Homo Sapiens’ Nomadic Hunter-Gatherer Interaction
By Anonymous
From approximately 70,000 years ago to 12,000 years ago Homo sapiens were a hunter-gatherer society, that traveled across swaths of land to find sustenance (Harari 36, 40). These populations relied on natural sources of food, foraging for figs or berries, hunting prey, and fishing, even occasionally setting up long term camps (Harari 40). These sources of food are our natural resource units. These fall into the greater categories of the resource systems, which are the ecological systems which the units are part of. The river is the system for the fish, the forest for the fruits, and the population for the prey.
There is not much known about the social interactions while Homo sapiens were in this hunter-gatherer phase. Some scholars posit that they were egalitarian societies with monogamous relationships creating a sense of community and common goal, while other scholars insist they followed an inherent nuclear family model (Harari 36). An aspect that is agreed up is the nomadic lifestyle that the group participated in, travelling over land to reach more prosperous areas. As bands of Homo sapiens wander, there are bound to be interactions with other populations, and while we don’t know the extent of these relationships, an assumption is a level of both cooperation and fighting (Harari 39). A massive social factor in these communities is the population of a single group, a factor that influences the demand for resources. Through this the rate at which a group would be required to move is also changed, as there are more people the same land can support the band for a shorter time.
The interaction of Homo sapiens and the environment at this time was relatively simple, they foraged, hunted, and fished for food. While there are occasionally short-term fishing camps, the populations were nomadic, and due to this provided the opportunity for the ecology to regenerate. After a band had eaten their fill at a location they moved to the next one, allowing the original location to thrive, animals reproducing and plants propagating through the forests. The movement of bands is the only factor balancing the environment in this model, as the populations of the bands would be unsustainable if they were sedentary and didn’t have an alternative source of food.
The unsustainability of sedentary hunter-gatherer populations is obvious if you run the loopy model. The population will continue to increase through reproduction, and the environment will become overutilized. It is only when you increase the amount of movement for the bands that the environments begin to recover, and slowly at that. Once the systems have become overused, it is very difficult to bring them back, requiring a massive amount of movement from the communities.
Works Cited
Harari, Yuval. “Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind.” Random House. HarperCollins. 2015.
Loopy Model
The Harnessing of Fire and Homo Sapiens Development
By Daniel Seim
13.5 billion years ago, an event nicknamed the Big Bang kicked off what we now know as our universe, and 3.8 billion years ago Earth was formed. All these events came together to create a genus known as homo, or humans. 70,000 years ago, humans entered what is known as the cognitive revolution (Harari, 2014, p. 9). Although long before this cognitive revolution, humans were making cognitive advances which drastically changed their place in this world. By approximately 300,000 years ago, humans including homo erectus, homo neanderthalensis, and homo sapiens were all making use of fire (Harari, 2014, p. 15). This advancement yielded humans a unique place in the world order, they now had control of a natural resource and event. The stocks in this instance would be humans, the control of fire, the cooking advancements this allowed, natural resource stocks, and impacts on human intelligence.
Governance and User Characteristics
This topic stems from a time where governmental systems had not really been enacted yet. Although this analysis is still possible. I would say that these advancements allowed humans to come together in a culinary sense. The advancement of fire really ushered a space for humans to meet over a meal. The advancement in cooking allowed humans to spend 1/5th the time that chimpanzees spend chewing their food daily (Harari, 2014, p. 15). This allowed the time for increased socialization and potential setup of leadership, the more discussion that there is in a simple society the greater likelihood that issues of the society are discussed and thus solutions are found.
Social/ Economic/ Political Settings or Related Ecosystems
While this advancement was from an exceedingly initial period in human development, some issues can still be applied. Economics is an interesting question in a period this early, however the concepts of bartering can go back if there were resources to possess. I think the advancement of fire and cooking because of it would only increase the prevalence of bartering. If one possesses a very good tasting cooking piece of meat that may yield a higher trade value than an uncooked piece or a fruit. It also must have led to increased political stability as it led to more free time and less disease across society as cooking became more prevalent. Ostrom’s framework is especially applicable in this instance as the impacts of cooking were felt across the social-ecological system. As cooking became common practice, humans were consuming more food and taking more resources out of the ecosystem. This also allowed humans to burn down forests to create farmland (Harari, 2014, p. 15), which is a huge issue in modern society because natural habitats are being destroyed to create farmland. This advancement may seem surface level, but it had massive impacts on the world, and especially social-ecological systems.
Works Cited
Harari, Y. N. (2014). Sapiens: A brief history of humankind. Random House.
Loopy Model
Early Humans and Their Environment
By Anonymous
For this assignment, I decided to go with the evolution of early humans around 2 million years ago when they were moving from trees to grasslands in the African Savannah. This was an important time in the evolution of the human species, because it was the start of walking on two legs, a change in diet/ food sources, and the emergence of complex social groups in order to hunt effectively and survive (Columbia,2016). This time in history was when we starting developing the foundation for not only our bodies, but also our social interactions with other humans and set ourselves apart from our great ape relatives.
At this time in history, grasslands were becoming more prevalent around our early ancestors ecosystems, and offered a diverse array of food options that weren’t as readily available as in the woodlands we were accustomed to. Transitioning to the grasslands was necessary for survival in order to feed increasing populations as well as produce enough energy to supply our growing brains (Columbia,2016). During this time, early humans started transitioning to a mostly carnivore diet to also including grasses and really what was readily available. For early humans this time was extremely new and difficult to compete in, which is why our bodies evolved better in order to suit our new environment (Choi, 2011). When moving from the trees to more grasslands, humans needed to be able to walk on two feet, make use of our hands, and communicate effectively in order to obtain resources. Since early humans had to compete with predators and were not on the top of the food chain, they had to work together and communicate in order to hunt/gather and provide energy to their larger than average brains.
During the early human evolution there was little to no governance in the populations besides the alpha males. Unfortunately they were more preoccupied surviving instead of regulating inner communally and making policies or laws to abide by. One aspect related to their ecosystems most likely did play a role in their evolution and everyday life would be the changing climate patterns of the time(Byrd,2016). When being as dependent on your own abilities and the ecosystem around you, climate patterns most likely played a huge role in what to hunt or eat in certain times of the year when certain things aren’t readily available. An example for this would be rainy seasons or the dry seasons in the summer months when staple animals and plants would be diminished or nonexistent which could kill the whole population if not properly adapted to (Columbia,2016). Ultimately, this time period was a huge stepping stone in the evolution of early humans into what we are today. Without transitioning to grasslands, we may not have developed walking on two feet, a more diverse diet, or our complex social interactions and communication skills. Even without the use of policies and governance like we know it today, our early ancestors were able to adjust to hardships like the change in climate patterns, the availability or resources, and outside competition for said resources. Our ancestors went through hardships and centuries of development in order to walk so that their future generations could run.
Works Cited
Byrd, D. (2016, June 6). Did humans evolve with grasslands?: Human world. EarthSky. Retrieved March 27, 2022, from https://earthsky.org/human-world/did-humans-evolve-with-grasslands/
Choi, C. Q. (2011, August 3). Savanna, not forest, was human ancestors’ proving ground. LiveScience. Retrieved March 27, 2022, from https://www.livescience.com/15377-savannas-human-ancestors-evolution.html
Columbia Climate School. (2016, June 6). New support for human evolution in Grasslands. Earth Institute. Retrieved March 27, 2022, from https://www.earth.columbia.edu/articles/view/3283
Kremer, R. (2022, March 30). Milestones in human evolution. Smithsonian Institution. Retrieved March 27, 2022, from https://www.si.edu/newsdesk/factsheets/milestones-human-evolution
Loopy Model
Use of Environmental Resources by Homo sapiens to Reinforce Social Constructs
By Colin McDonald
In Sapiens Yuval Harari (2018) argues that the ability of Homo sapiens to describe and believe a collective fiction is the foundational to the modern human condition. These social constructs allow H. sapiens to form and identify as belonging to groups that can be large in size and cooperate effectively. By shaping resources from their environment into objects with symbolic meaning H. sapiens reinforced these important social constructs, and these objects would become increasingly more complex and resource intensive as history continued, showing their importance.
Christopher S. Henshilwood and Curtis W. Marean define modern human behavior as “behavior that is mediated by socially constructed patterns of symbolic thinking, actions, and communication that allow for material and information exchange and cultural continuity between and across generations and contemporaneous communities. The key criterion for modern human behavior is not the capacity for symbolic thought but the use of symbolism to organize behavior” (2003, p. 635). Due to the amount of time that has passed since these behaviors first appeared in H. sapiens it is hard to find archaeological evidence of when it first emerged. Ochre dated to be about 300,000 years old potentially used as a symbol to reinforce social constructs was found at one site in Kenya (Brooks et al., 2018). Shell beads dated to about 82,000 years ago have been found in Morocco (Bouzouggar et al., 2007), while engraved ostrich eggshells dated to about 60,000 years ago have been found in South Africa (Texier et al., 2010).
The stock of natural resource used to make symbolic objects varies and depends on the environment that the H. sapiens making them are in. The examples we have are made from materials that can be shaped somewhat easily, such as ivory, but durable enough to retain the form given. Of course, it is likely we only have the objects made from the most durable materials because those are the ones that survived, as Harari points out. Ochre used as a pigment for coloring is also a commonly used resource. As human societies developed and technology improved the stocks of resources they would use to reinforce social constructs increased.
Using Ostrom’s (2010) social-ecological systems framework the resource systems that the H. sapiens creating the symbolic object are living in will determine the resource units that can act as inputs for the interaction, be it shells, ivory, or ostrich eggs. The interaction taking place is the gathering of the resource units and the creation of a symbolic object from those units, with the symbolic object and reinforced social constructs being the outcome. The actors are those whose belief in the symbolic object reinforce the social construct. The governance system is the social construct that demands the creation of the symbolic object, which in turn reinforces that social construct. This could be religious, such an idol, or hierarchical, such as a golden crown, to name a few examples.
Today our symbolic objects range from the simple, such as flags to represent a country, to the extraordinarily intricate, such as Saint Peter’s Basilica to represent religion. But these objects still serve the same purpose that the original symbolic objects did to our Homo sapiens ancestors tens or hundreds of thousands of years ago; to reinforce the social constructs that they symbolize, which in turn allow up to billions of people to feel that they belong to the same group and cooperate in extremely complex ways to incredible ends.
Works Cited
Bouzouggar, A., Barton, N., Vanhaeren, M., d’Errico, F., Collcutt, S., Higham, T., Hodge, E., Parfitt, S., Rhodes, E., Schwenninger, J.-L., Stringer, C., Turner, E., Ward, S., Moutmir, A., & Stambouli, A. (2007). 82,000-year-old shell beads from North Africa and implications for the origins of modern human behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(24), 9964–9969. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0703877104
Brooks, A. S., Yellen, J. E., Potts, R., Behrensmeyer, A. K., Deino, A. L., Leslie, D. E., Ambrose, S. H., Ferguson, J. R., d’Errico, F., Zipkin, A. M., Whittaker, S., Post, J., Veatch, E. G., Foecke, K., & Clark, J. B. (2018). Long-distance stone transport and pigment use in the earliest Middle Stone Age. Science, 360(6384), 90–94. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao2646
Harari, Y. N. (2018). Sapiens: A brief history of humankind. Harper Perennial.
Henshilwood, C. S., & Marean, C. W. (2003). The origin of modern human behavior: Critique of the models and their test implications. Current Anthropology, 44(5), 627–651. https://doi.org/10.1086/377665
Ostrom, E., & Cox, M. (2010). Moving beyond panaceas: A multi-tiered diagnostic approach for social-ecological analysis. Environmental Conservation, 37(4), 451–463. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0376892910000834
Texier, P.-J., Porraz, G., Parkington, J., Rigaud, J.-P., Poggenpoel, C., Miller, C., Tribolo, C., Cartwright, C., Coudenneau, A., Klein, R., Steele, T., & Verna, C. (2010). A Howiesons poort tradition of engraving ostrich eggshell containers dated to 60,000 years ago at Diepkloof Rock Shelter, South Africa. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(14), 6180–6185. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0913047107
Loopy Model
Fiction: The Foundation of Homo sapiens Success
By EMF
Between 30,000 and 70,000 years ago, Homo sapiens underwent a cognitive revolution that separated them from other humans in the genus Homo. With calories to spare after gaining the ability to cook, human brains grew (Harari, 2014, p. 15). Gossip shaped small sapiens groups into logical, effective collaborators (p. 22). Sapiens were almost ready to outcompete other humans, to cross the barrier between a marginal species and a worldwide one. The final factor that pushed us over the edge was the development of fiction—falsehoods that allowed us to unite into highly adaptable communities based on religion, nationality, economy; all myths that wouldn’t exist unless we sapiens believed them so (p. 24). Now, we take those intangible falsehoods and physically change our environment to make them true, then unite around them, use them to bend the natural world to our will.
Resource Characteristics and Environmental Interactions
During the cognitive revolution, sapiens lived nomadic lives and thus had a wide range of foods and lands at their disposal. Most tools were made of wood (p. 36). Foraging meant malnutrition was less common than in later agrarian societies that depended on staple crops, and that if one food source failed, they had many others to rely on (p. 42-43). They mainly gathered food, although they hunted what they could. Natural disasters and disease greatly affected their survival (p. 48), but their large brains and cooperation skills allowed ancient foragers to develop technology and knowledge, then use it to spread across the globe and leave mass extinctions in their wake. Animals that did not evolve to fear humans were hunted to extinction, and environments were fundamentally changed, like in Australia where forests were burned and diprotodons were slaughtered—then in America where countless species met their own ends (p. 51-58).
Governance, Political, and Social Factors
Little is known about their governing or political systems. It is assumed that they had variations in hierarchical versus egalitarian societies, just like we do today, but little evidence remains (p. 43-44). Ancient foraging sapiens tended to stay in relatively smaller groups that were tightly knit. They would occasionally trade, cooperate, or fight with neighboring groups, but the vast majority of their time was spent alone with their own people. In the two instances modern scholars have been able to observe—in Australia and western North America—conflicts between bands were frequent; however, these results may have been tainted by imperialist influence (p. 48). Bone artifacts only offer vague ideas of injury, like whether a bone was broken or not, leaving out whatbroke the bone and what condition the soft tissues were in. From what we do know, foraging sapiens most likely had varying times of tranquility and extreme violence; the same as modern humans do (p. 49). Socially, based on scant cave paintings and artifacts, many scholars believe they lived in small, close groups, practicing various types of animism (p. 44). But, like their governance, they left little behind for modern archeologists to study.
Works Cited
Harari, Y. N. (2014). Sapiens: A brief history of humankind. Random House.
Loopy Model
Man and Beast
By Anonymous
Time Period: ~15,000 years ago
Dogs are notably the first domesticated animal. Harari briefly goes over this in the cognitive revolution portion of the book. As Harari states, “Dogs that were most attentive to the needs and feelings of their human companions got extra care and food, and were more likely to survive.” (page 39). This is partially shown in the loopy model. The model shows the mutually beneficial relationship between man and early canines. As Homo sapiens and early canines began to socialize together, they would hunt together. In the book, Harari mentions how canines and man would hunt together as well as fight and provide an alarm system (page 39). This would boost the population of Homo sapiens as well as the early canines. However, it would cause a loss in population among native fauna due to the increased effectiveness of hunting.
As populations of both Homo sapiens and canines grew, as did the consumption of food. This would have a negative impact on the fauna but a positive impact on those eating the fauna, at first. In the end, without proper management, the fauna would be chased to extinction which would leave Homo sapiens and, consequentially, the canines with no food.
Works Cited
Harari, Y.N. (2014). Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind. Random House.
Loopy Model