THIS DIVERSITY IS NOT THE RESULT OF GEOGRAPHICAL SITUATION.
America--Ancient empires--Phenicians and Romans--Jews--Greece and
Rome--Commercial cities of Europe--Isthmus of Darien.
It is impossible to leave entirely out of the question the influence
which climate, the nature of the soil, and topographical circumstances,
exert upon the development of nations. This influence, so much overrated
by many of the learned, I shall investigate more fully, although I have
rapidly glanced at it already, in another place.
It is a very common opinion that a nation living under a temperate sky,
not too warm to enervate the man, nor too cold to render the soil
unproductive; on the shores of large rivers, affording extensive and
commodious means of communication; in plains and valleys adapted to
varied cultivation; at the foot of mountains pregnant with the useful
and precious ores--that a nation thus favored by nature, would soon be
prompted to cast off barbarism, and progress rapidly in
civilization.[74] On the other hand, and by the same reasoning, it is
easily admitted that tribes, charred by an ardent sun, or benumbed by
unceasing cold, and having no territory save sterile rocks, would be
much more liable to remain in a state of barbarism. According to this
hypothesis, the intellectual powers of man could be developed only by
the aid of external nature, and all his worth and greatness are not
implanted in him, but in the objects without and around. Specious as is
this opinion at first sight, it has against it all the numerous facts
which observation furnishes.
Nowhere, certainly, is there a greater variety of soil and climate than
in the extensive Western Continent. Nowhere are there more fertile
regions, milder skies, larger and more numerous rivers. The coasts are
indented with gulfs and bays; deep and magnificent harbors abound; the
most valuable riches of the mineral kingdom crop out of the ground;
nature has lavished on the soil her choicest and most variegated
vegetable productions, and the woods and prairies swarm with alimentary
species of animals, presenting still more substantial resources. And
yet, the greater part of these happy countries is inhabited, and has
been for a series of centuries, by tribes who ignore the most mediocre
exploration of all these treasures.
Several of them seem to have been in the way of doing better. A meagre
culture, a rude knowledge of the art of working metals, may be observed
in more than one place. Several useful arts, practised with some
ingenuity, still surprise the traveller. But all this is really on a
very humble scale, and never formed what might be termed a civilization.
There certainly has existed at some very remote period, a nation which
inhabited the vast region extending from Lake Erie to the Mexican Gulf.
There can be no doubt that the country lying between the Alleghany and
the Rocky Mountains, and extending from Lake Erie to the Gulf of Mexico,
was, at some very remote epoch, inhabited by a nation that has left
remarkable traces of its existence behind.[75] The remains of
buildings, inscriptions on rocks, the tumuli,[76] and mummies which they
inclose, indicate a high degree of intellectual culture. But there is no
evidence that between this mysterious people and the tribes now
wandering over its tombs, there is any very near affinity. However this
may be, if by inheritance or slavish imitation the now existing
aborigines derive their first knowledge of the arts which they now
rudely practise, from the former masters of the soil, we cannot but be
struck by their incapacity of perfecting what they had been taught; and
I see in this a new motive for adhering to my opinion, that a nation
placed amid the most favorable geographical circumstances, is not,
therefore, destined to arrive at civilization.
On the contrary, there is between the propitiousness of soil and climate
and the establishment of civilization, a complete independence. India
was a country which required fertilization; so was Egypt.[77] Here we
have two very celebrated centres of human culture and development.
China, though very productive in some parts, presented in others
difficulties of a very serious character. The first events recorded in
its history are struggles with rivers that had burst their bonds; its
heroes are victors over the ruthless flood; the ancient emperors
distinguished themselves by excavating canals and draining marshes. The
country of the Tigris and Euphrates, the theatre of Assyrian splendor
and hallowed by our most sacred traditions, those regions where,
Syncellus says, wheat grew spontaneously, possess a soil so little
productive, when unassisted by art, that only a vast and laborious
system of irrigation can render it capable of giving the means of
subsistence to its inhabitants. Now that the canals are filled up or
obstructed, sterility has reassumed its former dominion. I am,
therefore, inclined to think that nature had not so greatly favored
these countries as is usually supposed. Yet, I shall not discuss this
point.
I am willing to admit that China, Egypt, India, and Mesopotamia were
regions perfectly adapted in every respect to the establishment of great
empires, and the consequent development of brilliant civilizations. But
it cannot be disputed that these nations, to profit by these superior
advantages, must have previously brought their social system to a high
degree of perfection. Before the great watercourses became the highways
of commerce, industry, or at least agriculture, must have flourished to
some extent. The great advantages accorded to these countries
presuppose, therefore, in the nations that have profited by them, a
peculiar intellectual vocation, and even a certain anterior degree of
civilization. But from these specially favored regions let us glance
elsewhere.
When the Phenicians migrated from the southeast, they fixed their abode
on an arid, rocky coast, inclosed by steep and ragged mountains. Such a
geographical situation would appear to preclude a people from any
expansion, and force them to remain forever dependent on the produce of
their fisheries for sustenance. The utmost that could be expected of
them was to see them petty pirates. They were pirates, indeed, but on a
magnificent scale; and, what is more, they were bold and successful
merchants and speculators. They planted colonies everywhere, while the
barren rocks of the mother country were covered with the palaces and
temples of a wealthy and luxurious community. Some will say, that "the
very unpropitiousness of external circumstances forced the founders of
Tyre and Sidon to become what they were. Necessity is the mother of
invention; their misery spurred them on to exertion; had they inhabited
the plains of Damascus, they would have been content with the peaceful
products of agriculture, and would probably never have become an
illustrious nation."[78]
And why does not misery spur on other nations placed under similar
circumstances? The Kabyles of Morocco are an ancient race; they have had
sufficient time for reflection, and, moreover, every possible inducement
for mere imitation; yet they have never imagined any other method for
alleviating their wretched lot except petty piracy. The unparalleled
facilities for commerce afforded by the Indian archipelago and the
island clusters of the Pacific, have never been improved by the natives;
all the peaceful and profitable relations were left in the hands of
foreign races--the Chinese, Malays, and Arabs; where commerce has fallen
into the hands of a semi-indigenous or half-breed population, it has
instantly commenced to languish. What conclusions can we deduce from
these observations than that pressing wants are not sufficient for
inciting a nation to profit by the natural facilities of its coasts and
islands, and that some special aptitude is needed for establishing a
commercial state even in localities best adapted for that purpose.
But I shall not content myself with proving that the social and
political aptitudes of races are not dependent on geographical
situations, whether these be favorable or unfavorable; I shall,
moreover, endeavor to show that these aptitudes have no sort of relation
with any exterior circumstances. The Armenians, in their almost
inaccessible mountains, where so many other nations have vegetated in a
state of barbarism from generation to generation, and without any access
to the sea, attained, already at a remote period, a high state of
civilization. The Jews found themselves in an analogous position; they
were surrounded by tribes who spoke kindred dialects, and who, for the
most part, were nearly related to them in blood. Yet, they excelled all
these groups. They were warriors, agriculturists, and merchants. Under a
government in which theocracy, monarchy, patriarchal authority, and
popular will, were singularly complicated and balanced, they traversed
centuries of prosperity and glory. The difficulties which the narrow
limits of their patrimonial domain opposed to their expansion, were
overcome by an intelligent system of emigration. What was this famous
Canaan? Modern travellers bear witness to the laborious and
well-directed efforts by which the Jewish agriculturists maintained the
factitious fertility of their soil. Since the chosen race no longer
inhabits these mountains and plains, the wells where Jacob's flocks
drank are dried up; Naboth's vineyard is invaded by the desert, Achab's
palace-gardens filled with thistles. In this miserable corner of the
world, what were the Jews? A people dextrous in all they undertook, a
free, powerful, intelligent people, who, before losing bravely, and
against a much superior foe, the title of independent nation, had
furnished to the world almost as many doctors as merchants.[79]
Let us look at Greece. Arcadia was the paradise of the shepherd, and
Boeotia, the favored land of Ceres and Triptolemus: yet, Arcadia and
Boeotia play but a very inferior part in history. The wealthy Corinth,
the favorite of Plutus and Venus, also appears in the second rank. To
whom pertains the glory of Grecian history? To Attica, whose whitish,
sandy soil afforded a scanty sustenance to puny olive-trees; to Athens,
whose principal commerce consisted in books and statues. Then to Sparta,
shut up in a narrow valley between masses of rocks, where victory went
in search of it.
Who would dare to assert that Rome owed her universal empire to her
geographical position? In the poor district of Latium, on the banks of a
tiny stream emptying its waters on an almost unknown coast, where
neither Greek nor Phenician vessel ever landed, except by accident, the
future mistress of the world was born. So soon as the nations of the
earth obeyed the Roman standard, politicians found the metropolis
ill-placed, and the eternal city was neglected: even abandoned. The
first emperors, being chiefly occupied with the East, resided in Greece
almost continually. Tiberius chose Caprea, in the centre of his empire.
His successors went to Antioch. Several lived at Trebia. Finally, a
decree deprived Rome of the very name of capital, and gave it to Milan.
If the Romans have conquered the world, it is certainly in spite of the
locality whence issued forth their first armies, and not on account of
its advantages.
In modern history, the proofs of the correctness of my position are so
abundant, that I hardly know how to select. I see prosperity abandoning
the coasts of the Mediterranean, evidence that it was not dependent on
them. The great commercial cities of the Middle Ages rise where no
theorist of a preceding age could have predicted them. Novogorod
flourishes in an almost arctic region, Bremen on a coast nearly as
cold. The Hanse-towns of Germany rise in a country where civilization
has scarcely dawned; Venice appears at the head of a long, narrow gulf.
Political preponderance belongs to places before unknown. Lyons,
Toulouse, Narbonne, Marseilles, Bordeaux, lose the importance assigned
them by the Romans, and Paris becomes the metropolis--Paris, then a
third-rate town, too far from the sea for commerce, too near it for the
Norman barges. In Italy, cities formerly obscure, surpass the capital of
the popes. Ravenna rises in the midst of marshes; Amalfi, for a long
time, enjoys extensive dominion. It must be observed, that in all these
changes accident has no part: they all are the result of the presence of
a victorious and preponderating race. It is not the place which
determines the importance of a nation, it is the nation which gives to
the place its political and economical importance.
I do not, however, deny the importance of certain situations for
commercial depots, or for capitals. The observations made with regard to
Alexandria and Constantinople, are incontestable.[80] There are, upon
our globe, various points which may be called the keys of the world.
Thus, it is obvious that a city, built on the proposed canal which is
to pierce the Isthmus of Darien, would act an important part in the
affairs of the world.
But, such a part a nation may act well or badly, or even not at all,
according to its merits. Aggrandize Chagres, and let the two oceans
unite under her walls, the destiny of the city would depend entirely on
the race by which it was peopled. If this race be worthy of their good
fortune, they will soon discover whether Chagres be the point whence the
greatest benefits can be derived from the union of the two oceans; and,
if it is not, they will leave it, and then, untrammelled, develop
elsewhere their brilliant destinies.[81]
FOOTNOTES:
[74] Consult, among others, Carus: _Uber ungleiche Befähigung der
vershiedenen Menschen-stämme für höhere geistige Entwickelung._ Leipzig,
1849, p. 96 _et passim_.
[75] Prichard, _Natural History of Man_, vol. ii.
See particularly the recent researches of E. G. Squier, published in
1847, under the title: _Observations on the Aboriginal Monuments of the
Mississippi Valley_, and also in various late reviews and other
periodicals.
[76] The very singular construction of these tumuli, and the numerous
utensils found in them, occupy at this moment the penetration and talent
of American antiquaries. I shall have occasion, in a subsequent volume,
to express an opinion as to their value in the inquiries about a former
civilization; at present, I shall only say that their almost incredible
antiquity cannot be called in question. Mr. Squier is right in
considering this proved by the fact merely, that the skeletons exhumed
from these tumuli crumble into dust as soon as exposed to the
atmosphere, although the condition of the soil in which they lie, is the
most favorable possible; while the human remains under the British
cromlichs, and which have been interred for at least eighteen centuries,
are perfectly solid. It is easily conceived, therefore, that between the
first possessors of the American soil and the Lenni-Lenape and other
tribes, there is no connection. Before concluding this note, I cannot
refrain from praising the industry and skill manifested by American
scholars in the study of the antiquities of their immense continent. To
obviate the difficulties arising from the excessive fragility of the
exhumed skulls, many futile attempts were made, but the object was
finally accomplished by pouring into them a bituminous preparation which
instantly solidifies and thus preserves the osseous parts. This process,
which requires many precautions, and as much skill as promptitude, is
said to be generally successful.
[77] Ancient India required, on the part of its first white colonists,
immense labor of cultivation and improvement. (See Lassen, _Indische
Alterthumskunde_, vol. i.) As to Egypt, see what Chevalier Bunsen,
_Ægypten's Stelle in der Weltgeschichte_, says of the fertilization of
the Fayoum, that gigantic work of the earliest sovereigns.
[78] "Why have accidental circumstances always prevented some from
rising, while they have only stimulated others to higher
attainments?"--_Dr. Kneeland's Introd. to Hamilton Smith's Nat. Hist. of
Man_, p. 95.--H.
[79] Salvador, _Histoire des Juifs_.
[80] M. Saint-Marc Girardin, _Revue des Deux Mondes_.
[81] See, upon this often-debated subject, the opinion--somewhat acerbly
expressed--of a learned historian and philologist:--
"A great number of writers have suffered themselves to be persuaded that
the country made the nation; that the Bavarians and Saxons were
predestined, by the nature of their soil, to become what they are
to-day; that Protestantism belonged not to the regions of the south; and
that Catholicism could not penetrate to those of the north; and many
similar things. Men who interpret history according to their own slender
knowledge, their narrow hearts, and near-sighted minds, would, by the
same reasoning, make us believe that the Jews had possessed such and
such qualities--more or less clearly understood--because they inhabited
Palestine, and not India or Greece. But, if these philosophers, so
dextrous in proving whatever flatters their notions, were to reflect
that the Holy Land contained, in its limited compass, peoples of the
most dissimilar religions and modes of thinking, that between them,
again, and their present successors, there is the utmost difference
conceivable, although the country is still the same; they would
understand how little influence, upon the character and civilization of
a nation has the country they inhabit."--EWALD, _Geschichte des Volkes
Israel_, vol. i. p. 259.