RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MAN AND NATURE DURING AND AFTER NEOLITHIC REVOLUTION AND HOW THE NATURE REMAIN ROBUST AND DESTROYED RESPECTIVELY

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MAN AND NATURE DURING AND AFTER NEOLITHIC REVOLUTION AND HOW THE NATURE REMAIN ROBUST AND DESTROYED RESPECTIVELY

KIWALE BRASTO, FESTO.

©2016, IRINGA, TANZANIA.

RUAHA CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY

Kiwale Company Publishers

Neolithic revolution refers to the transition from hunting gathering and scavenging to agricultural production of dome 10,000BCE. Is undoubtedly one of the major events in human history, an event which has been revolutionary in the sense that it entailed radical changes in people’s relationship to nature and among themselves. The process comprises many processes or comprises many revolutions, taking place in different times and places for at least 99% of duration of their existence, members of the Omnivorous genus Homo had lived by hunting and gathering. OR

Neolithic revolution, the transition from being solely hunter gatherers to the beginning of independent food production is dearly the main change that defines the Neolithic Revolution. The nomadic way of life supplementary scavenging, was presumably, also shared by earliest hominids. Also Neolithic revolution was a fundamental change in the way people lived, the shift from hunting and gathering to agriculture which lead to permanents, settlement, social classes and division of labor.

Nature is the phenomena of the physical world collectively, including plants, animal, the land scape and other features and products of the earth as opposed to human creations, nature(environment) resources are used to satisfy the survival needs of individual (Nagar, 1958).

The relationship between man and nature during Neolithic  revolution is based on economic system present at a time, until the Neolithic and in most areas for a long time after all human engaged in economic activities called hunting and gathering which is exactly what it sounds like acquiring of food  by hunting wild animals and gathering wild plants. This system was called “food extraction” as opposed to “food production” by agriculture and pastoralist. Hunting and gathering were actually a very efficient system that much of the time produces ample food. The main disadvantages were inability to maintain surplus during the time of inefficient food or supply non-food extractors like leaders and in fact that it can only maintain a very low population.

Relationship between man and nature during Neolithic Revolution.

During Neolithic revolution as population was low, the nature still remains stable as not intensively exploitation used for production of food to support the population. Since there is no archaeological evidence of food crises prior and during the development of agriculture, hunter gatherer communities maintain population size over time unless destructed by environmental shock, implying that the

Adoption of agriculture must have taken place as a result of unusual climate change in early  

(Bryne, 1989).

Another relationship between man and nature during Neolithic revolution man started to conduct the agriculture and pastoralism in the environment instead of hunting and gathering. In this period there were series of discoveries like domestication, culture and management of plants and animals. During Neolithic revolution agriculture was adopted repeatedly and independently in the world. Most of the parts of the world adopted agriculture and pastoralism like Middle East, Northern China and Mesoamerica where agriculture begun man depended in land in order to conduct these activities (Binford, 1968).

During Neolithic revolution man was still in the state of transformation from being controlled by nature in which characterized by low population and low technology, but that time the nature were not being destructed by man activities because the nature of technology used for exploiting resources were still low which would prevents  over exploitation of resources (Bryne, 1989).

Relationship between man and nature after Neolithic Revolution

After Neolithic revolution population increased more, investment activities increased, demanding for food to support population increased too and production for commercial activities as well. In most case the availability of Neolithic revolution paved the way to the growth of population pressure  which forced the intensification of domestication and food production, thus the growing population as people established permanent settlement provide intensive agriculture which  influence much the change of nature as the environment violation increased (Bin ford, 1968).

On other hand, the iron technology motivated the development of agriculture which could provide both food crops and cash crops. Hence, as cash crops produced, the industries developed in different parts of the world which highly demanded cash crops in this state man practiced large scale agriculture associated with violation of environment due to the clearing of forest for agriculture production (Dow et al 2009).

Availability of environmental resources are used to satisfy the survival need of individual in this relationship individual are not attempting to subjugate nature instead to live within the regularities of nature for example house constructed in those area beyond the reach of flood water, but amount interaction depend on nature with maximum amount of accommodation and minimum amount of manipulation, (Nagar, 1959).

The following are the factor which show the relationship on how nature remaining robust and destroyed during and after Neolithic revolution;

Demographically and Ecologically stressed civilization, for example Maya empire collapse following a brief dry period and Mesopotamian civilization were destroyed after their system of irrigation was destroyed by the Mongols. As many as 37,000 BC Sumerian cities were deserted by their population because irrigation technology, soil that had produced the world first agricultural surplus had become saline and water logged. But this environment had begun to degenerate long before this final disaster. Furthermore, Eastern philosopher MengTze (Mencius) was aware with environmental degradation in Asia, warning the rulers of imperial China of unsustainable use of resources land. Due to this facts nature was started to be destroyed during the Neolithic revolution and was more distracted after Neolithic revolution in which man had already mastered the environment.

Emergence  of sedentary and intensified forms of agriculture, in part as a response to wild life scarcity, this revolution in food procurement generally followed the collapse of the big game hunting culture in northern Europe and America, initially what is generally known as Mesolithic period or middle stone age. Hunting and gathering society were forced to intensive domestication of animals and plants.  Due to these facts many of elephant, lion and leopard of Europe were gradually disappeared following the change of nature due to human activities which involves clearing of environment which was more favorable for wild animal and plant species after being destroyed during Neolithic revolution. For example of area were sedentary settlement was emerged was Babylon, Egypt, Greece, Rome, Ancient China and Maya all of these areas forest were  destroyed and their fertile soil were totally destroyed and much of original fauna through combination of linear thinking and their insatiable drives for material wealth (Broswimmer, 2002).

Technologically (the rise of scientific and technological thinking). During Neolithic revolution, the nature was still stable due to technology which used was poor compared to the epoch after Neolithic revolution. During Neolithic revolution man were still use poor tools even if were getting some changes (improvement). So, the nature was not more destructed, while after Neolithic revolution man has already been improve technology and started to use high machine in industry which cause the destruction of natural intensively through practicing deforestation to acquire area for both settlement and production of agriculture, and through increase of industrial activities after Neolithic revolution influence destruction of nature through the emission of gases from industry and heavy machine (Dow et al, 2009)

                                                                                                                                                                                 In this both epoch of Neolithic revolution (during and after Neolithic), the nature (environment) become differ because during Neolithic Revolution the environment became stable as there were no high exploitation of resources to support the population while after the Neolithic revolution the intensive exploitation of resources associated with agriculture activities lead the destruction of nature in different parts of the world.

REFERENCES

Binford, L. (1968). “Post-Pleistocene adaptation”, new perspectives in archaeology, Chicago, IL:         

               Archive publisher.

Broswimmer, J. (2002). Ecocide, a short history of the mass extinction of species: London, Pluto  

               press.

Byrne, R. (1989). “Climatic change and the origin of agriculture” in Linda Manzanilla, ed; stuidies  

               in Neolithic and urban revolution Oxford; UK, British Archaeological reports publisher.

Dow, G et al (2009). “Climate reversal and the transition to agriculture economic growth,

                 new Haven, CT. Yale oriersity press.

Nagar, D. (1958), Environment Psychology, New Delhi, Concept Publishing Company 

Reinfew, C & Bahn, P. (2008). Archeology: Theories, methods and practice of agriculture (5^thed)

               London, theme & Hudson.

Tanno, K &Willcox, G (2006).Population, food and knowledge; A simple unified growth theory,

               Cambridge UK.Combridge University Press.

 Reinfew, C &Bahn, P. (2008). Archeology: Theories, methods and practice of agriculture (5^thed) 

               London, theme & Hudson.

               In this book of Archeology: theory methods and practice of agriculture explain the case of                   hunter gatherers and extreme climates of the productivity of intermediate goods which 

               involve further specialization in the limited set of available species.