Geographic Determinism and Its Role in Historical Events

Introduction: Geography as a Historical Force

Historical studies often highlight the qualities or actions of specific civilizations, or focus on the choices and errors of significant individuals. Sometimes, however, the real determining factor with regard to events in history is a nation's geography: its climate, mountains, rivers, and other elements of terrain. This paper focuses on nature itself, revealing the role of land layout in some of history's most significant outcomes. Social scientists maintain that the development process must be derived from civilizational dynamics that have shaped particular geographic areas and their peoples. From the social perspective, the development process is evaluated within and across various civilizational ecumene of the world. In this context, ecumene refers to an area of continual cultural exchange and interaction (Woods, 2003).

Geographic Determinism and Sub-Saharan Africa

Some scholars view the geographic environment as the primary explanation behind the present-day gap between poor and rich countries. They argue that the early environmental context determines the circumstances and resources with which civilizations grow and progress. "Historical time," from this viewpoint, is crucial, as geographical areas that developed in favorable environments secured an advantage that persists to this day. Although the substantive and theoretical factors of these views are applicable to every geographical region, this paper deals with Sub-Saharan Africa for the following reasons: (1) Africa is the poorest continent in the world, and the economic and educational gaps between Africa and richer regions of the globe continue to broaden; and (2) available literature on Africa does not suggest any consensus regarding the medium- and long-term reasons behind this increasing gap.

Regarding the latter reason, some researchers concentrate on medium- and short-term factors such as economic policy-making, poor leadership, and colonialism to explain these differences. Others argue that even when inadequate economic policies, elite mismanagement, and corruption are taken into account, a persistent gap still exists in African economic development compared to other continents (Woods, 2003). The literature reviewed in this paper presents additional information to sharpen the debate regarding the medium- and long-term causative dynamics that account for the development difficulties associated with Sub-Saharan Africa.

In the past several decades, environment and geography, as explanatory concepts, have begun regaining prominence. A seminal study conducted in 1999 explored the relationship between civilizational ecumene, geography, and consequent divergence in development levels, providing a parsimonious account of the way in which geography affects development (Diamond, 1999).

Diamond (1999) avoids the theoretical trap of selecting from an exhaustive list of countless environmental influences that could affect human communities; instead, he concentrates on four groups of differences: (1) continental differences in species of wild animals and plants available as preliminary domestication material; (2) factors that affect migration and diffusion rates of animals, plants, and peoples within continents; (3) factors that influence diffusion between continents; and (4) continental differences in area and total population size. Collectively, these factors explain the kinds of economic and social opportunities existing in a particular geographical region and account for the discrepancy in development levels between continents and civilizations (Woods, 2003).

Agricultural Origins and Environmental Advantage

Natural environmental conditions make a significant difference in how and where agricultural civilizations initially arose. As Diamond (1999) argues, geographic differences in when—or whether—peoples of various continents became herders and farmers largely explain their contrasting subsequent fates. Geographic regions possessing animals and plants that could be domesticated gained an edge over regions that did not. Eurasia had a strong advantage with regard to both animal and plant domestication. Settled agricultural societies are believed to have first arisen in the Mesopotamian-Mediterranean stretch, as this region possessed favorable soil and climatic conditions for domesticated animals and crops such as sheep and wheat (Woods, 2003).

Productive wild plant and animal domestication largely led to the establishment of sedentary agricultural civilizations, which in turn contributed to improved population densities. Over time, urban centers arose, and in many instances so did the development of writing for recording trade and commerce. Eurasia dominated this development process, as peoples of the Fertile Crescent could domesticate a far wider array of valuable productive species and a greater variety of crops; these regions consequently developed increased food production and dense populations more swiftly (Diamond, 1999).

These evaluations of agricultural societies and their early influences leave out another key example of geography's impact: the early discovery of copper, copper-smelting, and subsequently the Bronze Age. It is generally accepted that large-scale agriculture first occurred with the onset of the Bronze Age, traceable to the development of the first bronze plow. Areas that possessed natural supplies of ore, such as copper, were therefore prime candidates for early civilizations, compared to those without nearby ore deposits. Metals and tool-making were, in this sense, directly dependent upon geography (Cramb, n.d.).

The early advantages described above were shaped not by culture, but by the environment. Evidence supporting this point can be found in the fact that, in most cases, when domesticated animals and crops arrived from elsewhere, they were immediately adopted, often resulting in enhanced food production and population growth (Woods, 2003).

Conclusion

The notion that the physical environment of a society can control cultural developments has long been established, although this theory has suffered more than most from shifts in intellectual fashion. For much of the latter part of the twentieth century, environmental determinism was rejected by almost all geographers. Yet geographic determinism has been broadly supported by scholars—geographers and non-geographers alike—from ancient to modern times. In the prehistoric and medieval periods, the concept was advanced by non-specialists out of plain observation and interest. Modern geographers have engaged with this thesis more rigorously and argue that civilizations and their corresponding environments are indivisible (Singh, 2007).

A related general concept is that the character of peoples can be understood in light of their physical environments. Many researchers express this idea in terms of environmental influences on human behavior and society. The review above has traced the environment's impact across several dimensions of human life, including economic activity such as agriculture, trade, and employment; civilization and culture; religion; resource availability; health; behavior; politics; and knowledge. Ultimately, the central question concerns the extent to which humans are shaped by their physical environment. As this paper demonstrates, more work is required to precisely disentangle the foundational dynamics of civilization and to determine which environmental influences are likely to be dominant in the long run.