|
| |||||||||||
What are readers saying about Guns Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies?
|
A Reader posted a review at 2010-06-24 03:36:27.
(Language: English)
 
The book starts out with an account of the Spaniards owning the Aztecs and identifies the proximate causes for the Spanish victory against overwhelming numbers (162 conquistadors vs. 80,000 Aztecs), to whit, the Spanish had guns, horses, steel and a resilience to smallpox. However, these proximate causes beg the larger question: How come the Spaniards had all this great stuff, but the South Americans didn't? Why did the Aztecs conquer Spain? Diamond, the author, then goes on to examine each global region in terms of resources, and then how those resources contribute to the rise of human societies, why societies become larger and more complex, and what the future may hold for current dominant and developing cultures.The book is a fascinating and enjoyable read - definitely recommend for the intellectually curious, especially those with a passion for history! 
|
Yes (0) 
No (0) |
|
A Reader posted a review at 2007-06-27 06:25:56.
(Language: English)
Jared Diamond’s Guns, Germs and Steel is a look at the history of human achievements and why it has been dominated by cultures of Eurasian descent. The central theory of the book is that the Eurasian dominance was due to evolving in a favourable environment rather than any cultural or racial superiority. The early rise of agriculture in these societies was aided by more access to domesticatable plants and animals and agriculture then snowballed into other inventions. The large east west land mass of Eurasia also helped as it enabled European and Asian cultures to traded and distribute inventions and technologies.Guns, Germs and Steel is a interesting book yet I found it to be repetitive as Diamond hammered home his conclusions. Some criticisms I have read about this book have accused it of reinforcing old stereotypes that Eurasian cultures are beater suited to invention and dominance but I felt that Diamond was very clear that any society could have become the dominant one had they had the same advantages.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2008-03-12 12:28:05.
(Language: English)
Have you ever heard of "the Galileo Defense?" The phrase describes the phenomenon of honest, accurate science attempting to defend itself against ideology-driven accusations of those who are opposed to the implications of the scientist's work. A good example would be Darwin as he faced charges of atheism, satanism, etc. If the Galileo Defense has an opposite, Diamond deserves it for this book. To save you the trouble, Guns, Germs, and Steel basically articulates the first moderately believable and (most importantly) politically correct attempt to explain why the West was able to enjoy a position of relative dominance during the past few hundred years. Unfortunately, his assertions rely on numerous glaring omissions and flawed assumptions that really undermine his credibility. The existence of peanuts is one notable example that will be easily understood by those who've read the book. Those who haven't should do themselves a favor and skip ahead to L. Ron Hubbard.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2009-01-25 08:38:14.
(Language: English)
Without preaching, Diamond systematically debunks and exposes racist pseudo-science for the political agenda it is. He clearly and thoroughly explains how geography, climate, and extinctions affected access to certain domestic animals and plants -- necessary for the development of technologically advanced, complex cultures. Diamond's study and reflections from his knowledge of geography, immunology, geology, evolutionary biology, human migration patterns, anthropology, and history, show that race was a proximate, and not ultimate factor in determining how societies grew and prospered and why some failed and were subjugated by their luckier foes, who simply gained access to larger, more powerful domesticated animals, enjoyed more temperate weather patterns, more nutritious crops, better diffusion of ideas and technology due to geography's influence, and who were just plain luckier in the rather complicated confluence of disease resistance and exploration. Should be required reading for all students.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2010-11-01 07:54:53.
(Language: English)
Parts of Guns, Germs and Steel are tedious. The chapter on food near the start of the book came very close to making me stop reading (well, okay, listening) to this book. Too much detail. The rest of the book is easier to follow, but also more technical than it needed to be. Jared Diamond does not have Carl Sagan's gift for writing smart books that people can feel smart reading. Instead, you must plow through sections waiting for it to end (please, for Pete's sake, I get the point... no more examples!). But the book redeems its self and the next chapters are more interesting. The conclusions seem obvious, but I suppose it was not always accepted that peoples turned out a certain way because of their environment. Here's what you need to know if you find your tribe on a new planet: find other tribes and trade knowledge, cattle, and plants. Also, hang out around animals to build up more immunities than the poor saps on the other side of the world who live alone. Come to that, this is also a good strategy for playing Civilization IV.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2009-08-30 11:40:43.
(Language: English)
Very comprehensive study about three main changes in society that have altered the course of the world. Dr. Diamond clearly has an anthropological/sociological interest. I'm finding the book hard to slog through for some reason. I taped the three-part series on PBS, and had a hard time getting through the first one. I may have to declare defeat on this book even though it's well-written, well-researched and provocative. I have to admit, this is a book I bought because I really like the title and subject material. It's been the book that I'll read "someday." Imagine my surprise to find that it's been made into a three-part miniseries for PBS. It's like the Cliffs Notes motherload! That being said, I DVR'd all three portions of the miniseries and haven't watched them yet either.
|
|
Alexander posted a review at 2012-01-22 06:01:03.
(Language: English)
How were 168 Spanish soldiers able to defeat the Inca army of 80,000 strong? Why didn't the Chinese, on the verge of an industrial revolution in the 14th century, eventually go on to dominate the rest of the world? And why does modern Western society trace its roots to Eurasia, not the comparatively larger Americas? "Guns, Germs, and Steel" provides a history of the last 13,000 years of human existence, explaining how a variety of external factors caused some societies to go on to dominate globally while others societies became extinct.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2007-12-28 02:29:29.
(Language: English)
Hvorfor Europa â€vant†Tre uker pÃ¥ en hytte pÃ¥ sørspissen av Straumøya i Nordland. Mye dÃ¥rlig vær. Forutsetningene er altsÃ¥ perfekte for Ã¥ nÃ¥ ambisjonen om Ã¥ komme gjennom hele den halvmeterhøye bunken med bøker. NÃ¥, med en snau uke igjen, har jeg bare et par romaner igjen. Alt det tunge er unnagjort, med rosinen i pølsa, Jared Diamonds â€Guns, Germs and Steel†som den viktigste. â€A short history of everybody for the last 13.000 years†er bokas undertittel, og her trekkes virkelig de store linjene. Diamond forsøker Ã¥ svare pÃ¥ spørsmÃ¥let om hvorfor det var nettopp europeere som endte opp med Ã¥ kolonisere Amerika, Afrika og Australia, og ikke omvendt. SpørsmÃ¥let virker kanskje litt absurd, men jeg syns svaret er spennende. For ikke Ã¥ snakke om alle de artige delsvarene underveis. Les resten her: http://christoffersblogg.blogspot.com/2006/07/hvorfor-europa-vant.html
|
|
Saskia posted a review at 2009-08-06 01:46:56.
(Language: English)
While the central point of this book was really interesting, I have two complaints. First, it was highly repetitive. It needed a little more organization, and a finer comb editing. Second, it left me with one major question. Ultimately, the whole thing comes down to food production. Everything else is a matter of geography and how geography aided or impeded food production. The author was able to simmer all proximate factors down to differences in food production and geography. But it seems that the biggest ultimate difference is that the Fertile Crescent had large numbers of domesticable plants and animals - unlike the rest of the world. Nowhere did the author question how such a huge imbalance in such plants and animals arose. Leaving this as a simple a priori fact suggests that there was some magical garden of Eden at the Ferticle Crescent...
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2007-09-22 03:45:43.
(Language: English)
A book that everyone should read if they wanna gain a better understanding of the few important factors that have shaped the world into what we have today. Presented as scientific hypotheses backed by historical facts, detailed archeological evidence and case studies based on the author's years of field work. A great read for the science minded who are interested in human history and cannot bare reading facts after facts like in most other history books. I think there is a lot of confusions out there which is where some of the criticisms have come from. Many are still mixed up on what are proximate factors (such as culture) and ultimate factors (author's points on geography). Also the books arguments hinge not only on geography per se but on exploitable resource alignment and lack of due to it. Hence Bill Gates' parallel for corporate structure in the Afterword. Therefore for those who critiqued about the authors attachment to geography only : the point has been missed.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2009-02-24 01:20:06.
(Language: English)
Highschool history rarely succeeds at accurately teaching you how things happened, but they are even worse at teaching WHY things happened the way they did. This book analyzes the proximate and ultimate causes to the progress of human history from the 35,000BC to the 1,500AD. Why did some cultures develop writing while others never went past oral history? Why was farming developed by certain countries while others never did? And how did ultimate causes like farming result in the eventual kidnapping and assassination of an Inca Emperor ruling over an empire of millions, by a fearful and tattered crew of 200 Spanish sailors from the middle of their capital? If you were ever curious about how human history developed, this book is for you. PS One thing I liked about this book, is that it makes it seem like Age of Empires II is a more accurate portrayal of history than nearly everything I learned in school.
|
|
|
Stephen posted a review at 2008-06-27 11:51:30.
(Language: English)
Although subtitled "a short history of everybody for the last 13,000 years", the book focusses on answering a fascinating question - why have Europeans (and their disaspora in the Americas) in particular, and Asians to a slightly lesser extent, come to dominate so much of the world. Why did we "advance" so far in technology compared to native Australians and Americans? Jared Diamond explains why the serendipitous chance that gave Eurasians a wide range of domesticable mammals and plants, together with favourable geography, allowed and led to herding and farming, population growth, and more complex societies, these factors autocatalysing each other. The book is perhaps a bit repetive at times, in an effort to expand what is actually a relatively simple treatise into a full book, but it is well explained with lots of examples and analysis of competing theories for the various aspects of the overall explanations. An interesting read.
|
|
Kelsey posted a review at 2010-11-26 10:03:07.
(Language: English)
Absolutely brilliant. Diamond fully pulled me into the world of anthropology despite my reservations by clearly illustrating all of his points in sparse, but pointed and compelling language, and never forgetting his thesis. Any questions I had-- "Well, what about China then? They were on the Eurasian continent, why did they not rise to power as the Europeans did in the colonial age?"-- were quickly answered, and in such a complete way that I could only remain stunned by his logical prowess. Diamond's idea that because the Eurasian continent is more temperate, hosts more tameable mammals and provides more crops than other continents allowed for the rise of Europe is explained in breath-taking detail, and backed by such extensive facts that you will be throughly convinced. Not only is it informative and interesting, but also important-- the idea that some peoples are not sophisicated enough to compete on the global scale is seen throughout the world today, and should not be. Diamond's book dispells such theories rightfully, and also provides such a great history that everyone should read it.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2009-12-09 11:28:40.
(Language: English)
This has received no honor that it did not wholly deserve. It is a 450-page treatise based on a single question by one of the author's native guides to New Guinea, who wanted to know why Western Europe came to be the major power, the conqueror of the Americas, Asia, Australia, and the Pacific islands. Twenty years later, Diamond wrote his response. This book is an exhaustive review of the last ten thousand years of human history, beginning with the first tribes of hunter-gatherers who followed big game across the continents and concluding with the colonial period. His hypotheses are logical in construction (a far better situation than the idiocy of "Europe rules because of genetic predisposition" or "Europe rules because of God")and neatly fit into recorded history. Yes, areas that lack large, domesticable animals lacked large-scale agriculture. Yes, areas that lack large-scale agriculture do not develop beyond the chiefdom stage, while those that do construction nation-states. The book is not an exact discussion of any of these circumstances, since such an overview is not capable of depicting all circumstances evenly and equally (not without a six-volume, multi-million-word production). However, it is a successful argument and presented the best explanation of humanity's prehistory on our current social, political, and economic situation. Read it, and be prepared for several "Wow, I never thought of that," moments.
|
|
Adrian posted a review at 2009-07-29 09:00:46.
(Language: English)
Great book. Jared Diamond looks to answer the question: Why do the Haves have? What is the reason for Eurasian dominance? In doing so, he discredits any belief that it is due to inherit genetic superiority. Instead, he highlights 2 environmental advantages Eurasia had over the rest of the world: A larger pool of wild plants and animals that could be domesticated and a mainly East-West axis. These environmental factors led to the establishment of societies which eventually rose to dominance with Guns, Steel, and Germs. In the world, there are 148 animals over 100 lbs for which to try and domesticate. Of these, there are only 14 that have been successfully domesticated with 13 being domesticated in Eurasia, and only one in Peru (Llama/Alpaca). All of these animals were domesticated over 4500 years ago highlighting the difficulty in identifying and eventually domesticating large animals. He discusses a similar scenario with wild plants, particularly, wheat and barley in Eurasia and Maize in Mesoamerica. Eurasia's large East-West axis allowed breeds of plants or animals from one area to be used elsewhere due to similar climates and season cycles, thus allowing for large scale exchange of goods and ideas across Eurasia. In a large North-South axis like that of the Americas and Africa, although a plant/animal could survive in comparable latitudes opposite the equator, it often would not survive the middle latitudes to successfully make the trip. Due to Eurasia's early exposure to domesticated animals and the combined effect of living in close quarters with the animals and living in dense populations with each other, disease transmission was easy. Because of this, many Eurasians became ill and died. However, many also developed immunity. It was this immunity that was credited to European's early dominance in the Americas, and not necessarily due to military might. In many places, as many as 90% of the indigenous population was killed. Most succumbing to illness. Diamond gave many examples to affectively support his arguments. For me, they provided a deeper understanding of the complexities of animal and plant domestication as well as geography and their roles in the rise of power of Nations. This book was referred to me by a friend for which I read without any prior history of the book. I wasn't surprised when I learned later that it had won a Pulitzer Prize in 1998.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2008-02-14 09:29:39.
(Language: English)
Diamond's attempt to explain human history over the past 13,000 years is a Herculean effort, and he does a pretty good job of it. But the book might as well have been called 'Plants, Animals, and Conquest.' The guns, germs and steel in the title are rarely discussed, if only to show that without the development of food production and plant and animal domestication would any of those three things occur. The first 150 pages are fantastic; I read through them in a couple hours. But the next 250 pages, right up until the end of the book, is pretty slow. He goes into the minute details of plant domestication, which is obviously important and one of the pillars supporting his argument, but it gets old. Same goes with animal domestication, but to a much lesser degree. He also repeats himself. A lot.Nevertheless, the book does an amazing job at showing why the Eurasian continent became the dominant player in recent world history, and later would permit Europeans to conquer the Americas.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2009-03-09 02:17:32.
(Language: English)
An absolutely fantastic work, this book should be required reading in college if not high school. I thoroughly enjoyed it, it takes as wonderful “big picture” look at human history and asks (and answers) the question as to why some cultures ultimately triumphed (namely, those of the West) and why others, civilization certainly worthy of respect and that made important contributions (such as the Chinese, Inca, Native Americans, and sub-Saharan African civilizations) didn’t conquer the planet to the degree that Western Europeans did. Drawing upon copious amounts of research (though engaging and highly readable), Diamond tackled issues as diverse as climate, geography, available plant and animal species to domesticate, proximity to other cultures, and exposure to foreign disease pools in order to explain why the world looks like it does today, why some cultures produced many inventions, had vigorous and expansionistic states, and had enormous regional and global influence and why others didn’t. One of the best books ever on history, I can't speak highly enough of this wonderful work. It should be required reading in school, college if not high school. A true classic, it is a fantastic multidiscplinary work that shows why some cultures succeed and why some fail and why the West did as well as it did and why the Chinese, Inca, and other very advanced cultures did not conquer the world. Diamond draws upon lots of research in history, economics, geology, geography, paleontology, political science, and many other fields.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2010-05-16 07:56:16.
(Language: English)
The colonial dominance of Europeans has been deeply engrained in the social and political fabrics of human history. With their guns, germs, and steel, these northerners decimated anyone who stood in their path for gold, god, and glory. So why were the Europeans so powerful? Why wasn’t it the Asians or Africans who colonized the world instead? For centuries, scholars believed it was because of biology; that is the Europeans were simply a superior race. However, social scientist Jared Diamond believes it was Europe’s advantageous geography that ultimately led them to supremacy, and he set out to validate this thesis in his Pulitzer winning masterpiece, “Guns, Germs, and Steel.” Diamond’s fundamental theory is that because the Eurasian Fertile Crescent allowed Europeans to grow a surplus of food, the population was able to focus on other aspects of living. With food no longer the center of all activity, Europeans were able to establish social stratification, political bureaucracy, division of labor, and technology. This explains why they had far superior weaponry, organization, and knowledge compared to their enemies. Moreover, because Europe had exposure to a larger variety of animals, the people were able to develop an evolutionary resistance to their diseases over time. As a result, when Europeans came in contact with outsiders (i.e. Amerindians), they wrecked havoc with pestilence. “Guns, Germs, and Steel” is a monumental contribution to the social sciences. Diamond’s literature completely changed our view of human history and made us contemplate the colossal effects geography might have had on the fates of societies. It is a book that everyone needs to read.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2008-05-07 01:19:47.
(Language: English)
While it is an interesting and as yet not widely taken look at human history, I have to say that his understanding of anthropology is basic, at best, and that he misses many subtleties in the way cultures develop. I also take issue with his view that development is unidirectional: he assumes that as humans we start at point A (hunting-gathering) and end up at point B (modern state systems, through agriculture, etc.) and that all 19th and 20th century human societies were somewhere along that path. What if there are simply different ways of developing? Also, he has this notion that if modern science can't do it (for example, domesticating zebras, which he neglects to mention CAN'T be ridden because physiologically, their backs will break, which was not the case with pre-domestic horses), that it can't be done, which is a fallacy of modernism. He doesn't take into account cultural exceptions to his rules (see the Tuareg for exceptions to just about every one of them). In addition, his whole axis theory implies that, in order for agriculture to spread the way it did, the climate of Iraq is similar to the climate of Germany which is similar to the climate of India, which, last time I checked wasn't entirely accurate.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2010-04-26 03:01:19.
(Language: English)
Probably my Most Chucked Book on this application. If I had to recommend one book for everyone it would be this book. The sub title is something like A short history everyone in the last thirteen thousand years. So, we go back before the invention of agriculture in the Levant about nine thousand years ago and before the colonization of the peninsula of Europe after the last Ice Age and then figure out why those at the top are at the top and why those who are not are not. This kind of puts everyone in there place which is why it is such a fascinating story. For about 30 years my favourite book was The Ascent of Man by Professor Jacob Bronowski, also a wide ranging work of anthropology but Professor Jared Diamond has surpassed this. It all starts with Yali's question, and thanks to my dear friend Travis Stone for putting me on to this book, nice one dude!
|
|
Tan posted a review at 2012-03-23 08:42:01.
(Language: English)
This is a pretty heavy going book - for those without time, you can read the epilogue for a quick summary. It explains that there is a dominant race/ culture today because of geographical factors, i.e. presence of animals and plants which could be domesticated led to food production (as opposed to hunting/ gathering) in specific parts of the world, which in turn led to higher populations, specialisation and rise of innovation, and genetic immunity against diseases due to proximity with domestic animals. Subsequently, when the food producing populations expanded/ explored, they conquered less advanced civilizations via germs (which primitive civilizations had no immunity against), innovation (in the form of iron/ steel weapons)and bureaucracies (which enabled control of subjugated populations). The argument does sound logical at a broad level, but I thought it was overly deterministic and did not take into account what could have happened if different decisions had been made at different times in different parts of the world, e.g., if the Chinese had not stopped their sea faring in the 15th C, or if Europe had been successfully united - would our world be the same today?
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2008-10-24 09:32:48.
(Language: English)
This is a big book. Not big as in number of pages - big an in big thoughts. After all, we're talking about the last 14,000 years of human civilization. What's sought here is an understanding of why certain peoples attained complex and advanced societies while other peoples remain simple hunter-gatherers to this day. The quest for answers requires you (or at least me) to open your mind to new ways of thinking, or at least thinking of new things. For example, what could a continent's geographical orientation have any influence upon humankind? In the end, this book made me think of new questions which, after all, may be the best thing a book can do. Also - I don't recommend listening to this audiobook in the car while commuting to and from work. Descriptions of cross-continent yam domestication can be sleep inducing - not a good thing when you're behind the wheel. We'll see if Joel's praise is deserved.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2007-10-06 05:04:20.
(Language: English)
I read 'The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers' a few years ago (actually because some guy in the Interchange (ESL) book said it was easiest to read in a foreign country). In it, Paul Kennedy explained the reasons for the course history took over the last 500 years. Specifically, he described two main forms of power, economic and military and the need for a careful balance of the two. It was not an easy read for me but large portions of it were interesting and convinced me to research further. A much easier read was Guns, Germs and Steel, by Jared Diamond. The two works are similar in that they try to answer why some nations and peoples have been more successful than others. Diamond's book, though, finishes where Kennedy's starts and starts ten thousand or more years ago. The first subject Diamond discusses is that he is not interested in racial arguements. Over the past few hundred years, Europeans have been more successful, but not because they are white or special. Indeed, he suggests that, on average, the New Guineans may be more intelligent than Caucasians. He gave three criteria for a region's success. availability of suitable agricultural crops, availability of suitable livestock, and the general axis of the continent. The latter affects the spread of agricultural crops and technological information. The first two surprised me but he explained his reasoning clearly. Very few plants are all that useful as food items for humans. Many of the best ones were originally found in the Mid-East. I think that's right, he describes it as the Fertile Crescent. Few large mammals are useful for human transportation or farm power either. Most such animals (horses, sheep, cattle) were found...you guessed it, in the Fertile Crescent. The axis arguement was harder for me to swallow. North and South America are relatively narrow, east-west and the north-south axis is not useful for transferring argiculture nor ideas. The Fertile Crescent is part of Euroasia, the largest continuous east-west space. The central idea of same latitude/same climate is a good start but hard for me to accept. The east-west axis in Canada or the US is about 3000 km, more than most tribesmen or neolithic travellers would think of going. It took me a while to accept that different cultures could cycle information East and west without much travel by individuals. Next, his examples of north/south obstacles seemed solid and believable. The desert region of Mexico and the so very-narrow bottleneck of Panama prevented Northern temperate crops from reaching Sourthern temperate regions and South American pack animals (llamas) from reaching the north. The examples I connected with best were his island examples. His descriptions of various Polenesian islands and their measurable differences were compelling and showed real differential success.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2007-06-14 12:34:39.
(Language: English)
I read the whole book including his 2003 addendum. Very well written and fascinating book that looks at why different societies ended up the way they did and thus either dominated our were conquered. It rejects the racist idea that there is any difference in the capabilities or intelligence of human beings in different parts of the world and examines the different environmental factors and available resources that allowed them to progress at different rates. After reading it, I look at so many things in a different light. (Read it in May 2007) To comment on other reviews: - Not every line is important. He gives his thesis and then backs it up with a lot of information that can be pretty dry. Don't worry too much if you don't follow it all. He repeats himself a lot so you won't miss anything. - He is not saying that New Guineans are in fact smarter. New Guineans were living in the "stone age" when they were discovered by Europeans and the popular explanation was that they were not as smart. He cancels out this racist view by turning it around and postulating why survival in old New Guinea would require more intelligence that survival in old Europe. One of the best things about his writing is how he turns conventional arguments around to demonstrate a point.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2008-06-09 02:43:21.
(Language: English)
No one is going to doubt Mr Diamond's ambition. Guns et al. is one of those "big" books that tries to answer one of those questions you hear at a late night drinking session (i have pseudo-intellectual friends): why did Europe make it so big while the rest of the world either dwindled or never rose? Why was it that Europeans colonized the world and not the other way around? Diamond makes a good attempt at answering all that and more. A historian, geologist, evolutionary biologist and heckuva narrator, Diamond certainly whets your appetite but you end up wanting to know more (which was probably his aim). I didn't find the book heavy; in fact, I found it too simplistic at times, with his cutesy examples all nicely fitting into his overall thesis of geography being destiny. Humanity, he says, is prey to a grand geological roll of dice and we are who we are bacause of which side of the equator we were born. Simplistic? Yes.Convincing? Surprisingly yes.Boring? Never.
|
Share your views!
