[.ca] Civilizations: Culture, Ambition, and the Transformation ... (ISBN 0743202481)

From Amazon.com:
"Civilization" is a tricky term, one that means many things to many people. For some, it denotes great buildings, canals, codes of law; for others, it offers a contrast between one group and another, with the advantage always going to the more "civilized" bunch against the "barbaric," "savage," or "primitive." All such distinctions, writes Oxford University historian Felipe Fernández- Armesto, are arbitrary and laden with subjective value; they speak to unscientific notions of progress, to hidden agendas. What matters, he continues, is the extent to which a culture has developed means to separate itself from nature: "Civilization makes its own habitat. It is civilized in direct proportion to its distance, its difference from the unmodified natural environment." A culture such as the ancient Han Chinese, the medieval highland Maya, or the Renaissance Venetian, then, is highly civilized inasmuch as its members dammed and diverted rivers, drained lakes, stripped forests, and built monumental structures to celebrate their achievements; people content or resigned to "live off the product and inhabit the spaces nature gives them" are markedly less so by virtue of that accommodation. No culture, Fernández-Armesto writes, is inherently exempt from becoming civilized; nor, he adds, does "civilized" equate to "good." In exploring history as a branch of historical ecology, he sometimes abandons his thesis, intriguing and provocative as it is, to engage in a wide-ranging survey of the world past reminiscent of (but much better written than) Toynbee and Durant, touching on the ancient Greeks here, the herding peoples of the African savanna and Central Asia there, the Moundbuilders of prehistoric North America and the hunting peoples of the Arctic there. Unlike many standard textbooks, his narrative manages to offer something new wherever he turns. Allusive and learned, his book repays close reading--and should inspire plenty of argument along the way. -- Gregory McNamee

Rough around the edges, but impressive for its erudition:
As an adolescent, Fernandez-Armesto read the first volumes of Toynbee's "A Study of History" and "vowed never to return to them." Later in life, he "found that Toynbee's work is half full of wisdom," and "Civilizations" owes much to that half, admitting that his doctrine of "challenge and response"--the interrelationship between humans and their environment--is a "powerful and useful characterization" of how civilization can be measured. Inspired by this and other ideas, Fernandez-Armesto here defines and organizes civilizations by "their systematic refashioning of nature." Spanning over ten millennia, proceeding from tundra societies to maritime empires, and incorporating histories both obscure and familiar, "Civilizations" is a cornucopia of minutiae and generalizations, and the breadth of Fernandez-Armesto's reading and knowledge is staggering. Since he covers hundreds of societies, many get only a page or two while others get more detailed treatment, and the encyclopedic aspect of this work can be both exhilarating and overwhelming. (Readers lacking a historical atlas will probably find the lack of maps quite frustrating.) The book works best when the author is making a point or telling a story, as when he takes the reader on a tour of the wonders of the classical (Greek) world, when he discusses both the inflated significance and the true accomplishments of Vasco da Gama, or when he focuses, in the book's final chapters, on the importance of maritime history (his specialization) during the last thousand years. "Civilizations" falters a bit, however, when Fernandez-Armesto sketches cultures with which he seems to have a passing knowledge (Songhay, New Guineau, the Mound Builders). In some of these sections, the prose reads like a series of observations transcribed or paraphrased from a sequence of those index cards favored by researchers. Still, some of those index cards are pretty darn interesting. Fernandez-Armesto admits that this comparative study is "an experimental work," "rough-hewn," written "in something like a frenzy." Although I didn't think that its slapdash character was particularly wearisome, the book does contain some sloppy, imprecise statements that a second draft would have thrashed into submission. During his discussion of the Atlantic slave trade during the early modern period, for example, the author writes what he simply cannot mean: "It is not even clear what abolitionists found morally repugnant about slavery: they let other forms of exploitation, including coolie abuse, sweatshops, and convict labor succeed it." Putting aside the glib anachronisms in this sentence, the ambiguous "let" in this sentence demands clarification: abolitionists of the late 1700s and early 1800s were no more responsible for "coolie labor" or sweatshops than Einstein could have been for "letting" Hiroshima and Chernobyl happen. There are a number of carelessly worded and unsupported gaffes like this one, made in the "frenzy" of getting it all down, and the author doesn't always package his assortment of assertions and abundance of data into a cohesive whole. Fortunately these shortcomings don't overwhelm the merits of this sweeping, information-packed historical survey.

Refreshing:
Truth be said. Nowadays it is hard to find an accurate and impartial history of civilization, and most of the civilizations we'll be able to read about do not illustrate the effort to transform the environment like some of the civilizations portrayed in this book. The book is arranged according to similarities in the environment which sprouted especific civilizations and which similarities these weathers produce in their civilizations. In a different manner to what you'll most often find, he will explain the similarities of civilizations neither as the product of a proto civilization nor as a global consciousness, but rather as a direct consequence of the desire to transform the environment. The other thing that made this book refreshing (I know that most wont find a comparative history of civilizations refreshing) is how lucid Fernandez-Armesto's thougths on civilization are. On most explanations you'll find that the process of civilization is a way to improve the way of life, which this book clearly proofs wrong, via evidence, not because he is against civilization, but because in a short term it would reduce the diet of humans, and would increase infectious diseases. This is not only a work of history, but it clearly ilustrates the human mind and how it adapts, not only to it's own environment, but to external cultural influences. Though, as said on other reviews, Armesto fails to deliver all he promised (probably because he promises too much), still his work is worth of praise.

Fails to deliver:
Fernandez-Armesto's purpose in writing this book is to change the way we think of civilizations -- both in definition and in perspective. He gives us his definition of civilization -- the process by which human communities attempt to alter their environment -- and then gives us a "history" of the world's civilizations, grouped by the type of environment they inhabited. Thus, for example, he will compare and contrast the ways that the inhabitants of the Great Plains in North America, the Sahel and the savannah in Africa, and the steppes of central Asia attempted to adapt their enviornment. A fascinating idea, right? Unfortunately, even though he promises to do this, he never really does. Instead, he has written short impressionist pieces on civilizations around the world, lumping them together superficially. There is very little structure to this work; Fernandez-Armesto never details the irrigation techniques in one area and compares them to another; he never closely examines the deforestation process in North America and northern Euorpe; in short, he never does any of the things he promises to do. Despite this ambitious failure, the book is still entertaining, educational, and stimulating. Fernandez-Armesto has put out a new schema for the study of human history, but it appears that it will be up to someone else to do real analysis.

A worthy companion to MILLENIUM:
I admit that I have every known work published by Felipe Fernandez-Armesto. Almost all deserve that coveted five star award (exception being TRUTH). The current work is more than a history of various groups of peoples we conventiently call civilizations - culture would be apt. The originality of this work is its premise, namely that civilizations are to evaluated on their reaction to their environment. It makes for interesting bed-fellows; one can group African and Arab desert tribes with the Lapps and Inuits. Upon reflection it makes sense to view things this way. The similarities among these various groups is amazing considering their geographical isolation and cultural diversity. But each ecological niche - sand, mountains, oceans, jungles, grasslands, swamps - have the same problems and obstacles regardless of their geographical location - whether near the North Pole, in the Andes or in the steaming jungles of Southeast Asia. Fernandez-Armesto's works tower over felllow journalists simply because they extend further, make bolder claims, ask the right questions. Despite his interest and reverence for primitive peoples, he is not a multi-culturist who claims that every civilization is morally equal or that this kind of short, brutish life is preferable to our contented, abundant ones. He does ask for an attentive ear and an open mind for this lesson in history, language, food, customs and ideas.

A Brilliant Synthesizer Gives Us Another Good Book:
Fernandez-Armesto's venture into environmental history further enhances his reputation as the leading scholar producing large-scale history. Here he classifies civilizations according to the general type of environment in which they arose, flourished and---often---declined. Environments and their civilizations include highlands (Zimbabwe, Inca, Aztec); small islands (Polynesia, Malta, Crete); deserts (Peru, Sahara, Gobi), among others. He then analyzes their adaptations to these settings, as well as exploring other factors. This is an ambitious if not wholly successful work, and an exceptionally thoughtful one. Among other merits, his discussion of the thorny issue of defining a "civilization" is both sensible and relaxed, unlike some other, rather overwrought treatments (Spengler, Toynbee, Huntington). Like all his work, "Civilizations" is studded with insightful comments and distinguished by sparkling literary style. That said, there are a few flaws. Some equally valid alternate typologies exist to categorize societies and cultures, and some of these civilizations were not fully distinct from others. Despite his best efforts, this work does not fully escape the shadow of determinism. This US edition is not well-supplied with the illustrations (the British edition has photos) maps, diagrams and statistical tables that are very helpful in dealing with environmental data. Lastly, the author relies almost entirely on published primary and secondary sources, but this is really a necessity in creating history on such a huge canvas. It's the only way to avoid the "Lord Acton Trap:" that famous Victorian historian sought to write the entire history of human liberty strictly from manuscript sources, and as a result he never completed a single book. Write on, Dr. Felipe!