Tuesday 30 October 2012

Was ecocide the cause of the collapse?


Whilst having a procrastination break (don’t judge me, we all have them!) from the seemingly never ending statistical analysis I have to do for my dissertation; I ended up reading a blog post about our excessive consumption of our natural resources such as metal. It struck me how industry and technology have alienated us from nature and its constraints. Clive Hamilton (2010) attributes this to our society’s 'growth fetishism', which is our addiction-like need for the growth of GDP to continue year on year regardless of any environmental consequences. The unsustainable way we are depleting our resources is not wholly different from the way past societies existed before they collapse. 

Easter Island is often referred to as a prime example of ecocide and the collapse of a society, whether this is accurate or not I’ll leave Steve to look into (Hunt and Lipo, 2009). This led to me to wonder whether it was ecocide that was the cause of the collapse of Norse Greenland society.

A quick definition of ecocide from Wiktionary: "The complete destruction of an ecosystem due to human activities. It may result from exploitation of resources, nuclear warfare or the dumping of harmful chemicals" (Broswimmer, 2002).

The 8000 years previous to the Viking’s colonisation showed little/no signs of deforestation or soil erosion; such degradation only began to occur with the arrival of the Norse, but this unavoidable and to be expected. Diamond (2005) outlines three ways in which the Norse damaged their environment:
  1. deforestation
  2. the cutting of turf
  3. soil erosion

Unfortunately Greenland’s harsh environment includes fragile soils this together with the short plant growing season dictates that there is slow plant growth and soil formation. This leads to a thin topsoil layer and low organic humus content in the soil. Therefore, Greenland’s soil was very vulnerable to overgrazing, trampling and soil erosion that could lead to serious environmental damage. Furthermore, there is evidence of over-exploitation and the hunting to extinction of Icelandic walrus and Great Auk (Amorosi et al., 1997).

Just in case you didn't know what a Great Auk looked like
This paints a rather destructive picture of Norse practices in Greenland. It supports the view that people are fundamentally bad for the environment and thus, that ecocide was highly likely to happen anyway. It changes the outlook from if the Norse were to collapse to when the Norse were to collapse (Dugmore et al.,2007). Furthermore it infers that the Norse were ignorant with little appreciation of their environment. This is a simplistic judgment to make as there is an indication that the Norse were environmentally aware and did implement practices adapted to their harsh environment. They managed there environmental impacts to avoid total devastation in this delicate environment. Some of these include, monitoring the weight of livestock to make sure there weren't too many livestock grazing on the land. In addition the conservation of vital resources such as charcoal pits has been discovered (Dugmore et al., 2006).

The evidence of semi-sustainable Norse practices make me doubt that ecocide was the only reason for the collapse of Norse Greenland. However, there was significant environmental damage found at both the Western and Eastern Settlement making the society fragile and vulnerable. An alternate theory for the cause of this degradation is that climate change pushed the environment and the Norse to the brink of collapse and I’ll examine this theory in a later post (Dugmore et al., 2007).

List of references

Amorosi T., Buckland P., Dugmore A., Ingimundarson J.H. and McGovern T.H.(1997) ‘Raiding the landscape: Human Impact in the Scandinavian North Atlantic’ Human Ecology, 25, 3, 491-518.
Broswimmer F.J. (2002) Ecocide: a short history of the mass extinction of species, London: Pluto.
Diamond, J. (2005) Collapse: How Societies choose to fail or survive, London: Penguin Group.
Dugmore A.J., Church M.J., Mairs K-A., McGovern T.H., Newton A.J., and Sveinbjarnardottir G. (2006) ‘An Over-Optimistic Pioneer Fringe? Environ- mental Perspectives on Medieval Settlement Abandonment in Þórsmörk, South Iceland.’ In The Dynamics of Northern Societies. Bjarne Grønnow, Jette Arneborg, and Hans C. Gulløv, eds. Pp. 333–344.
Dugmore A.J., Keller C., McGovern T.H. (2007) ‘Norse Greenland Settlement: Reflections on Climate Change, Trade, and the Contrasting Fates of Human Settlements in the North Atlantic Islands’ Arctic Anthropology, 44, 1, 12-36.
Hamilton C. (2010) Requiem for a Species: Why we resist the truth about Climate Change, London: Earthscan Ltd.
Hunt T.L and Lipo C.P (2009) ‘Revisiting Rapa Nui (Easter Island) “Ecocide”’ Pacific Science, 63, 4, 601-616.

Tuesday 23 October 2012

Travelling back in time to Norse Greenland

I recently found an interesting travel blog by Glennia Campbell. In one of her exciting adventures she travels to Greenland and writes about her tour of some of the Norse ruins as well as the reconstructions showing us what the Norse structures would've looked like all those years ago.

Glennia has an excellent collection of photographs which really help to visualise what Norse life was like, the sense of community in such an isolated place. It also casts further wonder as to what happened to them? On a lighter note, the reconstructed Norse houses remind me of the Hobbit homes in Lord of the Rings, perhaps this is where J.R.R Tolkien got his inspiration from.

Anyway have a look!

Raids, Trades and Discovery


Cast your memory back to your primary school history lessons... do you remember Erik the Red? He was the founder of the Norse colony in Greenland after he was exiled from Iceland for manslaughter.  This epitomizes the popular image of Vikings, bloodthirsty, plundering the civilised settlements in Europe, having adventures and discovering new lands. They travelled as far east as Russia and Erik the Red’s son - Leif Ericson, is believed to have been the first European to visit North America. However, as vivid as this image is, the Vikings were also farmers wanting to find new lands to cultivate, and in doing so established six colonies in the Orkney, Shetland and Faeroe Islands as well as Iceland, Vinland and Greenland.

Erik the Red set out for Greenland in A.D. 985 and setup Europe’s furthest outpost (Hamilton, 1998). Over time, the Norse colony came to comprise of two main settlements – the Western Settlement and the Eastern Settlement. These settlements were built deep inside two fjord systems on the southwest coast which are sheltered from the cold ocean currents and chilling winds. The site offered a sort of oasis from the uninhabitable harsh environments Greenland is known for.

Erik the Red
The ruins of Erik the Red's house
The two Norse settlements in Greenland: the 1% of green in an expanse of icy wasteland.  

For 500 years this environmental sanctuary allowed the Norse kept pasture and rear livestock such as sheep and goats. To supplement their diet they also hunted seals using iron tools. Iron weapons gave them a military advantage and enabled them to keep their hostile neighbours - the Inuits at bay. In addition they traded ivory and walrus tusks with mainland Europe. With the spread of Christianity across the continent, they too converted and built churches and a cathedral (Diamond, 2005).

On the whole Norse Greenland was a complex and integrated society with good economic outputs and a military advantage over any rivals. The Vikings have a reputation for being strong and able to withstand the harshest of environments.  So why is it that a few centuries years later they vanished and yet the Inuits were able to survive for decades more? Better yet, how is it that the Norse colonies in Iceland could survive in equally as harsh conditions and continue to prosper into a modern affluent country?

Next time ... Would the Norse survived if a Lorax had been around?

References:

Diamond, J. (2005) Collapse: How Societies choose to fail or survive, London: Penguin Group.

Hamilton, L. Lyster, P. Otterstad, O. (2000) ‘Social change, ecology and climate in 20th Century Greenland’, Climate Change, 47, 193-211. 

Thursday 18 October 2012

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”- George Santayana (1905)


The romantic mystery of societal collapses has made them very popular - everyone knows about the demise of Easter Island, the Incas and the Mayans.  Civilizations such as the Incas built awesome structures such as the Machu Picchu and thrived for centuries. Today, these sites are a favourite with tourists but they also hold a dark warning for the fate of our planet. Currently, our world is dealing with several ticking time-bombs such as species extinction, climate change and resource depletion and any one of these problems could lead to war, disease, starvation and the collapse of our society.

Norse Greenland is a lesser-known example of a collapsed society, but one that may be the most appropriate analogue for the future of our planet. As the Norse were European and literate there is a record of the settlements in Greenland. This gives us a better picture of the way of life and the motivations behind the action that lead to the collapse.

Jared Diamond (2005) in his book Collapse reasoned that there are five main factors that may contribute to the collapse of society:
  1. environmental degradation
  2. climate change
  3. hostile neighbours
  4. friendly trading partners and
  5. the society’s response to its environmental problem

Over the next couple of months I will investigate each of Diamond’s factors in the downfall of Norse Greenland and draw parallels with contemporary society. However, the aim of this post was to show the importance of studying the reasons that led to fall of societies and how a greater understanding of the similarities and differences of these two societies will help us to overpower the similarities and change our fate.

Next time ... Viking expansions and the Norse settlement in Greenland