Passage
Fire is a bonus for many species, destroying parasites and competitors, providing warmth and light, clearing land and improving visibility, and attracting and scattering nutritious prey. The ancestors of human beings may have come to appreciate the value of fire probably long before subsequent generations discovered how to create and maintain it. Archaeological records provide ample evidence of fires occurring spontaneously – as a result of volcanic action, sunlight, lightning, build-ups of gases – from millions of years ago onwards. So our ancestors would have had plenty of opportunities to observe fires, develop strategies for coping with them and even benefit from them.
It is not clear when humans began to use fire. Some debated findings suggest that the australopithecines, distant ancestors of Homo sapiens, could have been using fire at Makapansgat, in South Africa, 1.5 million years ago, while others put the figure at only 500,000 years ago, which would make fire a new tool in the repertoire of Homo erectus. A novel find in 2004 suggests that Homo erectus may well have used fire some 790,000 years ago. Experts think that the control of fire encouraged social interaction, enabled dramatic changes in the diet of proto-humans and gave them the ability to defend themselves against wild animals.
Fire would certainly have offered early humans huge advantages with respect to survival and reproduction; so there would have been a strong incentive to learn how to create as well as control it. Sterkfontein, a South African cave, provides a classic illustration of how fire helped the balance of power to shift towards intelligent humans, and away from brawny beasts. Early layers of the cave reveal humans to be the prey of big cats; in later ones, contemporaneous with evidence of human-made fire, the predators are being consumed by us.
By burning scrubland, fires enabled human hunters to see their prey more clearly. Cooked food was easier to chew and digest, and could also be preserved for longer, leaving more time for activities not related to hunting or gathering. Fire may also have become a useful element in the hunt itself. Evidence in Spain suggests humans might have used fires to drive herds of large mammals – including elephants – off a precipice; a lazy way of butchering in volume.
Fire lent us a massive advantage. The burning of scrubland also encouraged the growth of edible grasses and legumes – exactly the plants that humans would later come to domesticate. In addition to being edible by us, these first crops would have attracted hosts of small game to the site, which could then be picked off at will. It is impossible to imagine farming without fire. For a start, the cereal crops first domesticated were only truly edible as a result of fire – either boiled into a pottage or baked into a crudebread. Fire would have attracted small pack animals to the fringes of human settlements, where humans would have captured them and domesticated them. Most importantly of all, it cleared the land and replenished its resources.
In numerous tribal groups, land is still claimed by means of setting light to it: man establishes his perceived dominion over nature with fire, as he almost certainly did 10,000–12,000 years ago, when global warming coincided with a population bulge. At this point the need for new territory might well have necessitated mass torching of the land. As areas became settled, the occupants re-enacted the original ‘claiming’ fire every two years or so, aware that the ashes would revivify and enrich the soil. This classic ‘slash and burn’ technique continues in some parts of the world to this day.
Question for 100 RCs for Practice Questions- 63
Try yourself:The central idea of this passage is:
Explanation
Option 1 is incorrect. Though the passage discusses the benefits of fire reaped by human ancestors, it does not mention the uses of fire in our day-to-day lives. This option is out of context and can be rejected. Eliminate option 1.
Option 2 is incorrect. The passage does not talk about fire in cultural terms or the importance of fire in different human cultures. Eliminate option 2.
Option 3 is incorrect. The discovery of fire is discussed only in the second paragraph, not the entire passage. Eliminate option 3.
Option 4 is correct. The passage is about how ancestral humans tamed fire, and used it to their advantage in a number of ways, for thousands of years. The passage stresses the significance of fire in the advancement of intelligent humans over brawny beasts. Thus, option 4 best sums up the main topic of the passage. Retain option 4.
Report a problem
Question for 100 RCs for Practice Questions- 63
Try yourself:Which of the following is NOT true regarding the relationship of ancestral humans with fire?
Explanation
Option 1 is incorrect. It paraphrases the second sentence of paragraph 1: “The ancestors of human beings may have come to appreciate the value of fire probably long before subsequent generations discovered how to create and maintain it.” Thus, option 1 is true. Eliminate option 1.
Option 2 is incorrect. The second paragraph begins thus: “It is not clear when humans began to use fire.” The passage then mentions different dates, according to different sources, such as 1. 5 million years, 500,000 years, 79000 years etc... Option 2 can be inferred from the different dates given in paragraph 2. Eliminate option 2.
Option 4 is incorrect. It is stated in paragraph 3 that “…there would have been a strong incentive to learn how to create as well as control it.” Eliminate option 4.
Option 3 is correct. According to paragraph 2, the findings that indicate that ancestral humans could have been using fire 1.5 million years ago, were from Makapansgat in South Africa, not Sterkfontein. Thus, option 3 is NOT true. Retain option 3.
Report a problem
Question for 100 RCs for Practice Questions- 63
Try yourself:According to the passage, all of the following are the advantages of fire EXCEPT:
Explanation
Option 2 is incorrect. In the last paragraph, it is stated that “fire would have attracted small pack animals to the fringes of human settlements, where humans would have captured them and domesticated them.” Thus, this option is not an exception. Eliminate option 1.
Option 3 is incorrect. It is stated in the last paragraph thus: ‘…the ashes would revivify and enrich the soil’. Eliminate option 3.
Option 4 is incorrect. It is stated in the second paragraph that “experts think that the control of fire encouraged social interaction”. Eliminate option 4.
Option 1 is correct. Option 1 is merely common knowledge. It is not mentioned in the passage that fire was used for the purpose of forging tools. Hence, option 1 is an exception. Retain option 1.
Report a problem
Question for 100 RCs for Practice Questions- 63
Try yourself:The passage supports all of the following EXCEPT:
Explanation
Option 1 is incorrect because it is not an exception. The first paragraph talks about how “ancestors of human being may have come to appreciate the value of fire probably long before subsequent generations discovered how to create and maintain it.” The essay then briefly describes how fire has played an important role in the lives of “australopithecines, distant ancestors of Homo sapiens,” in the life of “hunter gatherers” and finally about the domestication of fire and its significance. Hence, Option 1 is supported by the passage. Eliminate option 1.
Option 2 is incorrect because it is also not an exception. The second paragraph states that “experts think that control of fire encouraged social interaction, enabled dramatic changes in the diet of proto-humans and gave them the ability to defend themselves against wild animals”. Eliminate option 2.
Option 3 is incorrect. It can be inferred from paragraph 3, which states that “Early layers of the cave reveal humans to be the prey of big cats; in later ones, contemporaneous with evidence of human-made fire, the predators are being consumed by us.” Therefore, it is not an exception. Eliminate option 3.
Option 4 is an exception. The last paragraph states that “global warming coincided with a population bulge 10,000–12,000 years ago.” Global warming – which is also a natural process is thus not attributed to population bulge. Retain option 4.
Report a problem
