Continuing my response, but omitting duplicate points already made by others:
> jdiebremse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: <snip much> > In order to understand the "collapse" of Chaco > Canyon it is > important to also understand the role that Chaco > Canyon had in > Ancestral Puebloan culture before its abandonment. > Diamond > presents a little bit of this, but overall I think > he proceeds a > little too quickly to the (admittedly fascinating) > story of how > examination of timbers and analysis of packrat > middens illuminated > the story of environmental degradation around Chaco > Canyon.... Did anyone else think, "One-of-A-Kind!? Who knew that packrats were kin to Jijo's mulch spiders!" :) > ....Diamond only obliquely > mentions the road network of the Ancestral > Puebloans, which appears > to have been centered on Chaco Canyon. One of the > most remarkable > features of these roads is that they are almost > perfectly straight > they do not bend around any obstacles. If a > Cliffside is > encountered, the road literally goes almost straight > up the > hillside! This suggests that the roads served some > sort of > ceremonial or religious purpose, and further lends > credence to the > idea that Chaco Canyon may have had more > significance as a > religious, spiritual, and social center than as a > population center... That's sort of like the Nazca Plains figures, isn't it? All that effort, particularly considering that they had no draft animals (as you note), for reasons we don't understand. > Diamond does present a fascinating scientific > "detective tale" of > uncovering the environmental degradation around > Chaco Canyon through > analysis of the various timbers used in the > buildings of Chaco > Canyon, and the clues left behind in packrat > middens. Yet, at the > end of this Chapter, Diamond hints at the truly > amazing time scales > at work here. Chaco Canyon was first inhabited in > the 600's, and > according to my notes from my visit to Chaco Canyon > this summer, > building construction was underway by the mid-late > 800's. Chaco > Canyon wouldn't be abandoned until the early 1200's. > The six > hundred year settlement of Chaco Canyon is longer by > two hundred > years than the continuous settlement in the area of > Jamestown, > Virginia. Moreover, according to Diamond's tree > pole analysis, > Chaco Canyon was deforested "by around A.D. 1000." > (167 in the > paperback) Yet, according to the National Park > Service, Chaco > Canyon was just reaching the height of its influence > and > this "Golden Age" would last until the mid-1100's. > Set against > this timeline, the connection between environmental > degradation and > civilization collapse seems much weaker. Even > moreso when you > consider that Mesa Verde, to the north, wouldn't be > abandoned until the 1300's. Part of the reason, which he mentions, is the variances in agricultural techniques as well as the microclimate of each locale. He notes that today the population _supported_ by the land is less than when the APs lived there. However, I also think that he is contrasting the length of time AP civilization lasted compared to our 200+ years -- which is in itself not quite fair, as American culture is clearly an extension of European, particularly British, culture, which means that we too can claim centuries of contiguity. > So, in terms of discussion questions: > > Diamond related in the Chapter on the Pitcairn > Islands how trading > with friendly neighbors can sustain a civilization. > Chaco Canyon > was clearly at the heart of an extensive trading > network reaching to > Mexico, the Pacific, and the central Great Plains. > Did Chaco > Canyon stave off collapse for so long because of its > trading ties? > Or did the extensive trading increase the population > pressures on > the Canyon, pushing it to unsustainable levels, and > ultimately > leading to the Canyon's abandonment? I think it helped delay the end. > So far, our three examples of "collapse", Easter, > Pitcairn, and > Chaco Canyon have all shared the feature of being > settled in a > marginal environment. Is a marginal environment a > prerequisite for "collapse"? It certainly 'helps,' as noted in a later chapter on Greenland, but the next one, about the Mayans, finds that theirs was a more robust environment. And regarding the fragility of Greenland, he points out that the Inuit successfully lived and live there, but their society's answers to problems of population, culture, government, and wealth are quite different from those of the Vikings. Debbi Looking For Perspective Maru __________________________________________________ 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
