This is part 3 of 3.

THIRD POSSIBLE INITIATING FACTOR

The third possible factor, envisaged by the French Jesuit, is

'the sudden arrival of some ethnic
wave which had silently been
gathering somewhere else in the
most fertile regions of the globe'. [14]

An incoming ethnic population wave could be viewed as
enriching the culture and know-how of an indigenous human
grouping and being, in its turn, similarly enriched by the
indigenous people. This factor, it seems to me, is not
dissimilar to the second factor involving what the Jesuit
paleontologist calls contagion.

-----------------------

FOURTH POSSIBLE INITIATING FACTOR

The fourth possible factor proposed by Teilhard is that of an
'irreversible propagation of fruitful innovations'. [15] Perhaps,
by way of a bartering trade network over fairly extensive
geographical distances, there occurred, during Upper
Paleolithic times, exchanges of innovative ideas concerning
improvements vis-a-vis such technologies as those
associated with implements like fire-drills, wooden-handled
stone axes, and bows and arrows. We might wish to say, at
this point, that the momentum behind innovation was strong
enough to ensure that improvements were, for the most part
irreversible. Ameliorations, once in place, were unlikely to
be lost; an improvement in fire drill technology, for example,
would probably not revert back to its pre-improved state.

Some of what has been said in the previous paragraph
about the distribution of technological innovation can also
be said, I think, about the distribution of cultural, artistic,
and religious innovations.

In the widespread distribution of innovations, supported by
the mental life of our ancient human ancestors, we may be
seeing a prefiguration of what the Jesuit paleontologist
calls civilization.

------------------------

From Teilhard's perspective, it is hard to say if the stimulus
behind the Neolithic age was 'primarily a movement of
peoples ... or a cultural movement'. [16] We, his readers, may
harbour the suspicion that both movements had a role to play.

So, there can be uncertainty when it comes to the assignment
of the instigating factors behind the emergence of the
Neolithic age. What we can be sure of, though, is that over a
short interval (of no more, perhaps, than some hundreds of
years) there occurred the passage of

'the time required for the selection
and domestication of all
the animals and plants that
we still live on today'. [17]

Moreover, this domestication produced a human population
that was becoming more and more 'sedentary and
organized.' [18] People were becoming farmers, and so
were ceasing to be 'hunters of horses and reindeer'. [19]
Wandering hunter-gatherers gradually found themselves
sedentarily rooted to place, to their acreages of land.
Referring to the Neolithic age and the few thousands of
years preceding it, Teilhard writes:

'In ten or twenty thousand years,
the human being has divided
up the Earth and become
rooted there.' [20]

The Jesuit scientist still has more to say on the Neolithic age.
For example, he will explore certain influences which, in his
estimation, impelled the age to advance in the direction of
enhanced hominization, that is to say, of collective reflection
and socialization at the level of thought.

In a future submission I hope to reflect further on Teilhard's
approach to the Neolithic age.

End.

Notes:

[14] 'Phenomenon' Part III, Chapter II, Section 4, pp. 140-141.

[15] 'Phenomenon' Part III, Chapter II, Section 4, p. 141.

[16] 'Phenomenon' Part III, Chapter II, Section 4, p. 141.

[17] 'Phenomenon' Part III, Chapter II, Section 4, p. 141.

[18] 'Phenomenon' Part III, Chapter II, Section 4, p. 141.

[19] 'Phenomenon' Part III, Chapter II, Section 4, p. 141.

[20] 'Phenomenon' Part III, Chapter II, Section 4, p. 141.

With good wishes,

Brian.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]