeterminism.”53Thattheory

arguedthatagriculturewasaresponsetotheendoftheglacialagein10,000BCEandits

consequentialreorganizationofplantandanimalspecies.Itsopponentspointtotheyear

75,000BCE,whererecordsmarkasimilardrasticclimaticalterationthatdidnotcatalyzeany

knownradicalchangeinhumanbehavior.Also,thecriticsarguethatthisdeterminismdoesnot

accountforthefactthatdifferentglobalregionswereaffecteddifferentlybythelastglaciation,

yet,inthespanofafewthousandyears,groupsindependentofeachothertransformedtheir

foodproductionsimilarly.

50Reed,OriginsofAgriculture,88251Richersonetal,“WasAgricultureImpossibleduringthePleistocenebutMandatoryduringthe

Holocene?AClimateChangeHypothesis,"388 52Richersonetal,“WasAgricultureImpossibleduringthePleistocenebutMandatoryduringthe

Holocene?AClimateChangeHypothesis,"38753Wagner,“TheConceptofEnvironmentalDeterminisminCulturalEvolution,”50

27

Determinismoftensurfacesinthefieldofhistoryasaninevitableorderofevents.

Marxisttheoryisperhapsthemostfamiliarexampleofdeterminism,rootedinthebeliefthat

theproductivesystemofsocietyisthelocusofhistoricaldetermination.SpecificallyinMarxism,

classanalysispredictshistoricalprogress.However,theideaofadirectionalhistoricalprogress,

ortheoriesofunilinealsocialevolution,arelongstandingintheirviewofhistoryasthegrowth

ofefficiency,economies,andtechnology.Thisunidirectionalhistoryofprogressisthebasisof

capitalistandsocialistthought.Environmentaldeterminismfurtherarguesthatprogress,or

lackof,isdrivenbyenvironmentalchange.Environmentalhistoryoftenpracticesafatalistic

determinism,whatMcNeillcallsdeclensionism,or“asingledrearyandrepetitivetaleof

woe.”54Otherhistoriansfindthistendencytoonlywriteoflossanddegradationirritating.55

Especiallyinthe1970s,historianssawtheenvironmentasagreatopportunitytowritea

degradationnarrative,focusingonpastsocietiesthathadbetterenvironmentalrestraintora

bettertimewhereecosystemswhereintact,unaffectedbythehumantouch.Inthelate20th

centuryandturnofcentury,however,thehistoricalnarrativehasbecomemoreof

environmentalchangeandtheintricaciesofthischangeasitissometimesgoodforsome

speciesandbadforothers,and,largely,howhumanscannotberemovedtheequation.

CulturalgeographerPhilipWagner,arguesagainstenvironmentaldeterminismandfora

considerationofthevaryingdegreesinwhichtheenvironmentmightinfluencemodern

humanswhohaveevolvedtolivebeyondenvironmentallimitsandconstraints.56While

environmentaldeterminismtriestoshowcorrelationsbetweenphysical,naturalchangesand

54McNeill,“TheStateoftheFieldofEnvironmentalHistory,”35955SSchama,LandscapeandMemory,(NewYork:Vintage,1995)45056Wagner,“TheConceptofEnvironmentalDeterminisminCulturalEvolution,”59

28

socialchange,Wagnerarguesthathistorycannotbesosimplifiedandmustrecognize“the

manifoldnumberofpossibilities…wecanconceivenowofsocietiespossiblyremaining

altogetherstaticinthefaceofeitherunchangingenvironment,anenvironmentofsporadicand

disarticulatedvariability,onanenvironmentthatevolvesprogressivelyinsomedirection.

Alternatively,wemayentertaincorrespondingpossibilitiesofsocialsystemsundergoing

articulatedorchaoticchangeasareflectionofenvironmentalinfluenceofanyofthesekinds.”57

Basically,thatitismuchmorecomplicated.Inthespaceofafewthousandyears,thehuman

species–moreorless–universallyadoptedagricultureinpartasaresponsetotheirnatural

conditionbutalsoinanexpressionofagencydespitetheenvironmentthatissingulartothis

species.

Beforewecouldpickthemostproductivecropstocreatethemostamountoffood,

peoplehuntedandgatheredwhattheyneeded.Tradesystemsfortools,animalskins,and

otheritemsexistedinhunter-gatherersocieties,butfoodwasnotfrequentlytradedbecause

peopledidnotaccumulatefoodthewaythattheystarteddoingoncecultivationpracticeswere

intensified.Abilitytohaveafoodsurplusreorganizedcommunitiessothatnoteverysingle

personspentthemajorityoftheirtimesearchingforandcookingfood.Peoplebegantopickup

tradesrequiringskilledlaborandspecialization,expeditingtheemergenceoftechnological

developmentsandinvention.Thismeantthatcertainpeoplehadlargerquantitiesofitemsor

itemsofhighervaluetotrade;aclassofmerchantsemergedtofacilitatetheexchangeof

goods,andquicklybecameinfluentialandwealthymembersofsociety.Wealthinequalityand

eliteclassesbegantotakeform,andwithitcametheconflictsthata21stcenturyreaderis

57Wagner,“TheConceptofEnvironmentalDeterminisminCulturalEvolution,”59

29

muchtoofamiliarwith.Associetybecameincreasinglycomplex,apoliticalclassemerged

taskedwithorganizingtherapidlygrowingnumberofpeople,solvingconflictswithina

communityandnavigatingincreasingtensionswithneighboringcommunitiesduetoresource

competition(aconstantreminderthathumansare,despiteeverything,stillanimals).The

hierarchicalnaturethatseemssoinherenttohistoricsocietieslabeledas‘successful’was

heretoborn.Handinhandwithsocialcomplexitycameimpactslikedisease,decreased

nutritionalvalueoffood,establishmentofsedentarylifestyles,andcreationofconceptsof

propertyandownership.

Thisisobviouslyasimplificationofthechainofeventsthatfollowedthespreadof

agriculturebut,nonetheless,helpsasanoverviewtoindicatethescaleofitseffectsonasocial

evolutionthroughwhichhuman“learnttoharnesstheforceofoxenandofwinds,inventsthe

plough,thewheeledcart,andthesailingboat,”amongothertechnologicalandscientific

breakthroughs.58Comparedtothetimeperiodsthathavebeendiscussedthisfar,thebrief

periodbetweenthecompletionofsettlingofsedentarycommunitiesacrossmostoftheworld

andintroductionofmetalmaterialsthusendingtheNeolithicEra,in2000BCEandthestartof

theIndustrialRevolutionin1760CEseemsludicrous.However,intermsofinvention,social

reorganization,andimpactontheenvironment,thisisaperiodduringwhichthepaceof

changewasunprecedented.Whiletheevolutionarytimescalehadlargelydictatedhumanand

pre-modernhumanlifestyleforthemillenniapreceding,humansredefinedtherateofchange

attheexpenseoftheenvironment.

58Childe,ManMakesHimself,105

30

Ifwelookatthefirstgroupsofhomosapiens,wefindevidenceofhowenvironmental

factorslimitedtheabilityforpeopletoovercometheirsurroundings.IsraeliHistorian,Yuval

NoahHarari,offersoneexplanationofwhathasoccurredtoallowhumanstocause

environmental“havoc.”59Hearguesthatarcheologicalandbiologicalevidenceshowshow

humanswereoriginallyinthemiddleofthefoodchainorfoodweboftheecosystemand

throughaseriesof“historicalcalamities,”thehumanspecieshasreachedanunnaturalplaceas

topcarnivore.Ascendancethroughthefoodchainnormallyoccursthroughanevolutionary

scale.Ittakestimeandthatiswhytheresultisatwo-foldprocess:first,onceatthetopofthe

foodchain,thatspeciespossessesamasterythatisnaturallyrespectedbyasenseofmajestic

being(sharks,lionsetc.);secondly,theevolutionarytimescaleallowsforecosystemstoadjust

totheactionofthetopcarnivoreforexample,“aslionsbecamedeadlier,sogazellesevolvedto

runfaster,hyenastocooperatebetter,andrhinocerosestobemorebad-tempered.”60Human

ascendancetothetopofthechainoccurredoutsidetheevolutionaryscale.Butthisalsomeans

thattheecosystemsaroundushavenothadtimetoadjust.Probably,accordingtoHarari,even

ourownspecieshasn’thadthetimetoadjust.

Thetopcarnivoretheoryisacompellingargumentthatspeakstoananthropocentric

scholarshipofhumansasthemastersoftheecosystem.Hararimakessuretonotromanticize

thehumanpositionoftopcarnivoreaslionsandsharksoftenare.Thus,hehighlightsthe

dangerthehumanspeciesimposesontheecosystemanditsownsurvival,makingtheposition

oftopcarnivorearegrettabletraitbothfortheEarthandthehumanspecies.Harari’shistorical

analysisisausefulframeworkbecauseofitsseamlessintegrationofnaturalandculturalchange

59YuvalNoahHarari,Sapiens:ABriefHistoryofHumankind,NewYork:Harper,2015,1160Harari,Sapiens,11

31

anddemonstratesthenecessityforinterdisciplinarycollaboration.Workofnon-historianscan

oftenunderminetheassumptionsofhistoriansandatthesametimerefineourunderstanding

ofenvironmentalhistory.

Thetwo-partserviceprovidedbytheinclusionofdifferentdisciplinesintohistorical

analysisofthetopcarnivoretheorypointstoadifferentconclusionthanHarari’s,thatstrictly

ecologicallyspeakinghumansdonotholdatopcarnivoreposition.Usingclassicecological

assessmentofspecies’trophiclevel,Bonhommeauetal.calculatedthehumantrophiclevel

(HTL)usingdatafromtheUNFoodandAgriculturalOrganization.61Thefirsttodothis,these

researchersusedawell-knownscalewhichratesspeciesfrom1to5;1beingaprimary

producer,anorganismthatconvertslightenergyintoorganicmatter,and5beinganapex

predator,thatonlyeatsotheranimalsandhasfewpredators.Theirresultsindicatethat

humansareonaverageata2.21,thesamelevelasapigoranchovy.62

Figure1(A)Trendsinthehumantrophiclevel(1961–2009)and(B)mapofthemedianhumantrophiclevelover2005–2009

61SylvianBonhommeauetal.“EatinguptheWorld’sFoodWebandtheHumanTrophicLevel,”

inProceedingsoftheNaturalAcademyofSciences,vol110no.51,20617-2062062Bonhommeauetal.“EatinguptheWorld’sFoodWebandtheHumanTrophicLevel,”20617-

20620

32

Thesecalculationsaredividedbycountryandthecountriesaregroupeddependingon

theirspecificHTL,whichlargelycorrelatestoGDP,urbanization,life-expectancy,andCO2

emissions.63However,eventhecountrywiththemostmeatconsumption–Iceland–doesnot

reachlevel3.Thismaintainsthe21stcenturyhumaninthemiddleofthefoodweb,notasatop

carnivore.Intheirdiscussion,theauthorspointoutthattheresults“quantifiesthepositionof

humansinthefoodwebandchallengestheperceptionofhumansastoppredators(2).Humans

dominateecosystemsthroughchangesinlanduse,biogeochemicalcycling,biodiversity,and

climate(11,13,14).Itisnotsufficienttoseparatehumansfromanalysesofecosystem

processes,becausetherearenoremainingecosystemsoutsideofhumaninfluence(15).Thus,

investigationsofecosystems,withoutaccountingforthepresenceofhumans,areincomplete

(13).”64Thisisanimportantconclusionbecausetheauthorsofthispaperurgetonotfocuson

thetrophicleveltakenbyhumansbut,instead,howhumansutilizetheenvironmenttolive

beyondwhatisavailabletoananimalinamiddletrophiclevel.

Thestatementthat“therearenoremainingecosystemsoutsideofhumaninfluence,”65

isbasedonthedevelopmentsandtechnologiesthatoccurredintheperiodbetweenthe

NeolithicRevolutionandtheIndustrialRevolution.Itisatimecharacterizedbythe

intensificationofhumanimpactontheenvironmentthroughthedevelopmentofurbanization,

colonization,resourceexploitation,andinfluenceonnon-humanspecies;processesthat

63Bonhommeauetal.“EatinguptheWorld’sFoodWebandtheHumanTrophicLevel,”20618.

MongoliaandMauritaniaaresomenotableexceptionstothecorrelationbetweenGDPandHTLingroup5,whichrepresentsthecountrieswiththehighestcalculatedHTL,buthaveasignificantlylowerGDPtothecountriesthatfitthepatternofpositivecorrelation,likeIcelandandSweden.Inthestudy,thisisattributedtodietsbasedonfish,meat,anddairywithlowvegetableconsumption.

64Bonhommeauetal.“EatinguptheWorld’sFoodWebandtheHumanTrophicLevel,”2061965RGallagherandBCarpenter,“Human-dominatedecosystems,”Science2,1997,asreferenced

inBonhommeauetal.“EatinguptheWorld’sFoodWebandtheHumanTrophicLevel,”20619

33

permittedtheconditionsfortheinventionsthatrevolutionizedenergyuseandextraction

duringtheIndustrialRevolution.Thatbelief,thatallplanetaryhabitatshavebeensomehow

impactedbyhumanbehavior,isa21stcentury,‘post-colonial’eraonethatchallengesthe

drivingforcesofimperialexpansionandputsintoquestionthenarrativesusedtojustifyit.66

Oneoftheearlyenvironmentalhistorytexts,Crosby’sColumbianExchange,provides

oneofthefirstcombinedanalysesoftheenvironmentalandhumaneffectsofcolonization.Itis

aglobalperspectivethatdidnotfallunderanyexistinghistoriographicalcategoriesofthe20th

century.Aroundtheworld,environmentalismbecameanintellectualtrendinthe1960sand

1970s.Politicallyandintellectually,theenvironmentbecameapopularfocusformanyfields.67

Forhistorians,thisgeneratedinterestonthetopicofthenaturalworld.Oneofthosehistorians

wasRoderickNashwhowasthefirsttousetheterm‘environmentalhistory’inhisbook

WildernessandtheAmericanMind.68UnlikeNash,Crosby’swork,writtenin1972,transcended

anation-statenarrativeandaffordedagencytothenon-humanworld.Itexploresthe

environmentalconsequencesoftheAtlanticcrossingof1492andtheundeniableconnection

thattheyhadwiththesocialandpoliticaleventsthatoccurred.Now,thetitleofthebookis

partoftheintellectualvocabularyanditsfindingshavebecomepopularknowledge.But,

Crosby’sdetailedexplanationofthetransmissionofpathogens,crops,weeds,andlivestock

backandforthacrosstheAtlanticwasfoundationaltoenvironmentalhistoryasasimilar

projecthadneverbeencompleted.WhatCrosbydidsuccessfullywasweavethenon-living,

66WilliamM.Denevan,“The“PristineMyth”Revisited,”TheGeographicalReview101(4):576-

591Oct,2011,576-59167J.McCormick,ReclaimingParadise:TheGlobalEnvironmentalMovement,(Bloomington:

IndianaUniv.Press,1989),27868RoderickNash,WildernessandtheAmericanMind,(NewHaven,CT:YaleUniv.Press,1967),

426

34

environmentalfactorsoftheexchangewiththehumanactions,arguingthatthenaturalworld

wasbothacauseandaconsequenceoftheEuropeanarrivaltotheAmericas.69

Overthelast10,000yearshumanactivitieshavebroughtaboutmajorchangesinthe

ecosystemsoftheworld.Theuniversalexpansionofsettlementandthecreationoffieldand

pasturesforagriculture,thecontinualclearingofforestsandotherwildareas,andthedraining

ofmarshyareas,havesteadilyreducedthehabitatsofalmosteverykindofanimalandplant.

Thedeliberatehuntingofanimalsforfood,furs,andotherproductsandthecollectionofplants

hasdrasticallyreducednumbersofmanyspecies.Humanshaveintroducednewplantsand

animalsintoecosystemsoftenwiththeunexpectedandnearcatastrophicresults.Thereis

moreevidence,thoughstillverypatchy,fortheperiodafter1600butitisnotuntilthepresent

centurythatdetailedresearchhasbeenundertaken,largelypromptedbyagrowingawareness

oftheincreasingscaleofthelosses.Thereisnodoubtthoughthatthepaceofdegradationand

changehasbeenincreasing,particularlyfollowingEuropeancolonialismandexpansion.

69ACrosby,TheColumbianExchange:TheBiologicalandCulturalConsequencesof1492.

(Westport,CT:Greenwood,1972)268

35

Chapter3:TowardstheAnthropocene

weremusclelovingmuscle,drank

straightfromtheriversrantherapidsthrew

ouraxesatthetreesrodethebackofeverymoose

wecaughtmid-crossingputourcampfiresout

bypissingontheflames.70

Thehumanspecieshasspreadaroundtheworld,andwithit,itbroughtaseriesof

changesandaddedweighttolocalenvironments.Humanactivity,fromfarming,huntingand

fishing,tofossilfuelextractionandcombustion,hasalteredtheecosystemsittouchesinways

thatarenotyetentirelyunderstood.However,whatisunderstoodisthattheimpactof

widespreadhumanpresencehashadagreatenoughtollonthisplanetthathumanactivity

rivalsgeologicalforcestothedegreethatitwarrantsanewgeologicalera,theAnthropocene,

tobecreatedtoaccountforourpresentreality,andimminentfuture.Thedetailsofthisnew

geologicaleraareheavilydebated,withtechnicalargumentsaboutearthstrataandtime

markersbeingdebatedbyscientists,aswellasintensepoliticalscrutinyfromthegeneral

public,governments,thepress,fossilfuelcompanies,andothers,whoeitherseethe

recognitionoftheAnthropoceneasanecessarystepforwardinourcommitmenttoprotectthe

planet,oradelusionaldisplayofhubrisbyhumankind.71

70DonMcKay,“ThePrecambrianShield,”inStrike/Slip(McClelland&Stewart:Toronto,Canada,

2006),2071SimonL.Lewis,MarkA.Maslin“DefiningtheAnthropocene”PERSPECTIVES

doi:10.1038/nature14258

36

Thehistoricalframemostdirectlyexposedtohumanactionandrarelyconsideredin

historicalscholarship,ismadeupofthepresentcontextandconditions,thatwithoutallthe

previouslayersofhistorycannotbeunderstoodbutalsoisnotisolatedfromtheenvironmental

andanthropogenicconditionsoftoday.Thesourcesofenergyavailabletohumansocieties

haveplayedamajorpartindeterminingtheactivitiesthattheycanundertakeandthewayin

whichtheyareorganized.Forallbutthelasttwohundredyearsthesourcesofenergywerefew

andthetotalamountofenergythatwecouldgeneratewassmall.Thesecondgreattransition

inhumanhistory,comparableinitsimportancewiththeadoptionofagricultureandtheriseof

settledsocieties,involvedtheexploitationoftheearth’svast(butlimited)stocksoffossilfuels,

amovethatmadepossibleaneraofabundantenergyforpartoftheworld’spopulation.Allthe

formsofenergyuseduntilthistransitionwererenewable.Thelasttwohundredyearshave,

however,beencharacterizedbyamassiveandcontinuingincreaseinenergyconsumptionfrom

non-renewableresources.

Historyoftenfocusesonthehistoryofhumanachievementoffreedom.Inalecture

deliveredin2013,DipeshChakrabarty,outlinedthehistoricalironyoffossilfueluse.Fromthe

IndustrialRevolution,theabilitytoburnfossilfuelsliberatedhumanbeingsfromforcedlabor,

now,thesameprocessistheinstrumentthroughwhichhumanshaveacquiredtheagencyofa

geophysicalforce.But,Chakrabartystatesthatbeingageophysicalforceremovesmuchofthe

celebratedautonomyandagencythathumanshadgaineduntiltheAnthropocene.72Aforceis

definedisanobjectthathasthestrengthorcapacitytochangeanotherobject.So,asa

72DipeshChakrabarty,“HistoryonanExpandedCanvas:TheAnthropocene’sInviation,”

Keynote,TheAnthropoceneProject.AnOpening,HausderKulturenderWelt,Berlin,January13,2013

37

collectivewehavebecomeanotherobjectandlostourautonomy,sovereigntyandpurpose.

ThecreationoftheAnthropocene,howeverdefined,isacollisionbetweenthreehistoriesthat

havebeenconsideredseparateuntilthispoint:thehistoryofearthsystems,thehistoryoflife

(includinghumanevolution)andthehistoryofanindustrialwayoflife.

ThediscussionofthebeginningoftheAnthropocenecomeshandinhandwiththe

discussionoftheendoftheHolocene.TherearetwooriginstoriesoftheAnthropocenethat

canbetold;oneishowwehavearrivedtothisnewgeologicalepoch,thesecondisthestoryof

thetermitself.Itisnotasimplemannertoproclaimabrandnewgeologicalera,itrequires

scientificevidenceshowingthatthegeologicalrecordhaschangedsignificantlyandconsensus

fromgeologiststhatsuchchangewarrantsabrand-newepochcategorization.Thetwoorigin

storiesarecloselyrelatedbecausedebatingthedefinitionofthetermoreventhevalidityof

theclaimforanewgeologicalepoch,isultimatelydebatingonthehistoryofourspecies.When

thefirstproponentsoftheAnthropoceneasit’sunderstoodtoday,NobelLaureateandthen-

vice-chairoftheInternationalGeosphere-BiosphereProgramme(IGBP),PaulCrutzen,and

geobiologistEugeneStoermer,publishedtheirseminalarticleinthe2000IGBPnewsletter,they

sparkedaconversationencompassingeverythingfromtheroleofgeologyinclimatechange

policytotheimportanceofbighistoryineducation.73Inhisnextpaperonthetopic,Crutzen

outlinedtheintellectualhistoricalprecedentsoftheideathathumansbeingswerehavingan

increasinglyimportantroleinthegeologyoftheplanet.74Accordingtohim,thefirstrecorded

useofasimilartermwas“aslongagoas1873”byItaliangeologistAntonioStoppani,who

73PaulCrutzenandEugeneStoermer,IGBPNewsletter41(RoyalSwedishAcademyofSciences,

Stockholm,2000) 74PaulCrutzen,"Geologyofmankind,"Nature415,no.6867(2002):23

38

namesan“anthropoziocera”wherehumanactionscomparetotheforcesoftheEarth.75He

continuesnamingotherscholarslikeGPMarsh,VladimirVernadsky,PierreTeilharddeChardin

andEdouardLeRoytheprecursorstothecurrentscientificuseofAnthropocene.

Thesearchforhistoricalprecedentsforthislineofthoughtisusefultobecauseitshows

anoticeofthegrowthandcontinuityofhumaninfluenceonEarthandevencansuggestthatit

thescaleofthecurrentcrisescouldhavebeenavoidedoritseffectsbeenminimized.However,

inopposition,JacquesGrinevaldandCliveHamiltonarguethattherearenoprecursorstothe

AnthropoceneasitisdefinedtodaybecausethescholarsthatCrutzenreferstohadno

understandingofEarthSystemsand,thatsayingthatthereare,putstheseriousnessandscale

oftheissueatrisk.76Intheirwords,“Wesuggestthatinreferringtoprecursors,perhapsto

bolsterthecredibilityofthenewconceptbylocatingitwithinarespectedtradition(‘onthe

shouldersofgiants’),theoriginalproponentsoftheAnthropoceneunwittinglyunderminedthe

radicalnoveltyoftheconceptandtheactualityoftheproposednewgeologicalepoch.”77They

claimthattheAnthropoceneisuniquebecauseoftheintellectualcontextinwhichitwas

createdandinvolvesadeepunderstandingontheconvergenceofhumanandnaturalhistory.

OthercriticsoftheAnthropocenemodelchampionedmainlybyPaulCrutzen,Will

SteffenandJRMcNeill,pointtothedangersofthe‘humankind’viewofthisideologybecauseit

erasesthedeepinequalityinherenttothisepoch.78MalmandHornborgquitedeterminately

statethattheAnthropoceneisanalyticallyflawedandantitheticaltoactionbecauseittellsa

75Crutzen,"Geologyofmankind,"2376CliveHamiltonandJacquesGrinevald,"WastheAnthropoceneanticipated?"The

AnthropoceneReview2,no.1(2015):6077HamiltonandGrinevald,"WastheAnthropoceneanticipated?"6178AndreasMalmandAlfHornborg,"Thegeologyofmankind?AcritiqueoftheAnthropocene

narrative,"TheAnthropoceneReview1,no.1(2014):63

39

deterministstoryofhumanevolutionthatnaturalizesclimatechange.79Althoughwellargued,

MalmandHornborgseemtosimplifythedimensionsofthedefinitionsofferedbyAntropocene

proposerswithoutnotingthatmostworthwhileaccountsoftheAnthropoceneincludethe

historicallynuancedaccountsofhowpowerrelationsoperate,bothacrosstheearthsystemas

awholeandbetweenhumanbeings.The‘analyticalflaws’theyhighlightleadsthemtoaska

rhetoricalquestionlike,“Ifglobalwarmingistheoutcomeoftheknowledgeofhowtolighta

fire,orsomeotherpropertyofthehumanspeciesacquiredinsomedistantstageofits

evolution,howcanweevenimagineadismantlingofthefossileconomy?”80Thisignoresmuch

ofthecomplextheorybehindtheideologyoftheAnthropocene,whicharguesthatthe

geologicalrecordhasbeennoticeablyaffectedbyhumansbecause,yes,humanswereableto

harnessthepoweroffire,but,further,becausehumanshaveusedtheirknowledgeinsucha

mannerthathasforever-alteredEarthsystemsprocesses.Indeed,notallhumansaretoblame

becauseintrinsictotheAnthropoceneisdeepsocialandeconomicinequality.

Throughepochalthinkingandgeologicalrecords,theAnthropoceneilluminatesthe

pattersofhuman-causedenvironmentalchange.Unlikethecharacteristicsofothergeological

epochs,manyofthesepatternsareheavilypolitical.ThepoliticsoftheAnthropocenethushave

becomecentraltoitsveryexistence,andalthoughmuchhasbeenpublished,thereisstilla

centralchallengethatwasoriginallypresentedbyhistorianDipeshChakrabartythathasnotyet

beensolved.Hisargumentisthatthereneedstobeanti-capitalistresistancethatoverturns

capitalistglobalizationanditsprofit-drivenexploitationofdisempoweredcommunitiesand

vulnerableecosystemsinordertotransitiontoanenvironmentallyjustsociety.However,he

79MalmandHornborg,"Thegeologyofmankind?AcritiqueoftheAnthropocenenarrative,"6780MalmandHornborg,"Thegeologyofmankind?AcritiqueoftheAnthropocenenarrative,"67

40

notesthatourcurrentenvironmentalcriseswillexistforlongerthancapitalismasweknowit

justasithasbeencausesnotjustbycapitalistWesternpowersbutalsobyindustrializing

socialiststates.So,resistancetocapitalismisnotenough.Chakrabarty’sargument,basedon

history,isthatthe“boundaryparametersofexistence”thatpermitlifeontheplanetandare

beingdestabilizedthroughclimatechangeareindependentofcapitalismorsocialism.81

Confrontingglobalizationisessential,butglobalizationandglobalwarmingarenotintrinsicto

eachother.Globalwarmingaffectsallhumanbeings,althoughnotallhumanbeingsare

responsibleforitbutithasalogicofcausalitythatis,Charkrabartyargues,intrinsically,not

historically,indifferenttoinjusticebetweenhumans.Theargumentisthateveninasociallyjust

worldthatdependentonfossilfuels,wewouldhaveaclimatecrisis.Insuchaworldthecrisis

mightevenbeworstgiventhatatthemomentmostofthegreenhousegasemissionsarebeing

producedbyafifthofthepopulation,ifnoonewerepoortheenvironmentaldegradationcould

beworse.

Whatisclearthough,isthatthisisachangingplanet.Ascommunitiesaroundtheworld

increasinglyfacescarcity,naturaldisasters,andevencompletedestructionduetoclimate

changeanditseffects,itisessentialtounderstandtheeffectsofthischange.Capitalismisnot

thenecessaryprocessforclimatechange,thatisnotwherethecausalitylays.Instead,climate

changeexacerbatesandaccentuatestheinequalitiescreatedbycapitalism.Moreoftenthan

not,itisthosecommunitieswhocontributedtheleasttogreenhouseaccumulation,

environmentaldestruction,andclimatechangeingeneral,thatfacetheworstconsequencesof

it,andfindthemselvesinextremelyvulnerableconditionsaswellaswithlessresourcesand

81Chakrabarty,“TheClimateofHistory:FourTheses,"CriticalInquiry35,no.2(2009):218;This

issimilartoFredSpier’s“GoldilocksPrinciple”discussedinChapter1.

41

abilitytoadaptandsurvivethesechanges,duetoeconomicandstructuralinequality.AsSteve

Vanderheidendiscussesinhiswork“GlobalizingResponsibilityforClimateChange”,as

catastrophesbecomeincreasinglyfrequentanddrastic,relianceuponthestructureofnation-

states,operatingindependentlyisnotenoughtoguaranteeasafefutureduringthe

Anthropocene.82Therefore,itisincreasinglynecessarytodeviseaframeworkinwhich

resources,bothfinancialandmaterial,canbedistributedandallocatedtoallowforthesurvival

ofhumancommunitiesinaglobalscale.Thisshouldbedonealonglinesofresponsibility,in

otherwords,thosenationswhoprofitedfromeconomicandpoliticalactivitiesthatprovoked

damageontomorevulnerablenations,presumablylessengagedandlessbeneficiatedfromthe

globalcapitalisteconomy,shouldallocatedueresourcestolessenandpreventsufferingfrom

environmentalstress.

Vanderheidenfurthersuggeststhatthisliabilityshouldalsobeproportionally

distributedamongstthecitizenry,asnotallcitizensareequallyresponsibleforcontributionsto

climatechange.Vanderheiden’sproposedframeworkforliabilityandcostdistributioncreates

structuresbasedontheperceptionthatnotallhumanbeingsareequallyparticipatinginthe

chainsofproductionandconsumptionthat,perhapsirreversibly,damagedtheplanet.83

Somescholarssuggestthatwemustanalyzehumanrelationshiptotheenvironment

fromamomentmuchbeforecapitalismtounderstandtheAnthropoceneandhuman-induced

climatechange.Anthropoceneproponents,Steffen,Crutzen,andMcNeillhighlightthe

momentsinthelast150,000yearsthatchangesintheclimateaffectedhumanaffairsand,vice

82SteveVanderheiden,"Globalizingresponsibilityforclimatechange,"Ethics&international

affairs25,no.01(2011):6583Vanderheiden,"Globalizingresponsibilityforclimatechange,"76

42

versa,humansaffectedtheclimate.Theytaketheapproachthattheenvironmentandthat

humanpathto“civilizationandcities,”areintrinsicallyconnected.Whatmadeitpossiblefor

humantocreatebuildingsdidnotinvolveslavelabororbondagelabor.Itinvolvedcheapand

plentifulenergy,whichisfossilfuels.84 Fossilfueluseisacommonlyusedoriginpointforthe

transitionofthehumanspeciesintoageologicalforce.Thisviewsatesthatoncethehuman

specieslearnedtoworkcollectively,onepartofthespeciesfoundawaytolive‘better.’It

beganexploitingotherpeople,takingotherpeople’slands,colonizingthem,andusingthemas

slavelaboreventually,slaveasunenergywasinsufficienttofulfilltheenergyneedsof

unabatedgrowth.RobertMarksarguesthathumanshavehadaglobalenvironmentalimpact

onlysincethebeginningofthetwentiethcentury,“whereearlierenvironmentalimpactsof

humanactivityweremorelocalorregionalandsometimescouldbereversedwheneverthe

humanfootprinteased.”85Thisargumentisbasedontheclaimthatthesevereenvironmental

impactofhumanactionsonlybeganoncehumanpopulationswerenolongerboundbythe

limitsofsolarenergy.Beforefossil-fuelmodeofproduction-practically,theIndustrial

Revolution-humans’expansionandaccesstoenergywaslimitedbythecaptureanduseof

solarenergyandaccesstoland.86

Historians’roleinthedefinitionoftheAnthropoceneisessentialbecause,although

somecriticsarguethatthetermreinvigoratesasplitbetweenhumanandnature.Historical

inquirycanshowthatintrinsictothethisnew-epochpropositionisabeliefthatthereisno

84WillSteffen,PaulJ.CrutzenandJohnR.McNeill.2007.“TheAnthropocene:AreHumansNow

OverwhelmingtheGreatForcesofNature?”inAmbio,Vol.36,No.8(Dec.,2007),pp.614-62185RobertB.Marks,“The(Modern)WorldSince1500,”inACompaniontoGlobalEnvironmental

History,(JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd:Chichester,UK,2012)5786Marks,“The(Modern)WorldSince1500,”65

43

metaphysicaldividebetweenhumansandnature,buthumansareonemorenaturalagentof

chancewithintheEarthSystem.Itoutlineshowintrahumanandextrahumanforcescoproduce

oneanotheranditisthehistorian’sjobtoprovideevidenceforthatrelationshipproduction.

Whenscientistsandpoliticiansrefertoclimatechange,therhetoricoftensurroundsthe

ideaofa“humanspecies”asahomogenousentity,thatisbothcollectivelyresponsiblefor

environmentalcollapse,andiscollectivelythreatenedbyit.Whilethismightbetruetoa

certaindegree,thinkerssuchasDipeshChakrabartychallengethis“speciesthinking”,asit

collapsesimportantanthropologicaldistinctionsthatneedtobeaccountedforandunderstood

inordertotrulygrasptherealityofclimatechange.Ultimately,nosingleindividualcan

transcendtheirownpersonalexperiencesandtheirlimitations-noneofuscanexperience

ourselvesasaspecies,acollectivehumanentity.Infact,allwedoexperienceisaseriesof

relationshipsandinteractionsthatconnectsustoothers,bothhumanandnon-human,both

livingandnon-living.Withtheadventoffossilfuelpoweredtechnology,andacommoditychain

thatspanstheentireglobe,thiswebofrelationshipsnowconnectsusmoredeeplyandinmore

far-reachingwaytoeachother.Understandingthisassemblageofrelationshipscannotcome

fromasimplisticperceptionofasinglehumanspecies.Insteadbyunderstandingthe

differencesbetweenindividuals,andcommunities;howexperiencesshapeperception,and

structureaffectsexperience,wecanapproachamorehonestandaccurateunderstandingof

ourworld,andtheprofoundchangesthatareunderway.So,tellinga‘specieshistory’isnot

aboutgeneralizingonehumanhistory,buttellingadetailedstoryofthelocalinteractions

betweencommunitiesandtheirenvironmentsovertimeeventuallyleadingtothe

Anthropocene.

44

Conclusion

Climatechangeitselfisnotahomogenoussingleentity.Instead,itisanamalgamation

ofparticularexperiences,relationships,objects,andnaturalprocesses.Itstretchesacross

individuals,spaceandtime.AccordingtoTimothyMorton,globalwarming87canbedefinedasa

“hyperobject”becauseofitsmyriadmanifestations-alwaysfallingshortoftheobjectasa

whole,whichseeminglyonlyexistsinimmaterialforms.88Itsexistenceinadauntinglylarge

timeframe,or“deeptime”,dwarvestheindividualhumanexperience.Understandingclimate

change,requiresonetoseetheirresponsibilityinbeingapartofasystemwithsucheffects,

andforcesonetorecognizehowsmalleachhumanlifeis.Wehaveenteredaperiodknownto

scholarsastheAnthropocene,ageologicalepochofunforeseen,human-induced,accelerated

changestotheEarth’sclimate,oceans,landandbiosphere.89Thisepochhasbroughttolighta

newhistoryofthehumaneffectonthenaturalworldthatmustbetracedbacktothebeginning

ofnotonlyourcapitalistsociety,colonialprojects,andresourceexploitation;but,much

further,tothebeginningofsettledsocieties,intensificationofagriculture,andthevery

emergenceofourspecies,theHomoSapienssapiens.

87Mortonmakesapointtoexplicitlyusethetermglobalwarmingandnotclimatechangewith

thefollowingrationale,“Ontheterrainofmediaandthesociopoliticalrealm,thephraseclimatechangehasbeensuchafailurethatoneistemptedtoseethetermitselfasakindofdenial,areactiontotheradicaltraumaofunprecedentedglobalwarming.Thatthetermsarepresentedaschoicesratherthanasapackageisasymptomofthisfailure,sincelogicallyitiscorrecttosay“climatechangeasaresultofglobalwarming,”where“climatechange”isjustacompressionofamoredetailedphrase,ametonymy.”TimothyMorton,Hyperobjects,(Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress,2013)AccessedMarch9,2017.ProQuestEbookCentral,8

88TimothyMorton,Hyperobjects,289WillSteffen,PaulJ.CrutzenandJohnR.McNeill.2007.“TheAnthropocene:AreHumansNow

OverwhelmingtheGreatForcesofNature?”inAmbio,Vol.36,No.8(Dec.,2007),pp.614-621

45

Historicalinquiryisnecessaryforourunderstandingofthecurrentmomentandfor

imaginingthefuturebuthistoryisfacingthechallengeofanunprecedentedpresent.Historians

shouldnowmustseektobridgethedivisionsithascreatedbetweennaturalandhuman

historiesandapplyittoamuchlongertimeline–theoneofdeeptime.Onceweunderstand

whatithastakenintermsofhumaneffortandenvironmentalconditionstoarriveatthis

momentwecanbegintocreateinformedframeworks.Asaspecies,Homosapiens,transcend

threegeologicalepochs:thePleistocene,markedbythebiologicalevolutionofourspecies;the

Holocene,atimeofclass-stratification,environmentaldomesticationandacceleratedchange;

andourpresentAnthropocene,whenhumanshavetakentheroleofageophysicalforce,not

theonlyoneandmaybenoteventhemostimportantone,butaforcenonetheless.Evenif

futuregeologicalrecordsdon’tshowspecificallythathumansroamedtheearth,it’llshowa

naturalhistoryofdecadence.Therewillbeevidenceofasixthmassextinctionalmostequalto

thepreviousextinctions,ofatmosphericlevelsandtemperaturesthatevenintimesofclimatic

instabilitywerenotasvolatile.Thethresholdmoments,liketheevolutionofthespecies,our

adoptionofagriculture,andtheuseoffossilfuelsforenergyconsumption,allencompass

momentswheretheearth’shistoryandthesmaller,intermsoftimescale,historyofhuman

lifehavecollidedandforever-changedthemakeupofearthanditssystems.

Thischronologicalsummaryofhistoricalinquiryofhumandevelopmenthasthepurpose

ofpointingtohowhistorianshavenegotiatedtheirplacewithinthestoryoftheplanet,

borrowingfromandaddingtothedisciplinesthathighlighttheencounterbetweenhumansand

theirenvironment.Butthesenegotiationshavenotbeenseamless.Historicalinquiryoften

mustmakechoicesbetweenthespecificevents,actors,andthingsitchoosestostudy.

46

Traditionalhistoryhasnotsufficedtonarratethestoryofthatwhichisn’thuman,written,or

hasbeenhiddenbyhegemony.Asthecomplexityofthehistoryoflife–humanandnon-human

–isexposed,weneedtolookfurtherbackintimeandzoomclosertolookatthecreationof

processesthatnowseeminevitableforhumansustenance.Whetherornottheterm

Anthropoceneisadoptedbygeologists,theideologybehinditisnotlost.Humanactivitiesare

changingsealevels,climatetendencies,andtheabilityofspecies–includingourown–to

performtheirfunctionsintheirhabitatsastheyhavedoneinthepast.Thus,thestoryofthe

Anthropoceneisnotahumanstory,likeitsnamewouldsuggest,butthestoryofachanging

planet.

Thefieldofhistory,likeitssubjectofstudy,isnotstatic.Itrespondstoquestionsand

anxietiesreflectiveofamomentintime.Atthismoment,historyhasthetremendous

responsibilitytorespondtowhatlookslikeanimpendingcrisisinwhichentirepartsofthe

earthsystem,includingthosewhichwedependon,arebeingdangerouslyaltered.Tellingthis

storywillinspireallsortsofresponsesacrossthesocialandpoliticalstructuresaspeopleare

confrontedwithhavingreimaginetheassemblagesthatmakehumanandnonhumanlife

possibleintheplanetandtheirownroleintheprocesses.Thismightanunpopularproject,as

GordonChildemasterfullyputitin1936:

“Tosurvive,anysocietymustattainanadjustmenttoitsenvironment;itlivesbyexploitingthenaturalresourcesofitsterritory.Butjustinsofarastheadjustmentachievedissuccessful,thecommunityconcernedwilltendtobecomeconservative.Whenagroupareenjoyingasufficiencyoffoodinsimplecomfortwithspellsofrest,whyshouldtheychangetheirbehavior?

Theyhavepainfullylearnedthetricksanddodges,theartsandcraftsnecessarytocoaxthismodicumofprosperityoutofnature;whydomore?

Indeed,changemaybedangerous”

47

Today,thatneedforchangeisnolongernegotiableanditcannotbelefttothosefewpeoplein

positionsofpower.Everydaywearefacedwithanewcatastrophe,fromthedecreasingsizeof

fullypopulatedislandsinthePacific,todroughtsinCaliforniathatareputtingthefoodsecurity

ofmillionsofpeopleatrisk.Ourcurrentmodelsofresourceexploitationhavereachedan

impasseandourhistoricalframeworksareinsufficient.

TheAnthropoceneforceshistorianstolookatwherehumansfitinthehistoryofdeep

time.Withintheentirehistoryoftheplanet,thehistoryofthehumanspeciesisbutasmall

part.Inthattime,theEarth’sbiosphere,atmosphere,lithosphere,andhydrospherehave

performedtheirfunctionsashumanandnon-humanlifeprofitedfromthemandsometimes

sufferedfromitsunexpectedchanges.Today,thoseprocessesdatingbackfurtherthanthe

humanmindcanfullypicture,arebeinginterruptedandtransformedinharmfulways.History

nowmustreimaginehumanbeingsandnaturenotasadichotomybutasforcesinconstant

conversation.Andclimatechangeisessentialtothisconversation.Around500B.C.E.Heraclitus

wrote“youcannotsteptwiceintothesameriverforfreshwaterareeverflowinginuponyou,”

and,today,ourspeciesislearningthislessonthehardway.Aswe’veenteredtheriverofthe

changingsystemsoftheplanet,wehavetransformedtheflowaltogether.Insteadofjoiningthe

streamandbeinginharmonywiththefluxoflife,wehavedammed,polluted,anddriedthe

river.

48

Bibliography- "Homoerectus."InTheAmericanHeritageStudentScienceDictionary,editedbyEditors

oftheAmericanHeritageDictionaries.HoughtonMifflin,2014.- Antón,SusanC.,RichardPotts,andLeslieC.Aiello."EvolutionofearlyHomo:An

integratedbiologicalperspective."Science345,no.6192(2014):12368281-15.- BarrowJr.,MarkV."BonesofContentiontheAmericanIncognitumandtheDiscoveryof

Extinction."InNature'sGhosts:ConfrontingExtinctionfromtheAgeofJeffersontotheAgeofEcology.UniversityofChicagoPress,2009.ChicagoScholarshipOnline,2013.AccessedFebruary11,2017.doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226038155.003.0002.

- Bonhommeau,Sylvain,LaurentDubroca,OlivierLePape,JulienBarde,DavidM.Kaplan,EmmanuelChassot,andAnne-EliseNieblas."Eatinguptheworld’sfoodwebandthehumantrophiclevel."ProceedingsoftheNationalAcademyofSciences110,no.51(2013):20617-20620.

- Bourdieu,Pierre.Distinction:ASocialCritiqueoftheJudgementofTaste.Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress,1984.

- Chakrabarty,Dipesh.2012.“PostcolonialStudiesandtheChallengeofClimateChange.”NewLiteraryHistoryVol.43.

- Chakrabarty,Dipesh.“TheClimateofHistory:FourTheses.”CriticalInquiry35(2009):197-222.

- Chakrabarty,Dipesh.“HistoryonanExpandedCanvas:TheAnthropocene’sInviation.”Keynote,TheAnthropoceneProject.AnOpening,HausderKulturenderWelt,Berlin,January13,2013

- Childe,VGordon.ManMakesHimself.London,UK:Watts&Co,1936.- Christian,DavidandHMcNeil,William.CaliforniaWorldHistoryLibrary:MapsofTime:

AnIntroductiontoBigHistory.Berkeley,US:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,2004- Coffman,GeorgeR.“TheMedievalAcademyofAmerica:HistoricalBackgroundand

Prospect,”SpeculumI,no.1,(1926),5-18- Crosby,AlfredW.TheColumbianExchange:BiologicalandCulturalConsequencesof

1492.Westport,Conn:GreenwoodPress,1972.- Crutzen,PaulJ."Geologyofmankind."Nature415,no.6867(2002):23-23.- Crutzen,PaulJ.andEugeneStoermer.IGBPNewsletter41(RoyalSwedishAcademyof

Sciences,Stockholm,2000).- Deaton,Angus.UnderstandingConsumption.OxfordUniversityPress,1992.- Denevan,WilliamM.“The“PristineMyth”Revisited.”TheGeographicalReview

101(4):576-591Oct,2011.- Denevan,WilliamM.“ThePristineMyth:TheLandscapeoftheAmericasin1492.”

AnnalsoftheAssociationofAmericanGeographers.82-3(1992):369-385

49

- Ehrlich,PaulR.andHoldren,JohnP.andHolm,RichardW.,.Manandtheecosphere;readingsfromScientificAmerican/withcommentariesbyPaulR.Ehrlich,JohnP.Holdren,RichardW.Holm,W.H.FreemanSanFrancisco,1971.

- Friedman,Jonathan.ConsumptionandIdentity(StudiesinAnthropology&History).Washington,DC:Taylor&Francis,1994.

- Hamilton,Clive,andJacquesGrinevald."WastheAnthropoceneanticipated?."TheAnthropoceneReview2,no.1(2015):59-72.

- Harari,YuvalNoah.Sapiens:ABriefHistoryofHumankind.NewYork:Harper,2015.- Hawks,J.,deRuiter,D.J.,Berger,L.R..“Commenton“EarlyHomoat2.8MafromLedi-

Geraru,Afar,Ethiopia.””Science348,(2015):1326.AccessedFebruary11,2017.doi:10.1126/science.aab0591

- Hughes,J.Donald."ThreeDimensionsofEnvironmentalHistory."EnvironmentandHistory14,no.3(2008):319-30.

- Hughes,J.Donald.AnEnvironmentalHistoryoftheWorld:Humankind’schangingroleinthecommunityoflife.NewYork:Routledge,2001.

- Isherwood,BaronC.;Douglas,Mary.TheWorldofGoods:TowardsanAnthropologyofConsumptionNewYork:Routledge,1996.

- Isler,Karin,andCarelP.vanSchaik."Allomaternalcare,lifehistoryandbrainsizeevolutioninmammals."Journalofhumanevolution63,no.1(2012):52-63

- Ivanova,Diana;Stadler,Konstantin;Steen-Olsen,Kjartan;Wood,Richard;Vita,Gibran;Tukker,Arnold;Hertwich,EdgarG."EnvironmentalImpactAssessmentofHouseholdConsumption".JournalofIndustrialEcology.20(3):526–536.(18December2015).doi:10.1111/jiec.12371.

- Jefferson,Thomas.NotesontheStateofVirginia,ed.WilliamPeden.ChapelHill:UniversityofNorthCarolinaPress,1955.

- Leakey,Louis,PhillipV.TobiasandJohnR.Napier,"ANewSpeciesoftheGenusHomoFromOlduvaiGorge,"Nature202(1964):7-9

- Lewis,SimonL.,andMarkA.Maslin."Definingtheanthropocene."Nature519,no.7542(2015):171-180.

- Linnaeus.“TheOeconomyofNature.”.InMiscellaneoustractsrelatingtonaturalhistory,husbandryandphysick:towhichisaddedtheCalendarofflorabyBenjaminStillingfleet,37-131.4thedition.London:1791.

- Malm,Andreas,andAlfHornborg."Thegeologyofmankind?AcritiqueoftheAnthropocenenarrative."TheAnthropoceneReview1,no.1(2014):62-69.

- Marsh,GeorgePerkins.ManandNature;or,PhysicalGeographyasModifiedbyHumanAction.London:Low,194

- Mayr,Ernst."Ontheconceptsandterminologyofverticalsubspeciesandspecies."NationalResearchCouncilCommitteeonCommonProblemsofGenetics,Paleontology,andSystematicsBulletin2(1944):11-16.

50

- McCormick,John.ReclaimingParadise:TheGlobalEnvironmentalMovement.Bloomington:IndianaUniversityPress,1989.

- McNeill,JohnRobert."TheStateoftheFieldofEnvironmentalHistory."AnnualReviewofEnvironmentandResources35(2010):345-74.

- Meine,Curt.AldoLeopold:HisLifeandWork.Madison:UniversityofWisconsinPress,1988.

- Michelet,Jules.IntroductionaL’histoireUniverselle,SuiviDuDiscoursD’ouverturePononcéaLaFacultéDesLettresle9Janvier1843.2nded.Paris:Hachette,1834

- Morton,Timothy.Hyperobjects.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress,201.AccessedMarch9,2017.ProQuestEbookCentral

- Nash,Roderick.WildernessandtheAmericanMind:RoderickNash.NewHaven,Conn:YaleUniversityPress,1967.

- Potter,ClaireBondandRomano,ReneeC.DoingRecentHistory:OnPrivacy,Copyright,VideoGames,InstitutionalReviewBoards,ActivistScholarship,andHistoryThatTalksBack.Athens:UniversityofGeorgiaPress,2012.

- Reed,CharlesA..OriginsofAgriculture.Berlin/Boston:DeGruyter,1977.AccessedMarch9,2017.ProQuestEbookCentral.

- Richerson,PeterJ.,RobertBoyd,andRobertL.Bettinger."WasAgricultureImpossibleduringthePleistocenebutMandatoryduringtheHolocene?AClimateChangeHypothesis."AmericanAntiquity66,no.3(2001):387-411.doi:10.2307/2694241.

- Sandars,N.K.TheepicofGilgamesh.Harmondsworth:Penguin,1972.- Schama,Simon.LandscapeandMemory.London:HarperCollinsPublishers,1995.- Shryock,Andrew,andSmail,DanielLord,DeepHistory:TheArchitectureofPastand

Present,(Berkeley,US:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,2011)- Slater,Don(1997).ConsumerCultureandModernity.Cambridge,UK:PolityPress.ISBN

0-7456-0304-1.- Spier,Fred."BigHistory:TheEmergenceofanInterdisciplinaryScience?,"WorldHistory

Connected,October2009<http://worldhistoryconnected.press.illinois.edu/6.3/spier.html>(9Mar.2017).

- Spier,Fred.BigHistoryandtheFutureofHumanity.Chichester,U.K.:Wiley-Blackwell,2010.

- Steffen,Will,PaulJ.Crutzen,andJohnR.McNeill."TheAnthropocene:arehumansnowoverwhelmingthegreatforcesofnature."AMBIO:AJournaloftheHumanEnvironment36,no.8(2007):614-621.

- Vanderheiden,Steve."Globalizingresponsibilityforclimatechange."Ethics&internationalaffairs25,no.01(2011):65-84.

- Villmoare,Brian,WilliamH.Kimbel,ChalachewSeyoum,ChristopherJ.Campisano,ErinDiMaggio,JohnRowan,DavidR.Braun,J.RamonArrowsmith,andKayeE.Reed.“EarlyHomoat2.8MafromLedi-Geraru,Afar,Ethiopia.”Science347(2015):1352–1355.AccessedFebruary11,2017.doi:10.1126/science.aaa1343

51

- Villmoare,Brian,WilliamH.Kimbel,ChalachewSeyoum,ChristopherJ.Campisano,ErinDiMaggio,JohnRowan,DavidR.Braun,J.RamonArrowsmith,andKayeE.Reed."ResponsetoCommenton“EarlyHomoat2.8MafromLedi-Geraru,Afar,Ethiopia”."Science348,no.6241(2015):1326-1326.AccessedFebruary11,2017.doi:10.1126/science.aab1122

- Williams,HenrySmith.TheConquestofNature.NewYork:Goodhue,1912.