Killing Civilization: A Reassessment of Early Urbanism and Its Consequences. JUSTIN JENNINGS. 2016. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. 374 pp. 30 halftones, 11 maps, 4 charts. $75.00 (hardback), ISBN 978-0-8263-5660-4.
Killing Civilization: A Reassessment of Early Urbanism and Its Consequences. JUSTIN JENNINGS. 2016. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. 374 pp. 30 halftones, 11 maps, 4 charts. $75.00 (hardback), ISBN 978-0-8263-5660-4.
复制标题
扼杀文明：对早期城市主义及其后果的重新评估。
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2017
影响因子：
2.8
通讯作者：
Christopher A. Pool
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Christopher A. Pool
目前，格雷森描述和剖析了三种解释。保罗·马丁提出的“过度捕杀假说”指出，克洛维斯人猎杀巨型动物直至灭绝。我们知道这个假设是无效的，因为它取决于现在被证明是错误的几点：首先，克洛维斯（他们不是），克洛维斯大型猎物猎人（他们不是），所有巨型动物在11,000年前灭绝（他们没有），岛屿上的陆地动物在人类殖民后灭绝（他们确实灭绝了）。虽然最后一种说法是正确的，但它与美洲上下发生的全大陆范围的冲突关系不大。新仙女木撞击假说的支持者认为，大约10，900年前，一颗彗星撞击了地球，导致了新仙女木的爆发、克洛维斯的终结、覆盖克洛维斯遗址的黑色垫的形成，以及北美巨型动物的灭绝。格雷森对这一假设进行了逐点反驳。“克洛维斯彗星”取决于一次结束巨型动物谱系的盛大事件;然而，如此巨大的影响会产生更广泛的后果。它无法解释为什么有些动物在10,900年前就灭绝了，也无法解释为什么直到3,700年前，一群猛犸象才在北冰洋的北方岛屿上站稳脚跟。气候变化，特别是在更新世末期发生的剧烈的季节性温度变化，导致了植物群落的不可逆转的变化，小型哺乳动物范围的变化，以及对大型哺乳动物种群的灾难性影响。环境条件的改变使格里森的个人主义发挥了作用，即生物群落的成员在个体物种水平上对环境变化做出反应，而不是作为一个有凝聚力的单位。佛罗里达的猛犸象对这些变化的反应只能通过佛罗里达猛犸象的详细种群历史和环境记录来了解。对每一个灭绝的物种在它们曾经繁荣的每一个地方重复这一点，然后我们可能会理解在最后一个冰河时代结束时发生的事件。这是格雷森对未来的展望
Currently, there are three explanations that Grayson describes and dissects. The “Overkill Hypothesis,” proposed by Paul Martin, states that Clovis people hunted megafauna to extinction. We know this hypothesis is null because it hinges on points now shown false: Clovis First (they weren’t), Clovis big-game hunters (they weren’t), all megafauna went extinct 11,000 years ago (they didn’t), and terrestrial animals on islands become extinct following human colonization (they do). While the last is true, it has little bearing on the continent-wide extinctions that occurred up and down the Americas. Proponents of the Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis hold that a comet impacted Earth around 10,900 years ago and caused the onset of the Younger Dryas, the end of Clovis and the formation of the black mats that cap Clovis sites, and the extinction of North America’s megafauna. Grayson offers a point-bypoint rebuttal of the hypothesis. The “Clovis Comet” depends on one grand event that ended the lineages of megafauna; however, an impact of that magnitude would have had a wider array of fallouts. It does not explain why some animals went extinct well before 10,900 or why a population of woolly mammoths made a last stand on a northern island in the Arctic Ocean until 3,700 years ago. Climate change, specifically the drastic seasonal temperature changes that occurred at the end of the Pleistocene, caused irreversible changes in plant communities, shifts in small mammal ranges, and catastrophic effects on large mammal populations. The altered environmental conditions put Gleasonian individualism into play—the concept that members of a biological community react to environmental shifts at the individual species level, not as a cohesive unit. How mammoths in Florida reacted to those changes can only be understood through detailed population histories and environmental records of Florida mammoths. Repeat this for every species that went extinct in every location where they once thrived, and then we might understand the events that occurred at the end of the last Ice Age. This is Grayson’s vision for the way forward to the past.