I don't think the downfall of Egypt (and WHICH downfalln too?) would be due to resource depletion neccessarily, since the downfall was due to conquest by external forces (with vastly superior organization, resources, etc) at a time when monumental construction was out...
IIRC, thinking back to my college classes, the downfall of both the Old and Middle kingdoms came during times of political unrest... Damon. ------------------------------------------------------------ Damon Agretto [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum." http://www.geocities.com/garrand.geo/index.html Now Building: Trumpeter's Marder I auf GW 38(h) Sent from my BlackBerry wireless handheld. ------------------------------------------------------------ Sent from my BlackBerry wireless handheld. -----Original Message----- From: Deborah Harrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 14:10:41 To:Killer Bs Discussion <brin-l@mccmedia.com> Subject: Re: Jobs, not trees! (Collapse, Chapter 2) > jdiebremse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: <snip> > ...You mention that > "it was critical that they conserve these resources" > - and perhaps I am > being a bit of a devil's advocate to ask "why"? > So that they would be > able to continue to build moai into the future? > O.k. obviously the > loss of the trees resulted in a demonstrable loss in > quality of life for > all Easter Islanders. I wonder, however, if the > decline in quality of > life would be an almost inevitable consequence of a > society on such a > small and isolated piece of land at that technology. No. In later chapters he cites a couple of other Polynesian islands that avoided ecological collapse by (1) strict population regulation and (2) cultivation of useful trees. (Japan was also cited for its "top-down" approach to reforestation, but you were specifically talking about Polynesians, IIRC.) These are Tikopia and the New Guinea highlands, Chapter 9. Tikopia is reported to be 1.8 sq. miles in surface, and to have "been occupied [by humans] continuously for almost 3000 years." pg. 286, hardback copy. The methods used for population control varied from contraception through abortion, infanticide, and suicide-by-sea-voyaging -- not what I'd call ideal, although it seemed to work for them. :P Their use of a tiered forest for food and wood, however, was/is quite clever. > Would it really > have been possible for such a civilization to > develop "sustainable forestry" technology? Yes - see the Tikopia solution. Although that island also has the favorable factors he listed for productivity (soil renewal by volcanism/dust, decent rainfall, etc.); Easter was poor in these IIRC. > And if so, wouldn't this just make the moai > construction an irrelevant detail of an otherwise > almost inevitable outcome? No. Anytime a culture squanders its resources, it runs the risk of destroying itself; it may be made worse by the natural environment (like Greenland) or climatic change (frex the little ice age). An aside: has anyone proposed that part of what led to the downfall of Egypt was its resource depletion by building monuments to/for the dead? Although they certainly survived many centuries - and of course had a very large area to exploit, with neighbors to plunder and so forth. Debbi who got to recheck the book out, 'cause it wasn't on hold! :) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
