This article is compiled from Guns, Germs and Steel
Guns, Germs and Steel is an attempt to outline human history over the past 13,000 years. The question that inspired me to write this book was: Why do different continents have different historical trajectories? If this question worries you about getting a monograph with racial overtones, rest assured: the answers in this book do not touch on the differences between human races. The focus of this book is to explore the ultimate cause and to go as far back as possible to the historical chain of cause and effect.
Most writings on world history focus on Eurasian and North African societies with literacy cultures, while in other areas, such as sub-Saharan Africa, the Americas, the islands of Southeast Asia, Australia, New Guinea, and the Pacific Islands, indigenous societies there are only brief references, and are mainly about what happened in fairly recent times after they were discovered and conquered by Western Europeans. Even in the case of Eurasia, the history of western Eurasia occupies a much larger part of the history than the history of China, India, Japan, the tropical regions of Southeast Asia, and other societies in eastern Eurasia. Writing was born around 3000 BC, and the history before that is often only brushed over, although in the 5 million years of human history, no writing accounted for 99.9% of the time.
This narrow approach to world history has three flaws. First, it is not difficult to understand that today there are more and more people interested in societies outside the western part of Eurasia. After all, those "other" societies make up the majority of the world's population, and the vast majority of the world's ethnic, cultural, and linguistic groups are also there. Some of these societies have become, or are becoming, extremely powerful economies and political forces.
Second, those who are particularly concerned with how the modern world came into being cannot gain a deeper understanding if they read only the history of the aftermath of the advent of the text. The situation was not that societies on all continents were evenly matched until 3000 BC, when writing was suddenly invented in western Eurasia and began to lead in all aspects. The truth is that by 3000 BC, some societies in Eurasia and North Africa already had not only early writing, but also centralized national governments, cities, widely used metal tools and weapons, and also used domestic animals for transportation, traction, and mechanical power, relying on agriculture and livestock for food. In most or all of the other continents, none of these things happened at that time; some of them later appeared in parts of the Americas and sub-Saharan Africa, but the process took almost 5,000 years; and indigenous Australian societies never had these things. From this, we should be able to think that the dominance of western Eurasia in the modern world has its roots dating back to the past before 3000 BC, when no writing had appeared. (With regard to the dominance of western Eurasia, I am referring to the domination of the western Eurasian society itself and the societies it has shaped on other continents.) ）
Third, to focus only on the history of the societies of western Eurasia ignores a major question: Why are those societies so powerful and innovative? Usually, when people answer this question, they talk about proximate causes such as capitalism, mercantilism, scientific research, technology, and germs that kill groups on other continents that have come into contact with colonists in western Eurasia. But why did all these elements of conquest appear in western Eurasia, while other places were either only partial or none at all?
All of these elements are only proximate causes, not ultimate causes. Why did capitalism not flourish in Indigenous Mexican societies, mercantilism not flourish in sub-Saharan Africa, scientific research not highly respected in ancient China, advanced technology not blossoming in Indigenous Societies in North America, and deadly germs not evolving among Indigenous Australian groups? One might argue that the reason is because of the cultural peculiarities of these societies (e.g., scientific research was suppressed by Confucianism in ancient China and promoted by Greek or Judeo-Christian traditions in western Eurasia), but this answer avoids the search for the ultimate cause: Why didn't Confucianism appear in western Eurasia and Judeo-Christian ethics in ancient China? Moreover, this statement ignores the fact that until 1400 AD, Confucianism-revered China had been technologically ahead of western Eurasia.
If one only looks at the society of western Eurasia, then even the society of western Eurasia itself cannot be understood. The above-mentioned issues of concern relate to the differences between these societies and other societies. Answering these questions requires us to understand other societies as well, so that we can place the societies of western Eurasia in a broader context.
Some readers may feel that I am opposed to the traditional way of writing history, but I myself am going to the other extreme, over-compressing the space given to the western part of Eurasia in order to write the history of the rest of the world. My answer to this is that other parts of the world are very illuminating, often with diverse societies in a small geographical area. Other readers may agree with one of the book's reviewers. The commentator wrote half-jokingly that I seem to see world history as an onion, and the modern world is the outermost layer, peeling off the onion layer by layer in the search for understanding history. Yes, world history is indeed such an onion! However, the process of peeling the onion layer by layer is fascinating and challenging, and it is of great significance to me today, because we try to learn from history and learn from the past.
Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fate of Human Society
Responsible editor| Zhu Yongxing
Headlines were compiled | Josie Ho