The Role of Climate Change and Ecology in History
A popular activity of historians and nonhistorians alike has long been to try to associate historical developments with changes in the climate and ecology of different regions. Historical models known as climate determinism” and “ecological theory” attempt to relate historical developments to changes in the natural environment, which have been seen as influencing both the rise and fall of civilizations, In Mesopotamia, for example, it has been suggested that cool and dry conditions led to the beginning of civilization ca.3000 B.CE. and that a hot and dry period around 500 B.CE led to the decline of Mesopotamian civilization. In between, various other ecological conditions, such as deforestation, soil exhaustion.overpopulation, and even human-caused climate change, have been adduced to explain nearly every major social, economic, and political change
But complex models that hypothesize long-term and far-reaching effects of climate and ecology on history have problems. One is that, so far, no one quite agrees as to just when the cooler, warmer, drier, or more humid periods were. One model has the Sahara drying out in the fourth millennium BCE and leading to an influx of population into the Nile River valley, whereas another has the Sahara being much more humid at the same time. Another problem is misconceptions about the results of climate change on certain kinds of economies. For example, it has been suggested that lessened rainfall brought an economic decline in lower Mesopotamia because this area was particularly vulnerable to lower rainfall amounts: but given that all of the crops were irrigated, the economy in fact would have been quite insensitive to the amount of rainfall, which never was sufficient for extensive farming in the first place. In a like manner, overgrazing and deforestation are blamed for the decline of societies that already had altered their economies to cope with just these issues-for example, by planting salt-tolerant barley instead of wheat when the soil became salinated.
Another problem is that these theories often are proposed by persons with excellent credentials in other fields of study but who are not specialists in antiquity. As a consequence, they tend to underrate the degree to which ancient societies were able to deal with problems confronting them or to determine their own destinies For example, nonspecialists make the mistake of assuming that climate variations caused civilization to appear quite suddenly around 3000 BCE, when in reality all of the important components under discussion-that is, irrigation and food production methods had been in place for over a thousand years. It was the development of other factors not so clearly related to climate, such as writing, metallurgy, and the potter’s wheel, that resulted in these cultures being defined in the modern day as civilizations. In addition, the peoples of antiquity were quite capable of recovering from disasters and of responding to changes in very imaginative ways. Thus it will be seen, for example, that the movement of the centers of culture and civilization increasingly toward the west was part of a long process of human economic and social development not simply the result of a hot and dry period around 500 B.CE. as climate determinists contend.
Which is not to say, of course, that nature had no effect on human societies. Long-term droughts certainly could cause people to migrate, seeking new food sources. Some kinds of short-term variations in the natural environment, such as failures of the Nile River to flood, had clear consequences for agricultural productivity. And it may well be that increasing pressure on resources in Mesopotamia did lead to a consolidation of urban areas into larger centers and an increase in warfare, in a manner analogous to what would happen in the early Archaic Age of ancient Greece. But it is dangerous to be too narrowly focused in assigning a particular historical event to climatic or ecological changes;climate change did not alone lead to the creation of intensive irrigation systems, much less to civilization. And, in general, it also is always dangerous to argue that just because something happened after something else, it must have happened because of that something else.
1
But complex models that hypothesize long-term and far-reaching effects of climate and ecology on history have problems. One is that, so far, no one quite agrees as to just when the cooler, warmer, drier, or more humid periods were. One model has the Sahara drying out in the fourth millennium BCE and leading to an influx of population into the Nile River valley, whereas another has the Sahara being much more humid at the same time. Another problem is misconceptions about the results of climate change on certain kinds of economies. For example, it has been suggested that lessened rainfall brought an economic decline in lower Mesopotamia because this area was particularly vulnerable to lower rainfall amounts: but given that all of the crops were irrigated, the economy in fact would have been quite insensitive to the amount of rainfall, which never was sufficient for extensive farming in the first place. In a like manner, overgrazing and deforestation are blamed for the decline of societies that already had altered their economies to cope with just these issues-for example, by planting salt-tolerant barley instead of wheat when the soil became salinated.
Which of the sentences below best expresses the essential information in the highlighted sentence in the passage? Incorrect choices change the meaning in important ways or leave out essential information.
ASince lower Mesopotamia was especially vulnerable to reduced rainfall, it is likely that it suffered economic declines during dry periods.
BBecause it was always necessary to irrigate crops in lower Mesopotamia, reduced rainfall would not have affected the economy in this area very much.
CAlthough irrigation was necessary for extensive farming in lower Mesopotamia, the economy was still sensitive to reductions in the overall amount of rainfall
DEven though much of lower Mesopotamia’s economy remained insensitive to the amount of rainfall, a reduction in rainfall made it harder to irrigate crops.
2
But complex models that hypothesize long-term and far-reaching effects of climate and ecology on history have problems. One is that, so far, no one quite agrees as to just when the cooler, warmer, drier, or more humid periods were. One model has the Sahara drying out in the fourth millennium BCE and leading to an influx of population into the Nile River valley, whereas another has the Sahara being much more humid at the same time. Another problem is misconceptions about the results of climate change on certain kinds of economies. For example, it has been suggested that lessened rainfall brought an economic decline in lower Mesopotamia because this area was particularly vulnerable to lower rainfall amounts: but given that all of the crops were irrigated, the economy in fact would have been quite insensitive to the amount of rainfall, which never was sufficient for extensive farming in the first place. In a like manner, overgrazing and deforestation are blamed for the decline of societies that already had altered their economies to cope with just these issues-for example, by planting salt-tolerant barley instead of wheat when the soil became salinated.
In paragraph 2, the author discusses two historical models involving climate conditions of the Sahara in the fourth millennium B.C.E in order to
Aexplain why the population of the Nile River valley increased during that time period
Bprovide an example of the kinds of problems that ancient civilizations faced because of climate change
Cargue that the most severe type of climate change during that period was a reduction in the amount of rainfall
Dshow that uncertainty about when climate changes happened is a problem with models that use climate to explain historical developments
3
But complex models that hypothesize long-term and far-reaching effects of climate and ecology on history have problems. One is that, so far, no one quite agrees as to just when the cooler, warmer, drier, or more humid periods were. One model has the Sahara drying out in the fourth millennium BCE and leading to an influx of population into the Nile River valley, whereas another has the Sahara being much more humid at the same time. Another problem is misconceptions about the results of climate change on certain kinds of economies. For example, it has been suggested that lessened rainfall brought an economic decline in lower Mesopotamia because this area was particularly vulnerable to lower rainfall amounts: but given that all of the crops were irrigated, the economy in fact would have been quite insensitive to the amount of rainfall, which never was sufficient for extensive farming in the first place. In a like manner, overgrazing and deforestation are blamed for the decline of societies that already had altered their economies to cope with just these issues-for example, by planting salt-tolerant barley instead of wheat when the soil became salinated.
In paragraph 2. the replacement of wheat by barley as a crop plant is presented as an example of a practice used
Ain societies that had already declined
Bin places where rainfall was too low
Cto deal with salinated soil resulting from overgrazing and deforestation
Dto avoid the need to irrigate fields
4
Another problem is that these theories often are proposed by persons with excellent credentials in other fields of study but who are not specialists in antiquity. As a consequence, they tend to underrate the degree to which ancient societies were able to deal with problems confronting them or to determine their own destinies For example, nonspecialists make the mistake of assuming that climate variations caused civilization to appear quite suddenly around 3000 BCE, when in reality all of the important components under discussion-that is, irrigation and food production methods had been in place for over a thousand years. It was the development of other factors not so clearly related to climate, such as writing, metallurgy, and the potter’s wheel, that resulted in these cultures being defined in the modern day as civilizations. In addition, the peoples of antiquity were quite capable of recovering from disasters and of responding to changes in very imaginative ways. Thus it will be seen, for example, that the movement of the centers of culture and civilization increasingly toward the west was part of a long process of human economic and social development not simply the result of a hot and dry period around 500 B.CE. as climate determinists contend.
The word “proposed” in the passage is closest in meaning to
Aspread
Baccepted
Coffered
DFavored
5
Another problem is that these theories often are proposed by persons with excellent credentials in other fields of study but who are not specialists in antiquity. As a consequence, they tend to underrate the degree to which ancient societies were able to deal with problems confronting them or to determine their own destinies For example, nonspecialists make the mistake of assuming that climate variations caused civilization to appear quite suddenly around 3000 BCE, when in reality all of the important components under discussion-that is, irrigation and food production methods had been in place for over a thousand years. It was the development of other factors not so clearly related to climate, such as writing, metallurgy, and the potter’s wheel, that resulted in these cultures being defined in the modern day as civilizations. In addition, the peoples of antiquity were quite capable of recovering from disasters and of responding to changes in very imaginative ways. Thus it will be seen, for example, that the movement of the centers of culture and civilization increasingly toward the west was part of a long process of human economic and social development not simply the result of a hot and dry period around 500 B.CE. as climate determinists contend.
The phrase “problems confronting them” in the passage is closest in meaning to
Aproblems they encountered
Bproblems that frustrated them
Cproblems that followed them
Dproblems that weakened them
6
Another problem is that these theories often are proposed by persons with excellent credentials in other fields of study but who are not specialists in antiquity. As a consequence, they tend to underrate the degree to which ancient societies were able to deal with problems confronting them or to determine their own destinies For example, nonspecialists make the mistake of assuming that climate variations caused civilization to appear quite suddenly around 3000 BCE, when in reality all of the important components under discussion-that is, irrigation and food production methods had been in place for over a thousand years. It was the development of other factors not so clearly related to climate, such as writing, metallurgy, and the potter’s wheel, that resulted in these cultures being defined in the modern day as civilizations. In addition, the peoples of antiquity were quite capable of recovering from disasters and of responding to changes in very imaginative ways. Thus it will be seen, for example, that the movement of the centers of culture and civilization increasingly toward the west was part of a long process of human economic and social development not simply the result of a hot and dry period around 500 B.CE. as climate determinists contend.
According to paragraph 3, nonspecialists in antiquity wrongly believe which of the following?
AClimate change occurred at around 3000 B.C.E.
BThe process of economic and social development in ancient societies was long.
CAncient peoples were unable to respond effectively to climate change
DAncient societies without irrigation declined more quickly than those with irrigation
7
Which is not to say, of course, that nature had no effect on human societies. Long-term droughts certainly could cause people to migrate, seeking new food sources. Some kinds of short-term variations in the natural environment, such as failures of the Nile River to flood, had clear consequences for agricultural productivity. And it may well be that increasing pressure on resources in Mesopotamia did lead to a consolidation of urban areas into larger centers and an increase in warfare, in a manner analogous to what would happen in the early Archaic Age of ancient Greece. But it is dangerous to be too narrowly focused in assigning a particular historical event to climatic or ecological changes;climate change did not alone lead to the creation of intensive irrigation systems, much less to civilization. And, in general, it also is always dangerous to argue that just because something happened after something else, it must have happened because of that something else.
Which of the following is NOT identified in paragraph 4 as a type of change that can influence human societies?
ALong dry periods that cause human populations to relocate
BShort-term environmental changes that reduce crop production
CDeclines in natural resources that lead to the growth of cities and conflict
DClimate changes that lead to the development of major irrigation systems
8
Which is not to say, of course, that nature had no effect on human societies. Long-term droughts certainly could cause people to migrate, seeking new food sources. Some kinds of short-term variations in the natural environment, such as failures of the Nile River to flood, had clear consequences for agricultural productivity. And it may well be that increasing pressure on resources in Mesopotamia did lead to a consolidation of urban areas into larger centers and an increase in warfare, in a manner analogous to what would happen in the early Archaic Age of ancient Greece. But it is dangerous to be too narrowly focused in assigning a particular historical event to climatic or ecological changes;climate change did not alone lead to the creation of intensive irrigation systems, much less to civilization. And, in general, it also is always dangerous to argue that just because something happened after something else, it must have happened because of that something else.
The author’s statement that it is “always dangerous to argue that just because something happened after something else, it must have happened because of that something else” suggests which of following about the relationship of climate change to historical events?
AClimate change will undoubtedly shape many future historical events given that it has played a significant role in numerous historical events of the past.
BIt is not possible to tell whether a climate change caused an historical event until long after the historical event has taken place
CThe fact that a climate change happened before an historical event occurred does not necessarily mean that the climate change caused the historical event.
DClimate change is just one of the many kinds of change that can occur before an historical event occurs.
9
Which is not to say, of course, that nature had no effect on human societies. Long-term droughts certainly could cause people to migrate, seeking new food sources. [■]Some kinds of short-term variations in the natural environment, such as failures of the Nile River to flood, had clear consequences for agricultural productivity.[■] And it may well be that increasing pressure on resources in Mesopotamia did lead to a consolidation of urban areas into larger centers and an increase in warfare, in a manner analogous to what would happen in the early Archaic Age of ancient Greece. [■]But it is dangerous to be too narrowly focused in assigning a particular historical event to climatic or ecological changes;climate change did not alone lead to the creation of intensive irrigation systems, much less to civilization. [■]And, in general, it also is always dangerous to argue that just because something happened after something else, it must have happened because of that something else.
Look at the four squaresthat indicate where the following sentence could be added to the passage
Natural events did not have to occur over many years to have an effect.
Where would the sentence best fit？Click on a square sentence to the passage.
10
Changes in the natural environment have been argued to be important causes of historical developments.
AAttempts to explain historical events in light of climate change are questionable because there are misunderstandings about the effects of climate change and disagreements about when it occurred.
BHistorical models of climate determinism have been shown to be incorrect in their statement that early societies were insensitive to amounts of rainfall and its effects on crop production.
CIrrigation and food-processing developed at the same time as writing, metallurgy, and the potter’s wheel and helped to establish human civilizations.
DSpecialists in antiquity understand the role of climate change in historical events, whereas nonspecialists believe that a range of other factors led to historical events.
EMany theories based on the idea that climate change caused historical change fail to consider the ability of human civilizations to adapt successfully to changing natural conditions
FAlthough environmental changes forced populations to move and educed agricultural productivity, this does not mean that climate change was directly and solely responsible for changes in civilization.
答案：
