Jared Diamond

One of my favourite books in recent times has been Sapiens – it did a fantastic job of showing how the species ascended to the apex position in evolutionary biology. A vertical journey, so to speak. But why didn’t all humans, spread across various continents, develop equally in terms of civilisation and technology? To use the book’s blurb, “why has human history unfolded so differently across the globe?” In the modern world, why does an Africa or even a large part of Asia have to work hard to catch up with the western world? That’s what the book seeks to answer.

It does that by asking very interesting questions. For instance, why is it that the Spanish conquered South American empires, and not the other way? The book doesn’t stop at the proximate answers – horses, weapons, germs etc- but keeps asking a series of questions for the answers that come up. Even beyond the time that recorded human history begins. To when the species first made their appearance on the planet – in Africa- and how slowly they made their way to different parts of the globe.

Primarily, four factors have ultimately caused the disparity in the fortunes of various peoples- how early they started, the difference in the environment and biogeography of the areas they populated (what plants and animals there could be domesticated to scale up food production and create the surplus needed for new skills and ideas to develop), the spread of ideas (the fascinating aspect of how the axis of the continent – except for Eurasia, all continents have a north south axis – plays a large role in why a large number of major civilisations and developments occurred in this part of the world), and the densities of population that allowed competing societies within continents to come up with radical ideas.

In addition, there are also related interesting ideas. For example, how invention is actually the mother of necessity (examples of how some inventions had been made before, but are credited to the person/s who made the right tweak at the right time for others to adopt it in large numbers) and how some non-intuitive solutions have endured (e.g. the QWERTY keyboard).

All of this make for a fascinating, if not easy read. Even though it was published a couple of decades ago, I think it is an important book for this time because it shows how evolutionary determinism is not just about genes, but the environment as well.

P.S. I do wish he had spent some pages on how the British could conquer India. The only clue he does drop is how India’s environment might have created a caste system which prevented the creation and proliferation of ideas it otherwise might have had.