[.ca] 1491: New Revelations of the Americas (ISBN 1565119789)

An incorrect argument:
Often when developing a certain argument, some authors become so enamored by the argument that they get carried away by the beauty of their argument to the exclusion of the facts. Such is the case here. The fact is, what we have found out about the human occupation of the Western Hemisphere, both in the archaeological record for the extended period prior to Euro-American settlement (pre-1492), and in the early historic archaeological and ethnographic record since that time (post-1492), actually clearly illustrates exactly what it documents: Indians, regardless of their local manifestations were, at first, big game hunters, then hunter-gatherers, and only very late in the record (and in many places not at all), practicing horticulturalists or agriculturalists. And, in a handful of places, in the entire Western Hemisphere, from Tierra del Fuego to the Arctic Circle, this agricultural life way was superceded by early state-level societies (i.e., the Maya, Inca, Aztec and their immediate predecessors in their areas of occurrence.). Each of these life ways are paralleled, without exception, by a specific level of sociopolitical complexity and a concomitant population density. And each brought with it a certain impact to and relationship with the prevailing environment. There are no exceptions to this - worldwide. In all their manifestations in the Western Hemisphere prior to A.D 1492, we are dealing essentially with stone age peoples. The fact is, as a member of one of these stone age societies, there is only so much you can do to the environment with a stone axe. Moreover, all societies with stone axes are limited in size both by their technology (stone tool technology, you know) and economy (subsistence agriculture, at its most developed). So, there are just so many people to alter the environment. And, added to this, and probably most important, the people of these societies, people who carry around stone axes, only want to, and only have a need to, do so much to the environment. The fact is that which is overwhelmingly documented not only by the archaeological, historic, and ethnographic record, but also by the ecological record, illustrates precisely what occurred in the Western Hemisphere - That is, with the exception of the immediate areas occupied by the early state level societies, Indians did not significantly alter the ecosystems of the Western Hemisphere; Euro-American societies did - and are still doing so. One example makes this point: Every plant and animal species ever recovered in all of the tens of thousands of prehistoric Holocene archaeological sites (from 8,000 B.C. to A.D. 1492) that have been excavated in the entire Western Hemisphere to date have also been recovered from excavated early historic (post A.D. 1492) archaeological sites. However, it is also in the archaeological sites of this period (post A.D. 1492) that plant and animal species recorded prior to A.D. 1492 start to disappear from the archaeological record. The reason for the disappearance, extirpation and extinction of these species is heavily documented for this period in the ethnographic and historic record. The perpetrators of these alterations were not Indians. The entire prehistoric and historic record, in all the disciplines that yield this record, illustrates that Euro-American societies, with their fundamentally different land use patterns, huge numbers and totally different world view from that of the Indians, altered, and in many cases removed, the ecosystems of the Western Hemisphere. Yet, the author, ignores this entire record and comes to the opposite conclusion - that the Indians significantly altered the ecosystems of the Western Hemisphere. Really?

Not a review - a short response to previous review:
Well, I think that it can be very strongly shown that pre-Columbian Americans had a major ecological impact. The columbian mammoth, the giant ground sloth, the long-horned buffalo, short-faced bear and the saber-toothed cat all disappeared after the arrival of man (and before 1492). There is some evidence that the treeless plains had the spread they did due to human-set grass-fires. It is important to remember that, while a stone ax *may* have been the most advanced tool available, ecological impact was not therefore limited to what could be chopped down with a hand ax. Driving a herd of buffalo off a cliff, for instance, kills far more animals that the individual hunters could have killed with spears and/or bows. (That was, after all, the point!) And starting a fire that burns down a couple of thousand acres of forest certainly has a larger impact than the fellow that started the fire could achieve with his ax. I haven't read this book and can't speak to the author's specific arguments, but to reject it because of the previous reviewer's positions would be inappropriate.

WELL WRITTEN SUMMARY OF RECENT SCHOLARSHIP ON OCCUPATION OF THE AMERICAS BEFORE COLUMBUS:
There has been much scholarly discussion over the years about pre-Columbian societies in the Americas. How many were there? What technologies did they develop? Did they have writing? What destroyed them? Where is the evidence? In this book, Charles Mann brought together much of the recent scholarly knowledge, piecing together evidence from across North, Central and South America, to come up with a cohesive image of what the Americas looked like in terms of human occupation before Columbus. The book's main arguemnt is that the Americas were already heavily populated with as many as 20 million people when Columbus arrived. These people possessed technology very advanced that was not, as much of history tells, puny and weak compared to what Europeans had developed. Agricultural methods were advanced and very productive, providing the basis for the establishment of large sedentary populations, much larger than previously thought. These large populations were mainly destroyed by disease. What we see today are in fact the remaining population after the equivalent of a holocaust, which is hardly a good basis to judge their capabilities and one time glory. To demonstrate this theory, evidence is gathered from archeology and ancient reports from travellers. From most 16th century explorers, we get a picture of a heavily populated landscape, both in the southeastern US and in the Amazon. However, explorers through the same regions roughtly a century later describe a landscape of peaceful nature without large human interventions. The archeological evidence, as more is discovered, points in the direction of large populations and many characteristics (such as religion and art) of sedentary populations. Particularly interesting is the section on the Amazon forest, in which the author describes the Amazon not as virginal forest but rather an a human construct, a large garden manipulated by ancient inhabitants, now abandoned. Evidence of these people's technology can be found in unlikely places, such as in the formation of terra preta, a highly fertile soil in a land well known for poor soils for agriculture. Additionally, the raised fields of the Bolivian Amazon also point to a highly sophisticated and organized society that would need to be surplus producing in order to spare the manpower for such great public works. An interesting addendum to his argument is about the freedom enjoyed by antive americans, which is much more similar to the freedom we enjoy today and seek to expand, than the Europeans at the time enjoyed. The author does a superb job of piecing together evidence from across the continent to come to interesting conclusions about our ancestors. I highly recommend this book not only to anyone interested in the history of the Americas before Columbus, but to anyone looking for an interesting read about our history as humans.

a refutation:
Having read 1491 I find myself in disagreement with Mr Bass. I am neither archiologist or anthropologist but do have a keen interest in history. I feel that Mr Mann makes a good case for the North American Indian population having an impact on their environment beyond that previously thought. It is interesting that recently a University of Calgary professor was on the news, announcing that in his research he had come to the conclusion that the plains Indians were far more numerous and socially organised than previously thought. He felt that the traditional image of small groups of nomadic stone age hunters had to be re-examined. He fell short of suggesting that these same groups were probably the remanents of the largely inadvertant genocide that saw, what is likely, the largest human die off in history. The implication has to be there and Charles Mann addresses this time and again. 1491 is a compelling and worthy read and there is no compunction to accept every argument as gospel, even Mann provides the material with acknowlegment that there are opposing points of view. As for Mr Bass why as a member of the USDA why is he writing to amazon.ca?

Sheds much light on Pre-columbus americas:
Very entertaining and insightful book. You can agree or disagree with his thesis but you will be enlightened. For me it was the variety of new crops, introduced to European society. To learn that tomatoes, potatoes and most beans are new world crops, totally surprised me.