From the book: Historians’Fallacies: Toward a Logic of
Historical Thought. By David
Hackett Fischer
Just read
the first
paragraph—
no need to
read the
rest.
The Colonizer’s Model of the World: Geographical Diffusionism and Eurocentric History
J. M. Blaut
THE GUILFORD PRESS
New York / London
© 1993 J. M. Blaut
Published by The Guilford Press
A Division of Guilford Publications, Inc.
72 Spring Street, New York, N. Y. 10012
All rights reserved
No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any
form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording, or
otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher.
Printed in the United States of America
This book is printed on acid-free paper.
Last digit is print number: 9 8
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Blaut, James M. (James Morris)
The colonizer’s model of the world: geographical diffusionism and
eurocentric history / by J. M. Blaut. p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-89862-349-9 (hard) — ISBN 0-89862-348-0 (pbk.)
1. History — Philosophy I. Title.
D16.9B49 1992
901— dc20 93-22346
CHAPTER 1
History Inside Out
THE ARGUMENT
The purpose of this book is to undermine one of the most powerful beliefs of our time
concerning world history and world geography. This belief is the notion that European
civilization — “The West” — has had some unique historical advantage, some special quality of
race or culture or environment or mind or spirit, which gives this human community a
permanent superiority over all other communities, at all times in history and down to the
present.
The belief is both historical and geographical. Europeans are seen as the “makers of history.”
Europe eternally advances, progresses, modernizes. The rest of the world advances more
sluggishly, or stagnates: it is “traditional society.” Therefore, the world has a permanent
geographical center and a permanent periphery: an Inside and an Outside. Inside leads, Outside
lags. Inside innovates, Outside imitates.
This belief is diffusionism, or more precisely Eurocentric diffusionism. It is a theory about the
way cultural processes tend to move over the surface of the world as a whole. They tend to
flow out of the European sector and toward the non-European sector. This is the natural,
normal, logical, and ethical flow of culture, of innovation, of human causality. Europe, eternally, is Inside. Non-Europe is Outside. Europe is the source of most diffusions; non-Europe is
the recipient. 1
Diffusionism lies at the very root of historical and geographical scholarship. Some parts of the
belief have been questioned in recent years, but its most fundamental tenets remain
unchallenged, and so the belief as a whole has not been uprooted or very much weakened by
modern scholarship.
The most important tenet of diffusionism is the theory of “the autonomous rise of Europe,”
sometimes (rather more grandly) called the idea of “the European Miracle.” It is the idea that
Europe was more advanced and more progressive than all other regions prior to 1492, prior,
that is, to the beginning of the period of colonialism, the period in which Europe and nonEurope came into intense interaction. If one believes this to be the case — and most modern
scholars seem to believe it to be the case — then it must follow that the economic and social
modernization of Europe is fundamentally a result of Europe’s internal qualities, not of
interaction with the societies of Africa, Asia, and America after 1492. Therefore: the main
building blocks of modernity must be European. Therefore: colonialism cannot have been really
important for Europe’s modernization. Therefore: colonialism must mean, for the Africans,
Asians, and Americans, not spoliation and cultural destruction but, rather, the receipt-bydiffusion of European civilization: modernization.
This book will analyze and criticize Eurocentric diffusionism as a general body of ideas, and will
try to undermine the more concrete theory of the autonomous rise of Europe. The first chapter
of the book discusses the nature and history of diffusionism. Chapter 2 analyzes the theory of
the autonomous rise of Europe as a body of propositions about European superiority (and “the
European miracle”), then tries to disprove these propositions, one after the other. Chapter 3
discusses world history and historical geography prior to 1492, attempting to show that Europe
was not superior to other civilizations and regions in those times. Chapter 4 argues that
colonialism was the basic process after 1492, which led to the selective rise of Europe, the
modernization or development of Europe (and outlying Europeanized culture areas like the
United States), and the underdevelopment of Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Chapter 4 also
argues that the conquest of America and thereafter the expansion of European colonialism is
not to be explained in terms of any internal characteristics of Europe, but instead reflects the
mundane realities of location. The chain of argument in Chapters 2, 3, and 4, as a whole,
therefore, is an attempt to show that Europe did not have historical priority — historical
superiority — over what we now call the Third World.
This may seem to be too ambitious a project for one small book. I am really making just one
claim. I am asserting that a fundamental and rather explicit error has been made in our
conventional past thinking about geography and history, and this error has distorted many
fields of thought and action. I am going to present enough evidence to show that the belief in
Eurocentric diffusionism and Europe’s historical superiority or priority is not convincing: not
well grounded in the facts of history and geography, although firmly grounded in Western
culture. It is in a sense folklore.
1. In this book the word “Europe” refers to the continent of Europe and to regions dominated by European culture
elsewhere, regions like the United States and Canada.
The Colonizer’s Model of the World: Geographical Diffusionism and Eurocentric History
J. M. Blaut
THE GUILFORD PRESS
New York / London
© 1993 J. M. Blaut
Published by The Guilford Press
A Division of Guilford Publications, Inc.
72 Spring Street, New York, N. Y. 10012
All rights reserved
No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any
form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording, or
otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher.
Printed in the United States of America
This book is printed on acid-free paper.
Last digit is print number: 9 8
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Blaut, James M. (James Morris)
The colonizer’s model of the world: geographical diffusionism and
eurocentric history / by J. M. Blaut. p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-89862-349-9 (hard) — ISBN 0-89862-348-0 (pbk.)
1. History — Philosophy I. Title.
D16.9B49 1992
901— dc20 93-22346
CHAPTER 1
History Inside Out
THE ARGUMENT
The purpose of this book is to undermine one of the most powerful beliefs of our time
concerning world history and world geography. This belief is the notion that European
civilization — “The West” — has had some unique historical advantage, some special quality of
race or culture or environment or mind or spirit, which gives this human community a
permanent superiority over all other communities, at all times in history and down to the
present.
The belief is both historical and geographical. Europeans are seen as the “makers of history.”
Europe eternally advances, progresses, modernizes. The rest of the world advances more
sluggishly, or stagnates: it is “traditional society.” Therefore, the world has a permanent
geographical center and a permanent periphery: an Inside and an Outside. Inside leads,Outside
lags. Inside innovates, Outside imitates.
This belief is diffusionism, or more precisely Eurocentric diffusionism. It is a theory about the
way cultural processes tend to move over the surface of the world as a whole. They tend to
flow out of the European sector and toward the non-European sector. This is the natural,
normal, logical, and ethical flow of culture, of innovation, of human causality. Europe, eternally, is Inside. Non-Europe is Outside. Europe is the source of most diffusions; non-Europe is
the recipient. 1
Diffusionism lies at the very root of historical and geographical scholarship. Some parts of the
belief have been questioned in recent years, but its most fundamental tenets remain
unchallenged, and so the belief as a whole has not been uprooted or very much weakened by
modern scholarship.
The most important tenet of diffusionism is the theory of “the autonomous rise of Europe,”
sometimes (rather more grandly) called the idea of “the European Miracle.” It is the idea that
Europe was more advanced and more progressive than all other regions prior to 1492,
prior,that is, to the beginning of the period of colonialism, the period in which Europe and nonEurope came into intense interaction. If one believes this to be the case — and most modern
scholars seem to believe it to be the case — then it must follow that the economic and social
modernization of Europe is fundamentally a result of Europe’s internal qualities, not of
interaction with the societies of Africa, Asia, and America after 1492. Therefore: the main
building blocks of modernity must be European. Therefore: colonialism cannot have been really
important for Europe’s modernization. Therefore: colonialism must mean, for the Africans,
Asians, and Americans, not spoliation and cultural destruction but, rather, the receipt-bydiffusion of European civilization: modernization.
This book will analyze and criticize Eurocentric diffusionism as a general body of ideas, and will
try to undermine the more concrete theory of the autonomous rise of Europe. The first chapter
of the book discusses the nature and history of diffusionism. Chapter 2 analyzes the theory of
the autonomous rise of Europe as a body of propositions about European superiority (and “the
European miracle”), then tries to disprove these propositions, one after the other. Chapter 3
discusses world history and historical geography prior to 1492, attempting to show that Europe
was not superior to other civilizations and regions in those times. Chapter 4 argues that
colonialism was the basic process after 1492, which led to the selective rise of Europe, the
modernization or development of Europe (and outlying Europeanized culture areas like the
United States), and the underdevelopment of Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Chapter 4 also
argues that the conquest of America and thereafter the expansion of European colonialism is
not to be explained in terms of any internal characteristics of Europe, but instead reflects the
mundane realities of location. The chain of argument in Chapters 2, 3, and 4, as a whole,
therefore, is an attempt to show that Europe did not have historical priority — historical
superiority — over what we now call the Third World.
This may seem to be too ambitious a project for one small book. I am really making just one
claim. I am asserting that a fundamental and rather explicit error has been made in our
conventional past thinking about geography and history, and this error has distorted many
fields of thought and action. I am going to present enough evidence to show that the belief in
Eurocentric diffusionism and Europe’s historical superiority or priority is not convincing: not
well grounded in the facts of history and geography, although firmly grounded in Western
culture. It is in a sense folklore.
1. In this book the word “Europe” refers to the continent of Europe and to regions dominated by European culture
elsewhere, regions like the United States and Canada.
History 3C: Template
Study Guide 1: Theoretical Foundations
Name:
Date:
Dr. White
Please eliminate all highlighted areas before you submit this Study Guide. I will
immediately subtract 100 points for leaving any highlighted text in this Study
Guide.
Maintain the format of this Study Guide. I do not grade Study Guides that do not
maintain the format!
Note: The general objective is to write down things that will help you to
remember this material four to six weeks from now or whenever you are writing
the response to the final prompt(s). However, no prompt should be left blank or
empty. Nothing is optional in this Study Guide. If you do not understand what
the prompt is asking, please feel free to ask me. As-a-matter-of-fact, this Study
Guide is mandatory to stay in the course. You cannot proceed with the two
remaining Study Guides or the final essay without having submitted this Study
Guide. This Study Guide is worth 1000 points.
Standards for Grading:
1. One to three sentence responses are not what I consider college level work.
Again, the objective with this assignment is to really explore your thoughts
extensively. One to three sentences responses are not much of an
exploration, yet alone extensive. I automatically give the equivalent of a
“D” for this level of work, or 600 points.
2. One paragraph or bullets containing five to seven sentences, give or take a
sentence or two, is commensurate with doing satisfactory to good college
level work. I automatically give the equivalent of a “C” or “B” for this level
of work, or between 700 and 899 points.
3. Two to three or more paragraph responses containing five to seven
sentences each or 10 or more bullet-points, from my perspective, is indeed
doing an extensive exploration of one’s thoughts. This is the objective that
all of you should strive to obtain, and this is what takes this activity beyond
the realm of the mundane or superficial. This is what I consider
outstanding, college-level work at the highest level and worthy of the
maximum amount of points.
Indicate by making a check mark below as to what is included in your Study
Guide. I will not accept your Study Guide if you have not checked off the items
included:
_____ Historians’ Fallacies
_____ Modern Researcher: Handling Ideas
_____ History Inside Out
_____ Lottery of Birth
_____ Introduction: The Decolonization of Asia and Africa in the twentieth
century
1. Historians’ Fallacies: Introduction (100 points):
a. What is the main point/focus/claim/argument of this text?
Response:
b. What quote(s) or passage(s) helped you to understand this text?
Response:
c. What questions arose for you in reading this text? Response:
d. Identify and define any term(s) that you don’t know: Response:
e. Perspective:
i. Yours:
ii. Your Classmates:
2. Modern Researcher: Handling Ideas (100 points):
a. What is the main point/focus/claim/argument of this text?
Response:
b. What quote(s) or passage(s) helped you to understand this text?
Response:
c. What questions arose for you in reading this text? Response:
d. Identify and define any term(s) that you don’t know: Response:
e. Perspective:
i. Yours:
ii. Your Classmates:
3. History Inside Out (100 points):
a. What is the main point/focus/claim/argument of this text?
Response:
b. What quote(s) or passage(s) helped you to understand this text?
Response:
c. What questions arose for you in reading this text? Response:
d. Identify and define any term(s) that you don’t know: Response:
e. Perspective:
i. Yours:
ii. Your Classmates:
4. Lottery of Birth (200 points):
a. Introduction:
b. Birth:
c. Education:
d. Employment:
e. Obedience:
f. Questioning:
g. Creativity:
h. Perspective:
i. Yours:
ii. Classmates:
5. Introduction: The Decolonization of Asia and Africa in the twentieth
century (500 points):
a. According to Prasenjit Duara, what is the historian’s perspective
regarding decolonization? Response:
b. According to Prasenjit Duara, why are there few historical studies of
decolonization as a whole? Response:
c. How does Prasenjit Duara reference what “decolonization” means
within the “early years of the twentieth century until the 1960s”?
Response:
d. How does Prasenjit Duara go on to characterize the variations of
decolonization? Response:
e. How does Prasenjit Duara characterize the dynamics of imperialism
during this period? Response:
f. What is meant by the “imagined community of the nation,” and
how was it used? Response:
g. According to Prasenjit Duara, what is the “misguided evolutionary
frame-work”? Response:
h. According to Prasenjit Duara, how did “World War II make
conditions still more unfavorable for colonialism”? Response:
i. According to Prasenjit Duara, what two pillars did decolonization
and the anti-imperialist movement reside on, and what was meant
by each of these pillars? Response:
j. According to Prasenjit Duara, how were women’s issues and rights
a part of the decolonization and anti-imperialist movements?
Response:
k. According to Prasenjit Duara, how was the priority of the nation
given over the agendas of workers, feminists, ethnic groups or
others, and how does he characterize the discourse that emerges
from this priority discourse? Response:
l. According to Prasenjit Duara, what were the tensions and how does
he characterize the tensions that existed between the ideals of the
twin pillars and the program of nation-making? Response:
m. According to Prasenjit Duara, given the tensions that existed within
the decolonization movements, what are the interpretive threads
that should assist our thinking? Response:
n. After reading this introduction, what are your thoughts regarding
colonization? Response: