In the march of time, some people have gone far ahead, while some other people have lagged behind. Why so? Guns, Germs, and Steel is an attempt to answer this question. The author, Jared Diamond, suggests that it is primarily because of the environments that the societies inhabit. The subject of the book is History, yet Diamond’s approach is scientific. His marked storytelling ability makes it easy even for the uninitiated to grasp the complex issues that the book sets out to tackle.
First published in 1997, the book won Phi Beta Kappa Award in Science (1997), the Pulitzer Prize for General Nonfiction (1998) and the (British) Royal Society’s Rhone-Poulenc Prize for Science Books.
Jared Diamond (born 1937, Boston, Massachusetts, America), is a trained evolutionary biologist. He has written extensively on the subjects of history and science. In a 2005 poll, he was ranked the nineth of the world’s top 100 public intellectuals.
The 500-odd pages book carries an engaging sub-title: A short history of everybody for the last 13,000 years. The captions of its parts are no less disarming –
Preface: Why is the World History Like an Onion?
Prologue: Yali’s Question
Part One: From Eden to Cajamarca (‘Eden’ may remind one of the Biblical Garden of Eden in which Adam and Eve lived in innocence and bliss; while ‘Cajamarca’ – pronounced ‘Kakhamarka’ – refers to a city in Peru, South America.)
Part Two: The Rise and Spread of Food Distribution
Part Three: From Food to Guns, Germs, and Steel
Part Four: Around the World in Six Chapters
Epilogue: The Future of Human History as a Science
But first, the chronology of pre-history: Humans evolved from apes in Africa about 7 million years ago. It took our ancestors to achieve the erect stature some three million years, and another one-and-a-half million years longer to have a bigger body size with a bigger brain. Till 1.7 million years ago, Homo erectus, ‘was more than an ape, but still much less than a modern man.’ The immediate predecessor to modern humans – Homo sapiens – appeared half a million years ago; and not until 13000 years BP (Before Present) did the Homo sapiens enter into village life in some parts of the world. Diamond calls that ‘a suitable starting point from which to compare historical developments on the different continents.’ Humans had by then spread from Africa to Eurasia and migrated onwards to almost all parts of the world. The last Ice Age had ended. The North, Central and South Americas had been populated. Plant and animal domestication was about to begin.
‘Why did human development proceed at different rates on different continents?’ This question comes from Yali, Diamond’s friend and an outgoing Guinean (Guinea is a country in West Africa). Perhaps some people – the Europeans for instance – happened to be brighter than Yali’s ancestors, one might say. The author firmly rejects such a trite and racist proposition. ‘History followed different courses for different peoples because of differences among peoples’ environments, not because of biological differences among peoples themselves,’ he asserts. It is a layered assertion as we shall see.
To have enough food was the primary concern of our ancestors. That brought environmental factors into play. Those continents which had rich quantities of wild plants and animals ‘available as starting materials for domestication’ saw an initial advantage over others. The size and connectivity of the regions also played a significant role. Eurasia and Africa provided more wild species for domestication, and Eurasia more so, because of its larger area. Australia and the Americas, in comparison, offered fewer wildlife. In the continents themselves, plant and animal domestication was concentrated in favourable homelands. That necessitated intra- and inter-continental diffusion of the assets of potential food and migration of the peoples.
The book has been criticised for environment determinism. Diamond, however, does not abjure the role of human agency, as a collective and even in individual capacity in the world’s developments. His crisp and concise description of the rise and fall of medieval China (pp 480-481) is eye-opening. ‘China enjoyed undoubted advantages: a rise of food production…ecological diversity from North to South China and from the coast to high mountains of the Tibetan plateau, giving rise to a diverse set of crops, animals, and technology; a large and productive expanse, nourishing the largest regional human population in the world…’ China had no match in technology in the medieval world. It made cast iron, the compass, gun powder, paper and a lot more inventions. Politically, it was a mighty nation. It sent large ships across the Indian ocean. Then, sometime in the 15th century, because of internal political strife, the shipyards were dismantled and ocean-going ships were forbidden. Gradually, the country lost its primacy to the more enterprising Spain and other European countries.
Sometimes, even common folks leave an indelible mark in history. In 1882, Ms Longley, an American woman who ran a shorthand and typing institute, decided to opt for the QWERTY key-board for typewriters to promote her pupils. This decision has stuck with the world. It has been adopted even for computer keyboards. As Ray Thompson, the inventor of e-mail – which has radically changed the world of communication – said memorably, ‘I just happened to be in the right place at the right time.’
Now what of the ‘guns, germs and steel’ highlighted by the author in the book’s title itself? How did these acquisitions contribute to the rapid pace of development of the Europeans, for instance, and slavery of the native Americans? Guns and steel represent superior technology. Ironically, germs – carriers of disease – too are a manifestation of a prosperous nation disempowering a poor one. Diamond cites two historical instances in this regard. The expedition of the Italian sailor Christopher Columbus (1492-1504) left the Caribbeans with diseases against which they had no resistance. Then in 1532, a troop of mere 168 Spanish invaders ‘crushed a Native American 500 times more numerous.’ The Spaniards could win because they had guns. The Native Americans lost because they had never seen guns before.
Jared Diamond rakes up the issue why the average income of an American is ‘up to 400 times higher than the incomes in the poorest countries like Tanzania and Yemen.’ For an answer he lists a dozen traits of a flourishing state: control of inflation, educational opportunities, effectiveness of government, enforcement of contracts, freedom from trade barriers, incentives and opportunities of capital, low risk of assassination, open currency exchange, protection of private property rights, rule of law and unimpeded flow of capital.
Does India meet such a long list of pre-requisites to become richer? It’s anybody’s guess.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
