Paleolithic culture and characteristics

¶ … Wilderness - Max Oelschlaeger

In The Idea of Wilderness, Oelschlaeger asks, (350), "Do we dare think that we are nature watching nature?," a question that makes the modern-day reader realize a paradox. Humans are now part of nature. Meanwhile, they stand apart from nature, observing nature and developing their culture apart from, but in relation to, nature. How can this paradox be resolved? Oelschlaeger provides an overview of interaction with nature from the earliest times of human existence until present times in order to determine the answer to this yet unresolved concern.

According to Oelschlaeger, the distancing from wilderness has occurred over the evolution of humankind, but has increased incrementally with the development of Western civilization. "Although the ideological, economic, political, technological, and ecological changes that aggregated over time, literally thousands of years, were profound, revolutionary in sum, they developed slowly" (25). Throughout Neolithic times, humans became increasingly skilled at and aggressive in developing the land and began to recognize themselves as beings partially dependent upon yet separate from the natural world. They created complex stories, myths and religions to explain their interaction with the world around them and the unknowns they saw in their daily lives. They had a limited mastery over the land through technology, but promoted the concept that humans could not by any means control all aspects of the natural world.

In some civilizations, the connection between nature and humankind was stronger and remained longer. In the Eastern civilization and in African age of animistic civilization, spiritual values were highly esteemed and important in society. The universe and nature were regarded in mythological or religious terms. Because the material aspects of civilization were not well developed, a materialistic view of the world could not be dominant.

There still is a sect of wilderness Buddhist monks, for example, that have been roaming the wilderness of Southeast Asia for centuries, living symbiotically with the jungle. The monks' rules demand they live entirely outside of the market economy, refusing any activities that divide them from a completely wilderness life: agriculture, herding animals, conducting trade or commerce, or storing food. In a sense, they are hunters and gatherers, but since they cannot kill animals, take from plants, or dig up soil, they instead collect from the generosity of the farmers. To repay for the burden put on their supporters, they must make themselves worthy -- following the dharma, living frugally and virtuously, keeping their needs to a complete minimum.

The Idea of Wilderness covers Snyder's spiritual ecology and his "Eastern Connection" and interest in Oriental philosophy, psychology and religion. From his contact with the Zen Buddhism, he gained contact with ecology, to "hear the Earth Mother, welling up through the poet's song that sings of ancient sensibilities..." (262) " As Loa Tzu reminds, the name that can be named is not the Tao, the Mother of the ten thousand things."

Likewise, Snyder's own book Turtle Island explains how these Native Americans lived as one with nature. As he said, "When Native American thinkers and activists began to cease to use the word North America and to call the continent 'Turtle Island' a few decades ago, it came to many of us as a wonderfully constructive move. The name itself comes from a number of Creation tales told by the Amerindian people... I learned to see one place to learn how to live, and see things as they are"(Preface).

Yet in the Western world of civilization, the wilderness was increasingly recognized as divinely created for human development, agriculture, and continual change and modification. Eventually in modern times, the natural earth came to be seen as having little or no value until humanized by technology. It is here only for the purposes of human utilization. The scientific revolution significantly precipitated this idea, emphasizing the fact that humankind was the master and possessor of nature. What followed was a greatly enhanced growth of exploitation of the wilderness for human needs.

Humankind did not always treat nature this way. Oelschlaeger clearly describes the Paleolithic cultures as having a high esteem and reverence toward the natural world. In his view, these hunting and gathering peoples saw nature as feminine, alive and sacred, and having animistic worldviews. They also had strong kinship duties toward non-human life. This strong kinship is clearly seen in the Paleolithic cave art that span about 15,000 years in Western Europe. Cave art shows that "under favorable ecological conditions, hunting was capable of sustaining an interesting, exciting and in some measure leisured life" (22).

The cave art, although difficult for people today to truly understand, shows a harmony with nature and of creation. "The crucial point in understanding Paleolithic cave art is to recognize in it the inescapable mark of sentience: surely the dawning of self-consciousness was the epochal event of prehistory." These artists were doing more than imitating the natural world around them. They were celebrating the cosmic spectacle that they were seeing firsthand (22).

The Paleolithic religion can be seen as a link to this celebration of nature. Paaleolithic burial sites seem to confirm belief in a transcendent deity and an eternal afterlife. These people most likely believed in a timeless and repetitive cycle of life, from birth to rebirth based on the seasons -- with the dying away of autumn and winter followed by the rebirth of spring and summer. The people most likely celebrated the miracle of existence and one with their world.

Most important, the Paleolithic people lived comfortably in the wilderness, as the Inuit on the polar ice or the Kalahari Bushmen in Africa, and most likely had a plentiful food supply (14). There is no evidence of malnutrition or starvation or poverty. The fact that they died young and had a difficult life is open to debate. This may have become more common as the Neolithic culture began. Also, Oelschlaeger states that modern man has not surpassed these prehistoric beings in cognitive powers and achievements. The intellectual life of these pre-historic groups was as rich as the modern individuals. Also, the rate of intellectual discovery and creativity appears equal. There is no evidence that the brain's neocortex has evolved since then.

The Paleolithic people saw nature as alive and responsive, supporting humans in the same way that a mother nourishes her child. Aborigines living today, for example, such as the Lakota Sioux, still believe this. The hypothesis is that hunter-gatherers were better adapted to the ecological world of sustainable life than the industrial world. In fact, archaic culture existed in some form for 200,000 years and caused minimal environmental damage (17). Pollution, extinction of animals, uncontrolled population growth, terrible diseases, war and such horrors as nuclear bombs did not exist. Rather, the emphasis was on integrity, stability and beauty.

Instead of exploitation, harmony was the guiding force for the Paleolithic mind as well as modern aborigines. Rituals created to retain the cosmic order were of major importance to this belief system. It gave them the ability to honor as well as kill and eat animals. Ceremonies also allowed them the means to deal with the unexplained mysteries of life and death.

All of this changed with the advent of the Neolithic culture. "The onset of the Neolithic culture forever altered both intellectual and material culture" (28). Noting the studies of environmentalists such as Paul Shepard and other deep ecology supporters, Oelschlaeger argues that the decline of ecology went hand-in-hand with the advent of Neolithic agricultures, which brought social and religious hierarchies, warfare, and a new attitude toward nature as enemy (28).

Major changes occurred in ideology, sociology, economics, and technology. Once humans became involved with agriculture, the character of prehistory was lost. Although earlier cultures were mostly content in accepting the natural order and looked above all else to retain the integrity of their environment, those using agriculture experienced a tremendous quickening of the human potential to modify the naturally bestowed.

Rather than trying to live in harmony with their surroundings, farmers worked diligently to dominate the wilderness. They made distinct boundaries between the natural and their cultural and conceptual worlds. These agriculturalists defined the word "fields" as areas cleared of natural vegetation, "weeds" as undesirable plants intruding upon fields, and "crops" as desirable plants suited to human needs (18).

At the same time, war became conceivable and even desirable at times. Evidence from archeological digs shows skulls with injuries from axes during Paleolithic times, but there was not major institutionalized warfare. During the Neolithic culture, with its central authority and ever increasing population, the rationale for war arose. Growing populations with the necessary manpower to fight battles against others could go to war without hindering the ultimate group survival. Also, war was a means to expand the population even more, as well as acquire the resources, including slaves, to take care of these larger populations.

Thus, the Neolithic person was no longer one with the natural world. The wilderness and nature as a whole became something that had to be taken over and become part of countries and nations. Were such changes necessary? According to what Oelshlaeger explains in his book, it appears that much of these changes are interconnected. With agriculture "naturally" come other transitions in the society. In fact, "neo" or "new" implies the many changes that occurred 10,000 years ago with the advent of growing crops. The beginnings of this huge change can be traced to the food-producing cultures evolving on the eastern shores of the Mediterranean Sea in Southwest Asia, including today's Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Israel, and Iran and Iraq or what was later called Mesopotamia.

Near the end of the Neolithic period after the domestication of cereals and cultivation, domestication and breeding of stock was established and people developed farming methods especially for wide open landscapes. At that time metals, such as copper and gold, came into frequent use and technology advanced to the stage that large numbers of tools were being crafted by the methods of crude smelting and hammering. Tools that were crafted could also be used for warfare. The harvesting of grain also stimulated the development of specialized tools such as stone sickle blades and grinding stones, as well as the construction of buildings for storage. This gave rise to larger settlements and the beginnings of urban areas and a resulting increase in the population central areas. Civilization as it is known today had arrived.

What Oelschlaeger writes about has been witnessed throughout the world. Urban areas lead to centralized religion that longer revolves around nature, in addition to government and social activities that are all separated from the natural world. As the population expands, the land is taken over more and more for the convenience of the people's homes and personal needs and services. In addition, as the population grows, there is greater chance of increased poverty and illness because of the change in the food chain and distribution of wealth. The individuals who do not have desire what others do have and the cycle continues.

Oelschlaeger ends his book stating that the wilderness has been caught up in a never-ending process of change. Paleolithic hunter gatherers were bound into the natural world and organic unity between humankind and wild nature. With the Neolithic revolution, came end of the Great Mother and the beginning of barbarians who pillage and loot, beasts that prey on livestock and pests to ruin the harvest.