Ecological Imperialism: The Biological Expansion of Europe, 900-1900 (Studies in Environment and...

Ecological Imperialism: The Biological Expansion of Europe, 900-1900 (Studies in Environment and History) | Alfred W. Crosby | Triumph of the pig, the rat, the dandelion, the smallpox virus... and the European humans who gave them a ride across the ocean

books:

Ecological Imperia...

	Ecological Imperialism: The Biological Expansion of Europe, 900-1900 (Studies in Environment and History) Alfred W. Crosby Cambridge University Press, 2004 - 390 pages average customer review:based on 22 reviews view larger image
	for more information click here

highly recommended

People of European descent form the bulk of the population in most of the temperate zones of the world--North America, Australia and New Zealand. The military successes of European imperialism are easy to explain because in many cases they were achieved by using firearms against spears. Alfred Crosby, however, explains that the Europeans' displacement and replacement of the native peoples in the temperate zones was more a matter of biology than of military conquest. Now in a new edition with a new preface, Crosby revisits his classic work and again evaluates the ecological reasons for European expansion. Alfred W. Crosby is the author of the widely popular and ground-breaking books,The Measure of Reality (Cambridge, 1996), and America's Forgotten Pandemic (Cambridge, 1990). His books have received the Ralph Waldo Emerson Prize, the Medical Writers Association Prize and been named by the Los Angeles Times as among the best books of the year. He taught at the University of Texas, Austin for over 20 years. First Edition Hb (1986): 0-521-32009-7 First Edition Pb (1987): 0-521-33613-9

for more information click here

Book Review: "Ecological Imperialism"

Book Review: "Ecological Imperialism"
In his book, Ecological Imperialism: The Biological Expansion of Europe, 900-1900, Alfred W. Crosby investigates the roots of European domination over the western world. He calls the places where early Europeans settled "Neo-Europes" with special emphasis on North and South America , Australia , and New Zealand . In his prologue he ponders whether Europeans dominated their environment and other cultures because of their technology, or whether the consistent "success of European imperialism has a biological, [and] an ecological, component.". Crosby 's thesis is that Europeans were successful imperialists because wherever they went their agriculture and animals thrived; and the indigenous populations and local ecosystems collapsed under their biological advance.
Crosby begins at the beginning, discussing the one big continent, Pangaea, supposed to have existed in pre-history and the slow development of life forms other than reptilian, in particular Homo sapiens. The break up of Pangaea (this hypothetical super-continent) caused the "the decentralization of the process of evolution," that is, when the land cracked apart flora and fauna were spilt between the newly created continents. That continental split is the reason similar species are found in Europe and North America.
Eventually Crosby brings the reader up to the end of the Ice Age. Ten thousand years ago humans were exploring the islands of the Eastern Atlantic including Australia . Once on these islands humans domesticated plants, piled up mounds of garbage, spread disease, and hunted animals into extinction. Normally the despoilment of indigenous flora and fauna occurs over tens of thousands of years. In locations where humans arrived with mature hunting skills a sudden extinction of local plant and animal life occurred. These sudden prehistoric, or Pleistocene, overkills were the first concentrated impact humans had on virgin ecosystems.
The virgin ecosystem of Porto Santo Island was the destination of Portuguese settlers during the 1400s. Porto Santo Island was completely uninhabited and filled with untouched flora and fauna. One Portuguese ship captain brought a mother rabbit and her babies to the island. The rabbits loved Porto Santo and thrived in the island environment. So much so that soon the settlers were blasting away at the rabbits in an attempt to exterminate the entire local rabbit population. It seems the rabbits could not determine the difference between the crops meant for human consumption and the crops meant for bunny consumption. The rabbits won in this instance and for a time the settlers moved elsewhere, "defeated by their own ecological ignorance."
The experience of Spanish invaders in the Canaries showed them that no matter where they went, even if they could not out-fight their opponents, Europeans could dominate their enemies anyway. "In all these [new] places, the newcomers would conquer the human populations and Europeanize entire ecosystems." The Spanish learned from their experiences in the Canaries that their livestock and crops would succeed in these new environments; they also learned they could easily defeat the local natives without traditional warfare. The various "plagues" and "sleeping sicknesses," which the Spanish called peste and modorra, killed off and weakened natives who had no natural immunity to ailments common to the Spanish. In essence, sore throats and colds were the winning weapons of the conquerors; it was the flu that subjugated the Canaries.
The unfortunate natives of the Canary Islands , the Guanches, did not survive their meeting with the Spanish sailors. These previously isolated people died rapidly from dysentery, pneumonia, and venereal disease. According to Crosby "few experiences are as dangerous to a people's survival as the passage from isolation to membership in the worldwide community that included European sailors, soldiers, and settlers." When the Spanish conquered the Canaries the Guanches lost their land and therefore their livelihood. Some Guanches joined the Spanish army and went to fight in the Americas ; the Spanish sold others into slavery. The majority of Guanches however died of disease and the entire population became extinct.
Unlike the Guanches of the Canaries, the Maoris of New Zealand did survive despite great odds. When invaded by Europeans the Maoris assumed they would become extinct. European rats annihilated the Maori rat, an animal that was a food staple for the natives. The Maori fly might have help ward off the incursion of sheep that quickly destroyed the local flora, but invading European houseflies wiped out the local flies. Clover took over where ferns had been, and the Maori waited for their own extinction. The Maori population hit bottom in 1890 but then began a mysterious recovery and 280,000 people claim to be Maori by 1981.
In the 1500s Europeans arrived in the Americas with horses, technology (weapons), domesticated plants (crops), farm animals, germs, insects, diseases, weeds, and varmints. The garbage piled up by farmers encouraged varmint populations (mainly mice and rats) which spread disease and attacked human food supplies. Crosby devoted an entire chapter to the spread of weeds around the world. Weeds are not specific plants. "Weed" is a general term applied to a plant that spreads rapidly and encroaches on other plants. The study of where specific weeds appeared and when, aids in tracking population movements. The weeds brought by Europeans were actually another unintentional imperial victory. Weeds repaired damaged top soils and provided feed for livestock. " Rye and oats were once weeds." "Weeds are the Red Cross of the plant world; they deal with ecological emergencies." "Weeds thrive on radical change, not stability. That, in the abstract, is the reason for the triumph of European weeds in the Neo-Europes..." Weeds were resilient and thrived in soils laid bare by European plows, and damaged by drastically altered ecosystems.
European populations exploded in the Americas and Australia . What distinguished these Neo-Europes were the large food surpluses they generated. Neo-Europes led the world in food production "relative to the amount locally consumed." Other cultures actually produced more food per capita and per hectare, but the Neo-Europes exported more food than any other society. Especially successful exports from Neo-Europes were wheat, soybeans, pig products, and beef. Europeans consistently chose to settle in temperate climates where their animals and crops thrived. This was prudent and logical, it would have made no sense for Europeans to settle in torrid climates where their livestock would have suffered, and their favorite crops could not be grown.
The wind also aided European imperialists. When faced with strong winds the Portuguese marinheiros, true sailors, did not turn around and go home or sit sail-less in the water until the winds changed. Marinheiros would "sail around the wind." Sailors would tack close enough to the contrary wind to keep moving and then find a wind that they could use to continue their course. The Portuguese who perfected this "crabwise slide" called it the volta do mar, literally "going back to the sea." This understanding of winds allowed marinheiros to sail out on trade winds and back home on the westerlies.
Smallpox was the big killer of the Aztecs and the Incas in Peru ; the Huron and Iroquois in Mexico ; and the Amerindians of the United States . Crosby claims the victories of the Conquistadors over the Amerindians were "in large part the triumphs of the virus of smallpox." Besides smallpox Europeans brought dysentery and influenza; those epidemics killed almost the whole indigenous population of North America . In effect, the domination over ecology and culture by European invaders was more of a biological accident, than a well-executed military takeover.
Virgin soil epidemics spread through populations who had no prior contact with European diseases. These populations had no immunity to protect them. Virgin soil epidemics had many dramatic consequences. First, the epidemics effectively committed genocide, killing entire populations of native people around the world. Second, certain diseases (measles, influenza, tuberculosis) effected people fifteen to forty years of age more than others. These young adults were responsible for most of the labor involved in supplying food, procreation, raising children, and defending the society. The third and fourth effects of virgin soil epidemics were cultural optimism on the part of the conquerors, and cultural fatalism on the part of the conquered. When Europeans arrived and slew their rivals without raising a sword they believed that God must be on their side and this belief affirmed the rightness of their imperialistic actions. When the indigenous people died by the hoard from mysterious ailments they developed a fatalistic view of their own destiny and supposed the white man's Gods were the more powerful.
Ecological Imperialism is interesting, occasionally humorous, and easy to read. Crosby accomplishes his goal of writing a big book. This author presents a convincing and encompassing explanation for the incredible success of European imperialists. The book leaves the reader with more questions. How aggressively imperialistic were the original conquerors if all they had to do was show up and their opponents fell to the wayside? Crosby argues convincingly that Europeans were triumphant because the places they chose to conquer had ecosystems and indigenous populations that surrendered to the biology of the invaders.

for more information click here

Triumph of the pig, the rat, the dandelion, the smallpox virus... and the European humans who gave them a ride across the ocean

The most impressive and pleasant aspect of this new approach to world history is the non-anthropocentric perspective Crosby adopts. He tells the story of the expansion of a tightly connected group of European organisms, which includes humans alongside with other domesticated animals, crops, weeds, viruses and bacteria.

The book shows that humans were the leading elements in this great expansion beyond Europe and across the oceans - but they would not have managed to successfully invade, occupy and dominate vast areas of the planet such as America, Australia and New Zealand if they had not been supported by a powerful combination of fauna, flora and germs. In fact, often enough these supporting organisms even took the lead in making the "new-found" territories hospitable for Europeans. Once they had arrived to faraway lands with similar climatic conditions as Europe - but with much less people, germs, domesticated animals and plants - the horses, pigs, cows, sheep, bees, rats, weeds and endemic diseases carried by European vessels began spreading quickly in these totally unexposed areas, and thrived mainly by destroying the native organisms.

Another important point developed by Crosby is that this apparently aggressive invasion and occupation of other continents was actually the consequence of a long process started many thousands of generations before, and of which Europeans were totally unaware. They were simply the ones most prepared and willing to cross unknown oceans (in fact, for centuries they had to painfully learn all about winds and currents - for which many a vessel with all its human and non-human crew had to be sacrificed) and settle down many 1000 of kilometres away from their original home, because the "old continent" had become overpopulated, deforested and overgrazed. Their "ecological imperialism" was in the end part of their struggle to survive and reproduce (to the disadvantage of other human and non-human organisms).

Thus, Crosby urges his readers to think of this propagation of certain humans and their accompanying flora, fauna and germs in detriment of others as a natural phenomenon. In fact, he often compares the European ecological expansion with an "avalanche" or a "bursting dam", i.e., something that had to inevitably happen given the circumstances. In this scenario, it becomes clear that these organisms were vehicles for a great "biological revolution" (in the words of the author), where humans were the spearhead of the movement - but hardly the all-knowing, dominant, free agents they mostly imagine(d) themselves to be.

for more information click here

Interesting Theory

"Ecological Imperialism: The Biological Expansion Of Europe, 900-1900"
by Alfred W. Crosby. Cambridge University Press, 1986.
The implication of this book's theory is that the Europeans succeeded in the "New" World due to the imperialistic strength of European flora and fauna. European cattle and European horses conquered the plains of both North America and Argentina, making them "neo-Europes". When Columbus introduced the pig, (either inadvertently or consciously), he knew that that the porcine animal species would "conquer" their local environment. The author's excellent writing follows this theme throughout his book, but, in my opinion, he spends too much time on New Zealand ... pages 217 to 268.

Yet, if the author's thesis is correct, the book becomes a disparaging comment on human efforts. For example, compare the Pilgrims' landing in 1620 with the landing of Hernando De Cortez (1485-1547) at Vera Cruz in 1519. The Pilgrims snuck ashore, onto that Rock in Plymouth, on a cold winter's day. There was no one to meet them, as the locals (or "indigenes" as Crosby likes to call them) had all been killed off by strange and new diseases. The diseases were probably brought over by Englishmen; otherwise where did Squanto, the Indian chief, learn his rudimentary English? (Just as my aside, if the Scots, who first settled in Ulster, Ireland and then came to North America, are known as Scots-Irish, why weren't the Pilgrims known as "Anglo-Dutch"?)

In February 1519, more than a century before the Pilgrims, Hernando De Cortez landed at the Rich Villa of the Holy Cross, Vera Cruz, with some 500-600 men, to face not thousands, but hundreds of thousands. To instill courage in his men, Cortez burnt his boats. The Spanish had to go forward and they conquered an empire. On the other hand the Pilgrims occupied a dead village. In both cases, European diseases were the deciding factor, but the achievement of either group was entirely different. Crosby's book treats them as if they were equal.

I believe that Alfred W. Crosby has hit on something that bears further investigation. In the late summer of 2004, I attended a wedding in Slovenia. As we drove through Germany, I noticed goldenrod by the sides of the corn fields. I asked and I was told that goldenrod was introduced as a flowering plant but was not doing so well in Europe. I wonder if Crosby's thesis was borne out by the lack of success of goldenrod ...and other American plants? Don't get me wrong: since I am allergic to goldenrod, I am happy it was NOT successful in German farm fields, but why?

for more information click here

A landmark (but dated) study on the ecological dimension of European expansion

Alfred Crosby is widely credited for popularising the ecological dimension of the history of imperial expansion. For this reason, and perhaps this reason alone, his book is worth a read.

The book, first published in 1986, revolutionised the way we think about European imperial expansion into the New World. How a few hundred disoriented Europeans armed with spears and misfiring guns managed to overwhelm entire Inca and Aztec civilisations in the early sixteenth century, for example. Crosby convincingly casts aside traditional political or military explanations by attributing the astonishing Portuguese and Spanish victories to bacteriology: how diseases such as smallpox and measles that the Europeans unwittingly carried with them wiped out thousands of New World inhabitants, severely crippling their defences.

The larger point that Crosby drives across is a profound one. Historical events - in this case, European expansion and imperialism - can be explained predominantly by ecological factors. In the clash of `biotas' between the Old and the New World, the Old World won. Convincingly. Hence the presence not just of Europeans in the Americas, but also of pigs and dandelions. According to this thesis, ecology shaped European expansion; creating `Neo-Europes' in the New World that facilitated European migration, precipitating the `Caucasian wave' from the 1820s to the 1930s. Unlike in most other histories, in Crosby's ecological history, humans form the backdrop and inexorable ecological forces take centre-stage.

Refreshing as this perspective is, the way that Crosby has rendered it is problematic in on a number of accounts. By excluding humans from the picture; or at best relegating human developments to the sidelines, Crosby emerges with a dangerously reductive picture of historical development. Deterministic ecological explanations cannot alone account for European expansion - after all, we must not forget that the first European transoceanic voyages were motivated by curiosity rather than necessity. More problematic is the book's implicit assumption that ecological influence was unidirectional. In concentrating on explicating the Old World's ecological victory over the New, Crosby neglects to examine the influence that New World ecology had on the Old.

Nonetheless, Crosby's work remains a landmark study that deserves a read. Moreover, it packs a punch as a piece of writing - its lucid narratives and provocative assertions laid out with the bold and elegant strokes of a master-artist. Yet Crosby's work is also increasingly a dated study that has been qualified over and over by new works in the field, or in the related field of environmental history. Those interested in the subject should by no means stop at Crosby's book.

for more information click here

Problematic and missing information

This book sets out what Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies does, but in a less original way. It basicaly sets up a straw man by claiming that most people think Europeans conquered the New World and Oceania through weapons but in fact they were 'biologically' programmed to win. This thesis begins in the 10th century A.D. But here the author misses something. The Vikings that landed in Labrador and in Greenland were unsuccessful. They dwindled and died out. SO if they were biologically programmed to suceed then why didn't they. Inferior weaponry?

Then we jump ahead to the 16th century. Now the book misses another important point. Only in North America and Australia were the natives completely decimated by disease. In Mexico and New Zealand many of the native Aztecs and Maoris and Mayas survived. In Mexico today most people are descended from them. It was the sparsely populated natives that succombed to disease and this 'biological' issue. The conquest of Mexico and the mixing of peoples has a parellel in the Arab conquest of North Africa or the Turkish conquest of Anatolia. It is not simply a matter of disease and biology.

Thus this book falls short on several points. It is not an original thesis. It also suffers from severe problems of history, in trying to curve the data to fit the idea.

Seth J. Frantzman

for more information click here

reviews: page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

products you might be interested in