How religion impacted the ecosystem
By Anonymous
This event occurred before the agricultural revolution, which was 1300 years before. The impact of religion is still massive in modern-day society. Religion has a significant effect on the globalization of human culture. As religion developed, the ideas and philosophies in the environment started to change. Before the religious revolution, people didn’t care about the animals to eat or things to grow. As religion grew within the sapiens, animals and lands started to privatize. Now, people only care about the animals according to their “religion.” To survive, the inhabitants of a particular valley needed to understand the super-human order that regulated their valley and adjust their behavior accordingly. It was pointless to try to convince the inhabitants of some distant valley to follow the same rules. The Indus people did not bother to send missionaries to the Ganges to convince locals not to hunt white-tailed foxes (Harari, 2015). The Indus people of Ganges were mainly Hindus, and the law of religion taught them not to kill the animals. Instead, they would grow plants and raise cows and buffaloes for their purpose.
As the law of religion continued, land ownership and animal privatization became more common. As animals were raised, grew up, and died within some field regions, the resources started to get less and less. Landownership became a problem because it would disrupt other animals’ flow, and hunting would be more common within the law of the religion. Farmers may know what religion to follow and what animals to breed; however, they do not know the outcome mix animals breeding. They could lock the sheep in pens, castrate rams and selectively breed ewes, yet they could not ensure that they conceived and gave birth to healthy lambs, nor could they prevent the eruption of deadly epidemics (Harari, 2015). The idea of religion created more massive problems such as diseases. The concept of mixing rams and sheep made an unhealthy ecosystem within specific areas. Each animal has certain characteristics. Breeding one animal into another different animal species would make genetics diverse and discomfort the offspring of animals and cannot be healthy.
Another problem with religion is that it divides. As religion expanded throughout human history, people split themselves into specific regions. Only people had the same ideology and philosophy within that particular region. People would different philosophies and ideas would start a fight with other religions. Religion is such a subject that it is easy to start a war against each other. So the empires were created within the forms of religion. And people who thought they were confident would go and live in that particular religion. As long as people lived their entire lives within limited territories of a few hundred square miles, most of their needs could be met by local spirits. But once kingdoms and trade networks expanded, people needed to contact entities whose power and authority encompassed a whole kingdom or an entire trade basin(Harari, 2015).
The war within the territories has created massive problems in the ecosystem. As the battle continues, the weapons become the mass destruction of animals and the ecosystem. War creates a situation in food resources for animals and humans as well. As the war begins, the food chain is disrupted, mainly impacting animals and plants.
Works Cited
Harari, Yuval N. author. Sapiens : a Brief History of Humankind. New York :Harper, 2015.
Loopy Model
Effects of Spanish-Mexico Expansion into the Aztec Territory
By Anonymous
Time period:
1519 onward (1521, Cortes takes Tenochtitlan)
Stocks:
- Spanish expansion
Governance/use characteristics:
- Resource policies
- Market incentives
Social/economic/political
- Economy
- Spanish/Aztec conflict
- Spanish/Native allies
- Gold/resources
November 1519, Spanish conquistador Hernan Cortes meets Emperor Montezuma II of the Aztecs in the capitol, Tenochtitlan (Khan Academy, n.d.). Inaccurate history reports state that Montezuma II quickly adopted Christianity from the Spaniards and allowed them to move into the city where rebels later began conflict (Frederick, 2019). However, this is not accurate. Cortes led a brutal two-year campaign against the Aztecs in order to assume control of their land and resources (Frederick, 2019). By using more advanced weaponry, European diseases, and allying with neighboring tribes that considered the Aztecs their enemy, Cortes and his men were able to take Tenochtitlan in 1521 (Encyclopedia Britannica, n.d.). The main resource the Spanish were seeking was gold, although agricultural goods such as cacao were also desirable. After the defeat of Tenochtitlan, the Spaniards build a new capital with a Christian cathedral in the ruins of the city. Following the fall of the Aztec empire, the Spaniards continued expanding their rule. By 1525 the Spanish rule had reached as far as Guatemala and Honduras (Encyclopedia Britannica, n.d.).
Spanish expansion meant new access to land and resources for the Spaniards and all of Europe. They renamed Tenochtitlan “Mexico City” and set about populating it with Europeans (Khan Academy, n.d.). New cities meant deforestation for construction and for land. This means a loss in biodiversity as well. There was likely also loss of biodiversity to be used as food and to be sent back to Europe. From conquered native peoples the Spaniards gained silver and gold, their most desired resource, but failed to find large deposit sites. However, the quantities of silver and gold that were acquired and sent back to Europe caused inflation and economic distress (Khan Academy, n.d.). The access to these resources likely led to new policies and market incentives regarding the desirable goods.
Works Cited
Encyclopedia Britannica, inc. (n.d.). Expansion of Spanish rule. Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved April 9, 2022, from https://www.britannica.com/place/Mexico/Expansion-of-Spanish-rule
Fredrick, J. (2019, November 10). 500 years later, the Spanish conquest of Mexico is still being debated. NPR. Retrieved April 9, 2022, from https://www.npr.org/2019/11/10/777220132/500-years-later-the-spanish-conquest-of-mexico-is-still-being-debated#:~:text=capital%2C%20in%201520.-,The%20Spanish%20conquistador%20led%20an%20expedition%20to%20present%2Dday%20Mexico,and%20his%20men%20to%20retreat.
Khan Academy. (n.d.). The spanish Conquistadores and Colonial Empire (article). Khan Academy. Retrieved April 9, 2022, from https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/us-history/precontact-and-early-colonial-era/spanish-colonization/a/the-spanish-conquistadores-and-colonial-empire
Loopy Model
How Money Impacts Human-Environment Interaction
By Anonymous
Over time, smaller cultures and societies came together into bigger, more complex civilizations. Eventually, we have the global economy we have today. Some factors that brought groups together were money, empires, religion, and commerce.
Money allowed for more complex economies. Hunters-gathers didn’t have money. Instead, they traded goods and services within their isolated communities. They were mostly self-sufficient, but could trade with other groups for certain items they did not have. The economy used mutual favors and obligations and bartering with outsiders. When the Agricultural Revolution began, things were mostly the same. People lived in small communities. They traded for things they needed.
Because of differences in climate and differences in soil, different villages were better at producing certain goods. This leads to specialization. For example, one village might have good soil for clay for making pottery. Another village might have really good soil and climate for making wine. People could specialize in what they could make or grow and have greater expertise in a certain area.
The rise of cities and better transportation led to more specialization. People needed a better way to trade different kinds of goods. Money changed the barter economy and encouraged specialization.
Money helped bring smaller communities together. Money helps in the exchange of goods across different kinds of people. Money made it easier to exchange one thing for another. It was a common unit to help people understand the value of different types of things (e.g., apples, shoes, gold, food, medical treatment).
Time Period
After hunter-gather societies and after the agricultural revolution.
Resource characteristics
For the money system it would go to transportation, trade, cities, to specialization in like climate and soil.
Governance/user characteristic:
Government cared a lot about money systems and that is how cities and transportation, and trade were becoming very important in society.
Social/economic/political settings or related ecosystems
The use of money, instead of bartering, increased trade, increased people living in cities, and increased the need for transportation. Better transportation increased trade and allowed more people to live in cities. Better transportation also allowed people to be more specialized in what the grew or made or the service they provide. Differences in the climate and the soil in different villages and regions made it better to produce certain things. Differences in climate and soil led to specialization (e.g., clay for ceramics in one area, wine in another area, olive oil in another area).
Interactions:
Money system interaction with cities, transportation, trade, specialization and climate and soil.
Outcomes:
Money wasn’t quite known of by the native people they used gold for jewelry or would trade cloth or beans as currency. The rich people were trying to take advantage and take the gold and money for themselves. In different climates it is easier or hard to do certain things like making pots from clay or farming.
Citations
Harari, Yuval Noah. Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind. eBook edition, Harper Collins, 2014.
Loopy Model
Agricultural Revolution: The human-environment interaction on how money was the peacemaker between religions
By Anonymous
Time period: There were many crusades between Christians and Muslims during 1095-1291 (Moynihan, 2020). However, in the 1200s, conflicting societies came together and globally accepted and traded with money.
Resource characteristics: Due to agricultural and cognitive evolution, it increased the human population. This caused the increase of tree usage and exploitation of resources. More wood was needed to build houses and make fires for food and warmth. Also, the overuse of resources can cause fluctuations in the ecosystem (MacKenzie, et al., 2002). As people depend on resources to earn an income, it will affect the environment. For example, a city that’s close to the sea will have fish to sell. But as more people buy fish, the city will then have a hard to keep up with demand as available fish will decrease.
Governance/user characteristics: As more cities were formed, there was an increase in trade. Each city has its own resource(s) that other cities don’t have, which leads to an increase in trade. This helped increase wealth within their city, and the dependence of others for buying and selling resources. However, the dependence for each other does not mean they trust each other.
Social/economic/political settings or related ecosystems: In this human-environment interaction has a social context of economic development within the cities, political stability between religions, and an increase of market incentives to sell goods and make a profit. As for the related ecosystems, the social context increased deforestation and the fluctuation of resources. The production of resources aren’t keeping up with the demand.
Interaction(s): The growth of population caused people to migrate leading to the development of cities and deforestation. Within these cities, they had their own religion and resources. Each city has its own resource(s) that other cities don’t have, which leads to an increase in trade. With everyone accepting the concept of money, it calmed down the wars between religions. Harari emphasizes that money is an effective fiction because it convinces all of humanity to agree that something is valuable and trust everybody else will too. Cities had to depend on other cities for resources.
Outcomes: In my loopy model, it starts with population growth. As population grows so will religion. When the population growth increases, there will be an increase in cities. The increase in cities will cause deforestation, and which will affect us, the human population. With more cities forming, there will be an increase of different resources. With more resources, it causes an increase of trade between cities. With trade it comes with wealth, and wealth will improve/expand cities. Wealth and resources cause an increase in population. Throughout the loopy model, we will see resources, wealth, and trade fluctuate as resources can’t keep up with demand.
Citation:
MacKenzie, Alheit, J., Conley, D. J., Holm, P., & Kinze, C. C. (2002). Ecological hypotheses for a historical reconstruction of upper trophic level biomass in the Baltic Sea and Skagerrak. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 59(1), 173–190. https://doi.org/10.1139/f01-201
Moynihan. (2020). Peacemaking and holy war: Christian–Muslim diplomacy, c. 1095–1291, in crusades historiography. History Compass, 18(2). https://doi.org/10.1111/hic3.12606
Loopy Model
The collective agreement of currency
By Anonymous
Introduction and timeline
Harari (2014) writes that we get the first modern day coin currency around 640 BC in western Anatolia (roughly where modern-day Turkey is), when King Alyattes of Lydia commissioned coins of standard weight in gold or silver (131). The specific interaction I will be describing is the spread of metal coin currency. Although ostensibly they get their worth from the valuable metals, Harari argues this doesn’t apply to cultures who do not have any use for gold or silver pieces. Instead, coins such as these spread simply because some people believe they’re valuable, and thus everyone else eventually joins in because they see an opportunity to sell something ‘worthless’ to others, and in turn get things they do actually want. Harari himself skips around the timelines in regard to money usage, but we might see this period in Anatolia as the entry of currency which only increases with time.
Using Ostrom’s (2014) SES framework I will denote the different factors at play in this interaction.
Resource Characteristics
Harari does not dig into the environmental aspects of this process, but we can easily extrapolate and suppose that the resource characteristics include whatever general commodity is being traded (whether it be barley, furniture, spices, etc.), and the metal itself, including the resources needed to extract and refine it (of course, there are other forms of currency such as shells or cigarettes depending on contexts, but here I am focusing on coin money). Since we’re talking about commodities, the resource characteristics could include virtually anything that could be sold. Although there is theoretically a finite amount of gold and silver on the earth, these limitations don’t play into consideration here.
Governance/user characteristics
This category is more important. As Harari himself notes, currency generally requires a government or authority to back and mint the money as an act of sovereignty. This is important because it prevents forgery, for forging money is essentially the forgery of the government’s/king’s/etc. signature, which is treason and often punishable by death (Harari 131-132). What exactly government monetary policy looked like in the late 600s BC I do not know, but given that the government controlled the money supply, I imagine there must have been some kind of monetary policy. There was also certainly some kind of fiscal policy as well, undoubtedly in the form of taxation at the very least. The success of markets also likely played an important role in determining the real value of the money, i.e., how much people were willing to pay/accept for commodities.
It’s worth noting however that economists still argue about what and where exactly money derives its value from, and where and how it originated. Harari presents this as sound indisputable fact, but this is far from the case. David Graeber (2011), for instance, argues that credit and money long precede bartering, completely contrary to Harari’s very stereotypical story of barter -> money -> credit. Marx, for instance might argue that gold gets its value from how labor intensive it is. Sovereign power certainly plays an important role in money, and so does agreement, but whether these things are actually what constitutes money is far from clear—Harari seems to skirt the issue on this point, and is a little inconsistent on it.
Socio-economic-political and environmental factors
Political stability and economics development were undoubtedly significant in the spread of currency. A stable government and stable political community allowed for people to trust that the value of the currency would be stable. People were also incentivized to use the currency since it was probably easier to use by the mere fact that most people accepted it and it was standardized. Finally, money changed what it meant to trust others. Since the invention of currency, trust was no longer a question of moral character (so Harari argues), but rather an economic one: does this person have money, and can I trust them to give it to me? As for ecosystems, currency likely changed the way people saw the environment and materials: things could now be seen not in terms of their use-value, but rather more so in terms of their exchange value; by increasing specialization, natural resources and materials are seen in terms of their value and less so their raw utility.
Human-environment interaction
We can therefore argue that currency changes the way people interact with their environment and is one of the first major steps towards a disconnect from the environment. Gold mining became an economic industry, done because gold could be used to buy things, and less so (like the Asztecs) because it was easily workable and thus was useful for making aesthetically interesting things like statues. One consequence of this might be the colonization of Latin America by the Spanish (beginning in the late 15th century). Eduardo Galeano (1973) in chapter one of The Open Veins of Latin America (“Lust for Gold, Lust for Silver”) writes about the Spanish colonization and subsequent enslavement of the South American natives and their toil and extermination in the gold mines. Mining tends to be disastrous for environmental and human health. With this we can see a bit of a feedback loop between the increasing value of natural resources, and the decreasing value of the environment as something in itself valuable (biodiversity as a good thing, for instance). Harari (strangely) may not be so critical of imperialism, but the imperial conquest and stripping of resources of native people certainly played an important role in disadvantaging the global south and allowing for Western hegemony to take hold.
Outcomes
My model simplifies the basic process of the legitimation of currency, its spread, and the equilibration of price by supply and demand. Harari describes how, although for instance in India they might not see much value or use for gold, merchants who travel will notice this, and end up flipping the cheap gold from India for high profit in the Mediterranean. This leads firstly to an increase of demand for gold in India (and thus a rise in price), and then to an influx of gold into the Mediterranean (leading to a drop in price), thereby leading to a roughly equal price throughout. As demand for gold increases, more and more of it is minted and mined. This increases economic activity, as well as environmental activity by way of resource extraction.
Works Cited
Galeano, Eduardo. The Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of The Pillage of a Continent. 25th Anniversary Edition, Monthy Review Press, 1973.
Graeber, David. Debt: The First 5000 Years. 2014 edition, Melville House, 2011.
Harari, Yuval Noah. Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind. eBook edition, Harper Collins, 2014.
McGinnis, M.D., & Ostrom, E. “Socio-ecological system framework: initial changes and continuing challenges.” Ecology and Society, 19(2), 30. 2014.
Loopy Model
The Human-Environment Interactions of Trade-Based Central Asian Urbanization
By Sean Kurth
Time Period and Background
Samarkand rose and fell in its prominence as a Central Asian Silk Road trading post during the Middle Ages, before Europe began exploring for trade routes and colonies of its own. Harari specifically mentions Samarkand, but as a proxy for the entire region that was transformed by the unification of Europe and East Asia into one world economically. That would place the time period for this interaction between the 500s and 1500s AD (Bosworth & Schaeder, 2012). Samarkand still exists today, but as a globally insignificant city in the impoverished post-Soviet country of Uzbekistan that’s smaller than Indianapolis.
Samarkand is located in a desert, along with most of modern Uzbekistan, and what isn’t desert in Central Asia is semi-arid steppes or fragile temperate forest ecosystems (Sutton et al., 2013). Trees, once cut, had a hard time growing back, because the transpiration of the forests themselves contributed to making the climate wetter (Staal et al., 2018). Therefore, the removal of trees for agriculture actually makes the land worse for agriculture in the long-run.
Loopy Model Characteristics
The natural resource stocks used in this model are forests and soil nutrients. Trees were used for building, firewood, crafting, and they were also cleared to create fertile farmland. Soil nutrients were depleted by the intensifying of agriculture as the population grew, a problem compounded by irrigation making the land saltier over time from sediment left by rivers (Altaweel, 2013). Increased agriculture increased the amount of complex society that could be supported by the agricultural surplus, but also decreased the stocks needed to support it if done in an unsustainable, exponentially-growing way.
A more complex society increased the amount of roads and trade, then roads enable more trade as trade creates a demand for more roads. Both cause urban growth in Samarkand and similar cities, which leads to deforestation and the depletion of soil nutrients. This reduces the agricultural surplus, which reduces the amount of overhead a complex society has to work with, which reduces urban growth until the agricultural surplus and natural resource stocks are restored so the city can grow again.
Model Outcomes
Due to the constraints of the climate colliding with the intensity of economic activity along the Silk Road, the political order in this region was unstable: Samarkand was part of at least 9 different imperial civilizations over the period of interest (Bosworth & Schaeder, 2012). This indicates that the cycle illustrated in the loopy model likely oscillated rapidly from one extreme to the other, making it appropriate to run the model at medium-high speed. That’s exactly what occurred in the model: cities were rapidly expanded by the development of roads and an increase in trade, stayed large in a steady state for a short while, then rapidly declined and regenerated during periods when the agricultural surplus and/or water supply was insufficient.
Works Cited
Altaweel. (2013). Simulating the effects of salinization on irrigation agriculture in southern Mesopotamia. Archaeopress.
Bosworth, Crowe, Y., & Schaeder, H. . (2012). SAMARKAND. In Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. Leiden, Koninklijke Brill NV. https://doi.org/10.1163/1573-3912_islam_COM_0996
Sutton, Srivastava, J. P., Neumann, J. E., Droogers, P., & Boehlert, B. B. (2013). Reducing the vulnerability of Uzbekistan’s agricultural systems to climate change: impact assessment and adaptation options (A world bank study). In Reducing the vulnerability of Uzbekistan’s agricultural systems to climate change: impact assessment and adaptation options (pp. xvii–xvii). THE WORLD BANK. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-0000-9
Staal, A., Tuinenburg, O. A., Bosmans, J. H., Holmgren, M., van Nes, E. H., Scheffer, M., Zemp, D. C., & Dekker, S. C. (2018). Forest-rainfall cascades buffer against drought across the Amazon. Nature Climate Change, 8(6), 539–543. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0177-y
Loopy Model