Thread: Neolithic Revolution Comparision

I've this essay that is due tomorrow and I'm having a bit of trouble. See, it's comparing Catal Huyuk and Jericho, but it all seems a bit forced because I do not care much for the subject. Would anyone mind looking it over a bit and helping me with a decent conclusion (I don't have one at the mo')


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


During the Neolithic Revolution people took an important step towards civilization. It was the introduction of agriculture, domestication of animals, and a more sedentary life during the later part of the Stone Age. It did not happen overnight. This phenomenon was widespread and continued growing and influencing for thousands of years. These people were not penalized for gradual enlightenment, and after a trial and error period, everything began falling into place. There are records of towns consisting of hundreds, even thousands, of people. These towns were very widespread in where, and when, they arose during those 5000 years of stable farming. But two have been discovered and excavated and are used today as examples of the first towns ever assembled on earth: Jericho and Catal Huyuk. These two settlements, one located in the newly-named "West Bank" and one found in Anatolia, were two of the forerunners of a more civilized life, though they went about it in unique ways. Achieving a relatively synonymous goal, some things were emphasized more in Jericho - and the same in Catal Huyuk.

Technology in this time period was a very chief component to maturing and becoming more specialized. Stones for grinding and stone blades set with, chiefly bone, handles were discovered in both. The grinders probably indicated the heavy usage of grains, while the blades could represent hunting equipment or protection from surrounding peoples. Because they used animal bones in some of their tools, (and in Catal Huyuk: rings, hooks, etc.) that would imply that they used most, or all, of the carcasses they hunted.

Social status was already beginning to crop up more and more in these settlements, probably as soon as they began. One of the first indications of different social classes is burials and how extravagant they are. Burials found in Jericho show variability in the amount of items put to rest with them. Catal Huyuk burials even show variations in graves containing men, and graves containing women. The development of these differences is expected when people settle and become wealthier.

A variable of these early settlements that could be affected by geographical determination is housing. Of the two settlements, Jericho seems to have had the more primal city layout and houses. They were condensed in clusters and had no streets at all. They had slightly inward-leaning walls built of mud bricks on stone foundations so that the mud bricks would not be affected by the moisture. Other than that ingenious design, Catal Huyuk seemed a bit more complex in a few ways. Firstly, all of their houses were interconnected with the entrances on the roof. They used ladders to get off and on. Having that design not only saved them building materials, the interconnection of the roofs, along with the entrances, gave much need protection from surrounding peoples. It would seem that, in the event of an attack, they would head to the rooftops with their bow and arrows, bone-handled axes and other weapons, kick down the ladders, and defend their village. Once Jericho's attackers infiltrated their brick wall, they did not have as many options for defense or escape.

one major factor you're leaving out is that the oldest layers at catal hyuk show that it was originally a women-run society, similar to that discovered on the islands of malta and gozo, existing at about the same time... perhaps begun by the several thousand years earlier founders of the world's first agricultural community in matera, italy that later moved to sicily and then to malta, when the men took over and started using the tools women invented to farm with, for weapons... key evidence is that the women-planned-built-used sanctuaries found in catal hyuk's earliest layer are nearly identical to those on malta/gozo...

I found it a little flat to read. I am not sure what emphasis you were given to write on but it reads a bit like a list of items that could have been placed side by side in a list.

To get factual information across usually needs a bit more to be done to grab the readers' interest. Bring in some people, give a snippet of daily life, maybe ask some questions about the lifestyle - something to engage the reader & bring them into what you're trying to say.

A point of logic also here... they would pull the ladders up, not kick them down - why leave access to the roof down there where the attackers are? And how do you get down off the roof after you've beaten them off?

Also, you imply that the path to a civilised society was developed over time, and yet the big mystery is, in both locations (& others around the world) civilisation began all at once. The tools of civilised life were there from the beginning. Suddenly, apparent hunter-gatherers knew how to write, count, make bricks, plant, harvest & process grains, build solid housing (& mult-istory) at that and plan & incorporate sewage & drainage systems. Even the social structures were radically different from those of hunter/gatherer societies.

And yet there is no evidence of a developmental phase at all. Apparently overnight, Mankind went from roaming bands to settled towns.

Even places that predate Jericho & Catal-Huyuk, like Caral in South America & the Harappa-Sarasvatsti cities in India have the same problem - where did they learn their craft?

I think you maybe missed an opportunity to write of mystery & puzzles here.

Originally Posted by ProudestMonkey

I've this essay that is due tomorrow and I'm having a bit of trouble. See, it's comparing Catal Huyuk and Jericho, but it all seems a bit forced because I do not care much for the subject. Would anyone mind looking it over a bit and helping me with a decent conclusion (I don't have one at the mo')

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

During the Neolithic Revolution people took an important step towards civilization. [Civilization can mean many things.]

It [Say what "it" is, I assume "it" is the Neolithic Revolution, but, generally, unless the subject directly precedes the "it," we say what "it" is...] was the introduction of agriculture, domestication of animals, and a more sedentary life during the later part of the Stone Age. [Instead of just saying what the Neolithic Revolution wrought, tell me the shifts that occured, i.e. "transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture" instead of "introduction of agriculture."]

It did not happen overnight. [Oh, come on. You can do better than that. Ugly phrase for an academic paper.]

This phenomenon [I'm not sure that phenomenon is the best, or accurate choice in this circumstance] was widespread and continued growing and influencing ["widespread, growing, influential," they seem more like fillers in this sentence than an attempt for description. Also, too repititive on the "and."] for thousands of years [How many thousands. If you can pin it down, do so--also, give examples of which societies it influenced, and how they were influenced... you can even stretch a little, e.g. Roman Aqueducts--but that might be too much of a stretch].

These people were not penalized for gradual enlightenment [What do you mean penalized? why would they be penalized?], and after a trial and error period, [again, same as "it did not happen overnight" stay away from these terms if you can] everything began falling into place. [Everything? don't overexaggerate, be more specific.]

There are records of towns consisting of hundreds, even thousands, of people. [name the records, and make your point clearer in this sentence, always keep in mind your thesis.]

These towns were very widespread in where, and when, they arose during those 5000 years of stable farming. [I'd recomend rephrasing this, the "where, and when" is awk. And, again, specify "these."] But [The "But" is uncessary.] two have been discovered and excavated and are used today as examples of the first towns ever assembled on earth [As opposed to those on Mars? be specific when it is neccessary to be, not just for the sake of it...]: Jericho and Catal Huyuk.

These two settlements, one located in the newly-named "West Bank" and one found in Anatolia, were two of the forerunners [I don't much care for this word considering the circumstance, I don't see it as much of a race towards "civilization."] of a more civilized life [I really think you need to differentiate between "civilzed life" and an improvement in agriculture.], though they went about it in unique ways.

Achieving a relatively synonymous goal, some things [Technological things? you don't need to get too specific right here, because your following paragraph seems to cover that, however, "some things" just isn't adequate.] were emphasized more in Jericho - and the same in Catal Huyuk. [Just say "were emphasized more in Jericho than in Catal Huyuk." Then, when you come around to the paragraph/point where you speak of Catal Huyuk, you can say something along the lines of -- However, Catal Huyuk achieved the same results by placing a greater emphasis on so and so... -- to bridge those two points together.]


I'm neither an expert on what you're speaking on, nor have I read the entire paper, so forgive any, lets say, contextual errors. I'll try to get the rest done before the end of the day, but, for now, I've got to fire up the grill.

Edit: Well, fuck me. I didn't realise the date you posted this. I guess it was due... 3 days ago.