H‐EnvironmentRoundtableReviewsVolume1,No.1(2011)www.h‐net.org/~environ/roundtablesPublicationdate:January31,2011

RoundtableReviewEditor:JacobDarwinHamblin

J.R.McNeill,MosquitoEmpires:EcologyandWarintheGreaterCaribbean,1620­1914(NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress,2010).ISBN:978‐0‐521‐45910‐5Paperback.371pages.StableURL:www.h‐net.org/~environ/roundtables/env‐roundtable‐1‐1.pdfContents

IntroductionbyJacobDarwinHamblin,OregonStateUniversity 2ReviewbyLisaM.Brady,BoiseStateUniversity 5ReviewbyStuartMcCook,UniversityofGuelph 9ReviewbyRichardP.Tucker,UniversityofMichigan 14ReviewbyPaulSutter,UniversityofColorado 17Author’sResponsebyJ.R.McNeill,GeorgetownUniversity 23AbouttheContributors 29Copyright©2011H­Net:HumanitiesandSocialSciencesOnline

H‐Netpermitstheredistributionandreprintingofthisworkfornonprofit,educationalpurposes,withfullandaccurateattributiontotheauthor,weblocation,dateofpublication,H‐Environment,andH‐Net:Humanities&SocialSciencesOnline.

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 2

IntroductionbyJacobDarwinHamblin,OregonStateUniversity

hisinauguralroundtableforH‐Environmentcentersupononeofthekeyconceptsthatstudentsandscholarsofenvironmentalhistoryconfront:environmentaldeterminism.Manyfoundtheirwaytothefieldafterreading

AlfredW.Crosby’s1972TheColumbianExchange,whichbroughtplants,animals,anddiseasesoutofthefootnotesandintoaprominentplaceinthegrandsweepofhistory.Inthatbook,EuropeansgainedsyphilisfromNorthAmericawhileNativeAmericansgainedsmallpox.Europeansgainedtomatoesandchocolate,whileNativeAmericansgainedlargebeastsofburden.SomeoftheseideasCrosbylaterdisavowed(particularlyhisemphasisonsyphilis).However,mostofthebook,especiallyitsoverallpremise,hasstoodthetestoftimeforseveraldecades.Itwasakindofapproachtohistorythatemphasizedhowbiologicalentitieshadlivesoftheirown,oftendeterminingoutcomesinhumanhistorybeyondtheusualpolitical,social,andeconomicexplanations.Youngerscholarsmayhaveencounteredthisperspectivemorerecently,duetohigh‐profilebooksemphasizingtheimportanceofgeographyandclimateinthedevelopmentofsocieties,aswiththePulitzerPrize‐winningbookGuns,GermsandSteelbyJaredDiamond.1ForJ.R.McNeill,thekeyinfluenceclearlywasCrosby.Ashewroteinaforwardtothe2003editionofTheColumbianExchange,“Myfirstencounterwiththebookcameonarainyafternoonin1982whenIpickeditoffofashoulder‐highshelfinanofficeItemporarilyoccupied.Ireaditinonegulp,neglectingthepossibilityofsupper.OnlyrarelycanIrecallpreciselythecircumstancesinwhichIreadabooklongago,butTheColumbianExchange,andthesenseofexcitementitprovokedinme,etcheditselfintomymemory.”2WecanalsoseeinfluenceuponMcNeillbyalaterbookbyCrosby,EcologicalImperialism,whichemphasizedthemyriadwaysinwhichbiologicalexchangescouldbeasymmetrical,benefitingsomewhilecripplingothers.3McNeillhasappliedthisapproachtowardansweringoneofthetoughproblemsofcolonialandCaribbeanhistory:whywerepowerfulAtlanticpowersunabletodislodgethewaningSpanishempireintheCaribbeanduringtheseventeenthandeighteenthcenturies,despitenumerouscostlyeffortstodoso?TheresultisMosquitoEmpires,abookthatspansnearlythreecenturiesandthehistoriesofmanypeoples,nations,andempiresintheAmericantropicalworld.Asthetitlesuggests,itplacesconsiderableresponsibilityforthecourseofeventsuponmosquitoes,thoseformidablevectorsofyellowfeverandmalaria.McNeill’sfocusisondifferentialresistance—aninequalityindiseasesusceptibilitythatkilledoffsomehumanswhileotherssoldieredonunperturbed.Itnotonlyreinforcedthestatus1 Jared Diamond, Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies (New York: W. W. Norton, 1997). 2 J. R. McNeill, “Forward,” in Alfred W. Crosby, The Columbian Exchange: Biological and Cultural Consequences of 1492 (Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2003), xi-xvi. Quote on p. xii. 3 Alfred W. Crosby, Ecological Imperialism: The Biological Expansion of Europe, 900-1900 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986).

TT

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 3

quobeforethelateeighteenthcentury,disallowingseriousimperialreconfigurations,butalsostrengthenedindependencemovementsfromthe1770sonward.IapproachedLisaBradytocommentuponMosquitoEmpiresbecauseshehasdemonstratedakeeninterestintheintersectionsbetweenwarandtheenvironment.Herarticle“TheWildernessofWar”explainedtherelationshipbetweennatureandstrategyinwaysbeyondtheusualdeterminantsofthebattlefieldsuchasterrainandweather.Insteadshearguedthatnature,physicallyandconceptually,assumedanactiveroleinwarfare,particularlyintheAmericanCivilWar.LikeMcNeill,shehighlightednotsimplytheconstraintsoftheenvironmentalfactorsuponconflict,buttheirpsychologicalimportance,aswhenGeneralSherman’smarchtothesealaidwastetowhatshecalled“theecologicalfoundationoftheConfederacy.”4InherreviewofMcNeillsheappliesthisexpertiseinCivilWarhistorytoassesstheimpactofdifferentialimmunityinthe“GreaterCaribbean,”whichincludestheAmericanSouth.StuartMcCookhaswrittenextensivelyabouttheprocessofnation‐buildingintheSpanishCaribbeanduringthesameperiodthatMcNeillinvestigates.ForMcCook,thekeystoryhasbeenthedevelopmentwhathecalled“creolescience,”acooperativerelationshipbetweenscientistsandagriculturalelitesastheyattemptedtomaintainagricultural,export‐basedeconomies.McCookhasmadeclearthattheabilitytoexertpowerintheCaribbeanhasoftendependedupontheabilitytounderstandnatureandthedesiretocontrolit.5RichardTucker’sworkalsohashonedinonthetropicalworld,thoughnotlimitedtotheCaribbean.Hisworkhaseducatednumerousscholars—andmoreofmyownundergraduatesthanIcancount—onthedisturbingeffectsofviewingnatureasacommodityinaglobalcapitalisteconomy.WhereasMcNeillemphasizestheabilityofempires,governmentsandarmiestodiginforthelongterm,Tuckerhaswrittenaboutthedislocationsofpowerintheregionduetocorporationsandexpandingmarkets.6PaulSutter’sworkhasrangedquitebroadly,fromcarsandthetwentieth‐centurywildernessmovementtothehistoryofAmericanimperialisminthetropics.LikeMcNeill,hehasdevotedconsiderableattentiontothesignificanceofinsectsanddiseasevectorsintheprojectionofpowerintheCaribbean.ArecentarticleinIsis,therecipientoftheAliceHamiltonPrize(oftheAmericanSocietyforEnvironmentalHistory),explorestheroleofentomologicalworkersincombatingyellowfeverand

4 Lisa M. Brady, “The Wilderness of War: Nature and Strategy in the American Civil War,” Environmental History 10:3 (2005), 441-427. 5 Stuart McCook, States of Nature: Science, Agriculture, and Environment in the Spanish Caribbean, 1760-1940 (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2002). 6 Richard P. Tucker, Insatiable Appetite: The United States and the Ecological Degradation of the Tropical World, Concise revised edition (Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, 2007).

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 4

malariainthePanamaCanalZone.Sutterwrotethatscientistswerenotjustattemptingtocontrolnature,butthatthethreatfromnaturewasadirectresultofAmericanpracticesintheZone.7ThisperspectiveissharedbyMcNeill,whomakesclearinMosquitoEmpiresthatimperialismitself,particularlythetransformationoflandscapestosupportagricultureforexport,createdidealenvironmentsformosquitoesandthediseasestheycarried.Beforeturningtothecommentsandresponse,Iwishtothankallfivecontributorstothisroundtablefortheirthoughtfulcomments.Theirwillingnesstoraiseissuesforscholarlydiscussionanddebatewillundoubtedlyaidincreatingfruitfuldialogueabouttheshiftsinpowerandecologicalrelationshipsduringthislongandtumultuousperiod.

7 Paul S. Sutter, “Nature’s Agents or Agents of Empire? Entomological Workers and Environmental Change during the Construction of the Panama Canal,” Isis 98:4 (2007), 724-753.

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 5

ReviewbyLisaM.Brady,BoiseStateUniversity

hestoryofthevariousEuropeanpowers’strugglefordominationoftheAmericasisafamiliarone:Beginninginthefifteenthcenturyandculminatinginthenineteenth,thecontesttocontrolthewealthoftheNew

Worldinvolvedpoliticalmachinations,militaryclashes,andsettlementschemes.TerritorialclaimsintheAmericasbroughtwiththemmaterialwealthandincreasedpoliticalpowerinEurope.Thiswasespeciallytruewiththeadventofplantationagricultureintheseventeenthcentury,whichpromisedamoresustainablesourceofwealthasopportunitiestoextractgoldandsilverdeclined.Thecolonialholdingsweresecuredthroughmilitarymight,bothonlandandatsea,andbycarefuldiplomaticnegotiations.AllofthiseventuallywasunderminedbytheEnlightenment,withitsradicalnotionsofindividuallibertyanditscallsfordemocracy.EnlightenmentideaswereespeciallypowerfulintheAmericas,wheretheycontributedtoarashofindependencemovementsinthelate‐eighteenthandearly‐nineteenthcenturies.Bythemid‐1800sEurope’sholdontheNewWorldhadweakenedconsiderablyandwasbrokencompletelyasthetwentiethcenturydawned.J.R.McNeilltellsaninnovativeandmuchmorecompellingversionofthishistoryinhisnewbook,MosquitoEmpires.Withoutignoringordiscountingtheinfluencesofdiplomacyandintellectualdevelopments,McNeillrevealsanother,equallyimportantelementinthetransformationoftheAmericancoloniesfromresourceoutpoststoindependentnations:ecology.Equatingthereciprocalrelationshipbetweengeopoliticsandecologyto“acotillionofco‐evolution”(7),McNeilleffortlesslyguideshisreadersthroughtheintricatestepsthatultimatelybecamethedanceofdeathforEuropeanimperialismintheAmericas.MosquitoEmpirestranscendspoliticalboundariestoprovideatrulyecologicalviewofhistory.ByfocusingonwhathecallstheGreaterCaribbean,the“plantationzones”of“theAtlanticcoastalregionsofSouth,Central,andNorthAmerica,aswellastheCaribbeanislandsthemselves,”McNeilldemonstratesthatecologicalforcessupersedethearbitrarydivisionshumansimposeonthephysicalworld(2).Furthermore,McNeillcompellinglyarguesthatecologycantrumpimperialpowerandthatmonkeys,mosquitoes,andmicrobescanshapethedestiniesofmen.Iusethetermmen,asopposedtohumans,intentionallyherebecausewomenseemtohavelittletodowiththestory.Thehumanactorsare,withrareexception,maleandthefewwomenwhoappeardosoonlyinconnectiontomen(onlyJosephineandPaulineBonaparterankmentionbynameintheindexanddiscussionofwomeningeneralcanbefoundonascanteightpages).Inabookfocusedonmilitaryandpoliticalstrategyintheseventeenththroughearly‐twentiethcenturies,however,thisisneitherunexpectednoramajordetractionbecauseatthattimeandinthatcontext,menwerebyandlargetheprimaryagents.Unless,thatis,weturnourattentionawayfromHomosapiensandnoticeasmallbutpowerfulfemaleforce,

TT

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 6

“thosetinyamazons,thefemaleAedesaegyptiandAnophelesquadrimaculatus,”whichMcNeillargues“underpinnedthegeopoliticalorderintheAmericasuntilthe1770s,afterwhichtheyunderminedit,usheringinaneweraofindependentstates”(5).TheironyisnotlostonMcNeill,ofcourse,andheattimesseemstorevelinit,claimingatonepointthatthe“tinyfemaleA.quadrimaculatusstandstallamongthefoundingmothersoftheUnitedStates”(234).WhilesomemightquailatequatingamosquitowiththelikesofAbigailAdams,McNeillhasnosuchcompunction.Hisbookisthebetterforit.Aswithallhiswork,McNeillblendsimpeccablescholarshipwithanengaging,oftenwitty,stylethatmakesforgenuinelyfascinatingreading.Quitesimply,McNeill’sargumentisthat“questsforwealthandpowerchangedecologiesintheGreaterCaribbean”andthatthose“ecologicalchangesinturnshapedthefortunesofempire,war,andrevolutionintheyearsbetween1620and1914”(2).Keytothisargumentisthedevelopmentof“differentialimmunities,”firstenjoyedbytheSpanishwithregardtotheirEuropeanrivals,andlaterbyindependence‐mindedAmericanswhoexploitedtheadvantagetooverthrowEuropeandomination.BymodifyingAmericanecologiesthroughtheco‐introductionofplantationagricultureandAfricanslavery–and,thus,theimportationoftheyellowfevervirusandmalariaplasmodium–theimperialpowerssowedtheseedsfortheirowndemise.Theroleofdifferentialimmunitywasespeciallyimportantduringlarge‐scalearmedconflicts.McNeill’sargument,thoughwithoutexplicitlyattemptingto,providesexcellentinsightintoCarlvonClausewitz’snotionoffriction.ClausewitzsuggestedinhismilitarytreatiseOnWarthateventhebestlaidstrategiescannotanticipateeveryinfluencingfactorand,therefore,unintendedandunpredictabledevelopmentsoftendeterminetheoutcomeofmilitaryaffairs.8Inotherwords,muchinwarisafactorofchance.ManyoftheconflictsMcNeillexaminesinhisbookdemonstratetheprincipleoffriction,butoneinparticularillustratesitbest.InhisdiscussionoftheBritishsiegeofHavanain1762,McNeilldiscussedtheSpanishhopethatyellowfeverwouldassistinthedefenseofthecity.Thisinitiallyheldtrue.However,anunusuallydryJuneandJuly–primeyellowfeverseason–mitigatedsomewhattheravagesoftheepidemicandsparedtheBritishfromabsolutedevastation.Additionally,theBritishhadexpectedNorthAmericanreinforcementsinMay,butthesefreshtroopsdidnotarriveuntillateJuly,providingthenecessaryhealthytroopstocontinuethesiegelongenoughtoforcethecity’ssurrender.HadtheAmericantroopsarrivedasplanned,theywouldhavesufferedequallywiththeBritish;hadtheyarrivedanylater,theHabañeroswouldhavewithstoodthesiegelongenoughtoforcetheBritish,weakenedbyyellowfever,towithdraw.Additionally,hadtherainyseasonbeenmorereliable,theyellowfeverepidemiclikelywouldhavebeenmuchworse.Thesefactors,unforeseenandimpossibletocontrol,enabledtheBritishtotakeacitythatwaswellfortifiedandusuallyprotectedbydifferentialimmunity(178‐83).Theirvictorywaspyrrhic,however,as8 Carl von Clausewitz, On War, indexed edition, ed. and trans. Michael Howard and Peter Paret (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1984), 119-21.

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 7

theBritishsoldierscontinuedtosuccumbtothediseaseandcouldnotpresstheiradvantageagainsttheSpanishelsewhere.BytheendoftheSevenYears’War,HavanawasbackinthehandsoftheSpanish,thanksinparttochance(friction)andinparttodifferentialimmunity.Differentialimmunityhadamoredecisiveandpermanenteffectinanotherconflictfortyyearslater.InHaiti’srevolution,ashiftinunderstandingsofyellowfeverwenthandinhandwithchangesinmilitarystrategy.AccordingtoMcNeill,“Toussaintunderstoodbetterthananyonethatyellowfeverwasthesupremeweaponoftheweakandconductedhiswarsaccordingly”(262).Theoutcomeinthisinstancewaswhattherevolutionarieshopedfor:yellowfever,andtoalesserextentmalaria,disproportionatelyaffectedtheFrenchtroopssenttoquelltherebellion.“Giventhatyellowfeverandmalaria,bymaking(disease‐resistant)AfricanlaborespeciallyattractivetoCaribbeanandBrazilianplanters,itisaltogetherfitting”McNeillsuggests,“thatthesetwoinfectionsshouldhavehelpedworldhistory’slargestslaverevoltsucceed.ThevirusandplasmodiuminitiallypromotedAfricanslaveryintheAmericas,thenhelpeddestroyit”(264).ThesearejusttwoofthedozensofexamplesMcNeillprovidestoillustratethecrucialroleyellowfever,andtoalesserextentmalaria,playedintheviolenthistoryoftheGreaterCaribbean.Throughoutthebook,McNeillusesawiderangeofprimarysources,thoughheadmitsthatthereareproblemswiththemintermsofaccuratelyanddefinitivelyidentifyingthediseasestheydescribed.McNeillshoresupthissomewhatshakyfoundationthroughdeductivereasoningandsoundmedicalandepidemiologicalscience.Ifthereisaweaknessinthislineofargument,itisinthesomewhatsketchytreatmentofmonkeysinthetransmissionchain.Here,too,McNeillacknowledgesthelimitationsofhissources,concedingthe“uncertaintiesofhistoricalmonkeyecology”(50),butnonethelessIhadtroublemakingtheleapoffaithrequiredtoaccepttheirplaceinthestory.Furthermore,onemightquestionwhethermyriaddiseaseshelpedyellowfeverandmalariaontheirkillingways.Regardlessofwhethertheyhadco‐conspirators,McNeillneverthelessclearlyshowsthatthosetwodiseasesdidinfactplayasignificantroleinthepoliticsofempireintheAmericas–nosmallfeatindeed.Idohaveanothersmallquibble,however:McNeilldismissesyellowfeverandmalariaasminorfactorsintheAmericanCivilWar.Whiletheymaynothavekilledasmanyastyphusandother“crowd”or“filth”diseases,malariaandyellowfeverbothinfluencedstrategicandoperationaldecisionsinthewar,asAndrewMcIlwaineBellshowsinhisbookMosquitoSoldiers.9Deathisnottheonlywaydiseasescanaffecttheoutcome,oreventhewagingofwar.Battleplans,operations,andotherdecisionsoftentakediseaseenvironmentsintoaccount–McNeillclearlyshowsthisthroughouthisstudy.Why,then,discountitinthecontextoftheCivilWar?ThatconflictdoesnotfitintoMcNeill’scorollaryargumentregardingtheunderpinningof9 Andrew McIlwain Bell, Mosquito Soldiers: Malaria, Yellow Fever, and the Course of the American Civil War (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2010).

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 8

colonialgeopoliticsintheregion(thoughsomemayliketoseethewarasanimperialone),buttheCivilWarisanexcellentexampleoftherolesdiseaseanddiseaseecologiesplayinshapingandguidingelementsofwarfare.Thiswasamissedopportunitytobringthatpointhome.Theseminorissuesaside,McNeillhasproducedanexcellentbook,onethatmakesabrilliantcontributiontothegrowingliteratureonwarandenvironment.Itisthoroughlyresearched,engaginglywritten,andpersuasivelyargued.BegunaccidentallyduringhisdissertationresearchinSevillein1979,McNeillnotesinhisPrefacethat“Fewbookscanhavehadalongergestationperiodthanthisone”(xv).Itwaswellworththewait.

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 9

ReviewbyStuartMcCook,UniversityofGuelph

osquitoEmpiresisahistoryoftheinteractionsbetweenepidemicdiseasesandpoliticsintheNewWorld,butitisalsomuchmorethanthat.Althoughitsnominalfocusisonyellowfeverandmalaria,itcanalsobereadasa

sequeltosomeofAlfredCrosby’spioneeringstudiesinclassicssuchasTheColumbianExchangeandEcologicalImperialism.WhereCrosby’sworksfocusheavilyontheearlyphasesoftransatlanticexchanges,inthesixteenthandseventeenthcenturies,MosquitoEmpiresbringsthestoryoftheseexchangesfromtheseventeenthuptotheearlytwentiethcenturies.Itseekstoexploretheenvironmentaldimensionsofpoliticsinthe“GreaterCaribbean”(fromthesouthernUnitedStatestonorthernSouthAmerica)throughahistoryofyellowfeverandmalaria.Itsscopeisambitiousandbroad;thisisanenvironmentalhistoryofEuropeanimperialismandcolonialnationalismintheNewWorld.TheperioditcovershasbeencomparativelyneglectedinmanyenvironmentalhistoriesoftheAmericas;this‘middleperiod’hasnotreceivedthesamescholarlyattentionastheconquestera(roughly1500‐1650,coveredbyauthorssuchasCrosbyandothers),orasthetwentiethcentury.ButthisismorethansimplyachronologicalextensionofCrosby’sargument;McNeillshowscompellinglythatenvironmentalrelationsbetweentheOldWorldandtheNewunderwentafundamentaltransformationinthisperiod.Afterthemid‐seventeenthcentury,theepidemiologicaladvantageshiftedfromthecolonizersfromtheOldWorld,tothelocalresidentsintheNewWorld.MosquitoEmpiresalsodiffersfromtheseearlierworksinitscloseattentiontotheconnectionsbetweenenvironmentandpower.Inthefirstsection,McNeilldescribestheecologicaltransformationsoftheGreaterCaribbeanfromtheseventeenthtothenineteenthcenturies.The“GreaterCaribbean”hereisausefulconstructencompassingtheAtlanticcoastalregionsoftheAmericas,fromSurinamtotheChesapeake.HedefinesGreaterCaribbeanbygeography(primarilycoastallowlands),byeconomics(theplantation),andultimatelybydiseasessuchasyellowfeverandmalaria.Thereisacompellingunitytothisarea,andonethatcrossestheimperialandnationalboundariesthatoftenmarktheintellectualboundariesoftraditionalhistoricalscholarship.Atfirst,feverssuchasmalariaandyellowfeverdidnotsignificantlyinhibittheEuropeansettlementoftheNewWorld.Butthese‘importedfevers’graduallytookrootintheseventeenthcentury,withtheintroductionoftheyellowfeverandmalariapathogens,andtheirrespectiveinsectvectors:AedesaegyptiandvarietiesofAnopheles.Theirsuccessinvolvedsomethingmorecomplexthanthevirginsoilepidemicsofthesixteenthandearlyseventeenthcenturies,inwhichintroducedpathogensflourishedonlargepopulationsofsusceptiblehumanhosts.Manyoftheseearlyepidemicscouldbetransmitteddirectlyfrompersontoperson.Bycontrast,malariaandyellowfeverarebothzoonoticdiseasestransmittedbyinsects.Bothdiseasescaninfectbothhumansandanimals(andinfactoftenprefertheir

MM

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 10

animalhoststohumans).TheseimportedfeversgainedafootholdintheGreaterCaribbeanbecausethecolonizingpowershadcreated‘creoleecologies’–particularlysugarplantations–thatalsounintentionallyallowedmalariaandyellowfever,andtheirinsectvectorscouldflourish.Theepidemicsalsofoundahomeintheregion’sportcities,wheretherewasstandingwaterinwhichthemosquitovectorscouldbreed,andwheretherewasconstantinfluxofnon‐immunehostswhocouldsustaintheepidemic.TodistillMcNeill’sargumenttoitsessentials,thehumanpopulationsresidentintheGreaterCaribbeangraduallydevelopedatleastpartialimmunitiestotheseepidemicdiseases,usuallythroughexposureaschildren.Afterthesugarboomofthemid‐seventeenthcentury,peoplebornandraisedintheGreaterCaribbean,likethoseinWestandWest‐CentralAfrica,enjoyedamuchgreaterimmunitytothesediseasesthandidpeoplewhohadbeenbornandraisedoutsidethesezonesofexposure.ThisdifferentialimmunitywastoshapethegeopoliticsoftheGreaterCaribbeanintheeighteenthandnineteenthcenturies.OnceyellowfeverandmalariawereestablishedintheGreaterCaribbean,itbecameincreasinglydifficultforotherEuropeanpowerstoestablishafootholdintheregion.Inaseriesofelegantcasestudies,McNeillshowshow–intheseventeenthcentury–yellowfeverpresentedasignificant(althoughnotalwaysinsuperable)obstacletoDutchsettlementsinBrazil,EnglishsettlementinJamaica,andtheScotsatDarien.HepointsoutthattheBritishconquestofJamaicawasthelasttimethatoneEuropeanpowertookalargeCaribbeanpossessionfromanotherEuropeanpoweruntiltheBritishtookTrinidadmorethanacenturylater,andinthiscasetheBritishsucceededlargelybecausetheislandwaslightlyheld.ButeventhevictoriousBritishtroopssufferedheavylossesfromfevers,mostlikelymalaria.FrenchsettlersencounteredsimilarproblemsatFrenchGuyanaintheeighteenthcentury.YellowfeveralsoactedasanallytotheSpanishempire;yellowfeverepidemicshelpedbreaktheBritishsiegesofCartagenain1741,whentheyellowfevercosttheBritishforcesome6,000ofits9,000members,andturnedtheconquestofHavanaintoapyrrhicvictory.“Fortificationsandyellowfever,”concludesMcNeill,“helpedkeeptheSpanishempireSpanish”(188).Inthelateeighteenthandearlynineteenthcenturies,thegeopoliticalimportanceofmosquitoesandfeverschanged(althoughthediseasepatternsdidnot).ThediseaseecologiesoftheGreaterCaribbeanhelpedfavortheindependenceofNewWorldcoloniesfromtheirEuropeanmetropolises.IntheUnitedStates,forexample“malariaandsmallpoxweresystematicallypartisanbecauseofdifferentialimmunities”(200).OutbreaksofmalariamadeitdifficultforCornwallistodecisivelydefeatrebelforcesinthesoutherncoloniesin1780‐1,ortoresistthesiegeatYorktown.McNeillshowsjusthowfinelybalancedthetwosideswereinmostotherrespects,andhowthebattlescouldhaveeasilygonetheotherway.ButtheBritishtroopswereplacedatasignificantandconsistentdisadvantagesincesomanyofthemweredisabledbyfevers,particularlymalaria.YellowfeveralsofavouredtheindependencemovementsinSt.Domingue(Haiti),NewGranada(Colombia,Venezuela,andEcuador),andlaterinCuba.McNeillgivesaparticularlynuancedaccountoftheroleofyellowfeverinHaitianindependence,arguingthat

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 11

thedifferentialimmunityfromyellowfeverwasa“weaponoftheweak”(262)thatToussaintL’OuvertureandotherHaitianindependenceleadersdeliberatelyandeffectivelyincorporatedintotheirresistancestrategies.Ratherthanengagingimperialtroopsonthebattlefield,theycouldwageguerrillawarfareandallowthediseasestowreakhavocontheiropponents.AcrosstheGreaterCaribbean,localrebelpopulationsenjoyedamuchgreaterresistancetoyellowfeverthandidtheimperialarmiessentfromoverseas;thetremendousmortalityamongimperialsoldiersgaveadecisiveadvantagetotherebels.Thegeopoliticalimpactofyellowfeverdiminishedsignificantlyintheclosingyearsofthenineteenthcentury,asdoctorsidentifiedtheinsectvectorthatcarriedyellowfever.Oncethevectorhadbeenidentified,theyquicklydevelopedeffectivemeansofcontainingyellowfeverand(inmanyplaces)eradicatingitaltogether.MosquitoEmpiresisacompellingmodelofhowtowriteanenvironmentalhistoryofgeopolitics,withoutfallingintothetrapofenvironmentaldeterminism.AccordingtoMcNeill,yellowfeverandmalaria“didnotdeterminetheoutcomesofstrugglesforpower,buttheygovernedtheprobabilitiesofsuccessandfailureinmilitaryexpeditionsandsettlementschemes”(2).Throughoutthebook,McNeillisalwayscarefultoweightheimpactoftheseepidemicsagainsttheotherfactorsthatcontributedtoparticulargeopoliticalsuccessesorfailures,andtogiveeachfactoritsdue.IworrythatsomereadersofMosquitoEmpireswillmissthesignificantnuancesofMcNeill’sarguments,muchthewaythattheyhavedonewithCrosby’sworkonvirginsoilepidemics(seeJones2003).10Itwouldbechurlishtoexpectabooksosweepingandthoroughtocovermoreterritorythanitalreadydoes.Still,itisalsoworthconsideringthemomentsinthehistoryoftheGreaterCaribbeanwheretheabsenceofthesefeversortheabsenceofdifferentialimmunityalsoshapedgeopoliticaloutcomes.Afterthemid‐seventeenthcentury,theabsence(orlowincidence)ofyellowfeverandmalariainsomepartsoftheGreaterCaribbeanwasalsoahumanconstruct.Forexample,theabolitionofslaveryandtheslavetradeintheBritishandlaterFrenchempiresintheearlynineteenthcenturygraduallystoppedtheflowofpeoplefromAfricatotheregion’sremainingBritishandFrenchcolonies–especiallytheislandcolonies.TheirstagnatingsugareconomieslikewisereducedtheflowofsusceptibleEuropeanmigrants.Soitbecamemoredifficultforyellowfever,inparticular,toflourishintheWestIndies.Thedecliningimportanceofyellowfeverontheseislands–Jamaica,Trinidad,Guadeloupe,MartiniqueandtheLeewardIslandsmay,inturn,helpexplainwhysomeofthemremainedcoloniesofBritainandFranceuntilthetwentiethcentury,andwhysomecontinueincolonialrolestothepresent.Ofcourse,diseasealoneisnotasufficientexplanationforthis‐‐itisalsounlikelythattheinhabitantsofthesesmallislandscouldhavemountedacrediblemilitarythreattotheimperialpowersinthesamewayasdidtheircounterpartsinCuba,Haiti,andonthemainland.Butsurelytheabsenceofdiseasewasafactor,sinceitreducedthehumancostofmaintainingthesecolonies.Similarly,thelackofdifferential10 See D. S. Jones, “Virgin Soils Revisited,” William and Mary Quarterly 60:4 (2003), 703-742.

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 12

immunitydecisivelyshapedthehistoryoftheDominicanRepublicinthenineteenthcentury.McNeillrightlydevotesconsiderableattentiontothehistoryofHaiti/St.Domingue,buttheotherhalfofHispaniola(whichbecametheDominicanRepublic)remainsshadowyhere.ToextrapolateMcNeill’sargument,theHaitianconquestofeasternHispaniolain1822waspossibleinpartbecausetherewasnosignificantdifferentialimmunitybetweenthepopulationsoneithersideoftheisland.Inasinglesentence,McNeillnotesthatyellowfeverandmalariaimpededSpanishattemptstore‐conqueritintheearly1860s(295).Thepointisthattheabsenceoftheseepidemicfeversortheabsenceofdifferentialimmunitycouldhavejustasmuchgeopoliticalsignificanceastheirpresence.TheblurbsonthebookcoverstressthemainaspectofMcNeill’sargument–theroleofepidemicsinshapinggeopolitics.Buttheseblurbsand,Ifear,manyreviewswilloverlookthebook’scriticalsecondaryargument.Specifically,McNeillnotonlyshowshowdiseaseshapedgeopolitics;healsoshowshowgeopoliticsshapeddisease.Malariaandyellowfeverwere,ofcourse,‘natural’phenomenathatwerenottheresultofdeliberateplanningbyanyone.Nonetheless,theirpresenceintheGreaterCaribbeanwasshapedandsustainedbygeopoliticalprocesses–byEuropeanconquest,colonization,andtrade.Thediseasesandtheirinsectvectorswereintroduced(accidentally,andprobablyrepeatedly)totheNewWorldonshipsfromtheOldWorld.OnceintheNewWorld,theyprosperedinlandscapesthathadbeentransformedtosuitimperialends.Andtheyreceivedasteadysupplyofsusceptiblehosts,courtesyofgeopoliticalforcesthatbroughtnon‐immunepeopleintotheGreaterCaribbean(slavery,indenturedservitude,troopmovements,andeven–occasionally–voluntarymigration).AsMcNeillobserves,theseepidemicswerenotrandom,andevensomecontemporaryobserversrecognizedtheconnectionsbetweenthearrivalofnon‐immunepeopleandtheoutbreaksofdisease.Bythenineteenthcentury,peopleweremoredeliberatelyengagedinshapingtheirrelationshipwiththeinsectsandthepathogens.Theydevelopedeffectiveshipboardquarantines,andbytheearlytwentiethcenturybegancampaignstoaltertheirenvironmentssoastolimitthepopulationsofinsectvectors.Theeradicationcampaignswere,toalargeextent,theproductofUScolonialismandneocolonialismintheGreaterCaribbean.Theyellowfeverandmalariaepidemicswerebothimperialconstructs,albeitaccidentalones.Inshort,therelationshipbetweenepidemicsandgeopoliticsflowedbothways.McNeillwritesinaninformalyeteffectivestyle;inmanyplacesMosquitoEmpiresreadslikethetranscriptofanengagingandthoughtfullecture.Herecountshiscasestudiesinrichdetail,fromavarietyofperspectives.Forexample,theBritishsiegeofCartagenaisrecountedusingthevoicesbothofSpanishandBritishsources.Hepaintslucidpicturesofbattlesandsieges,andthebroaderconditionsoflandscapeandweatherthatshapedthepatternsofdisease.Asacounterbalancetothebook’ssombersubject,McNeill’slanguageisalwaysvividandgraceful,andoftengentlyhumorous.McNeillalsoexplicitlyidentifiesthepartsofhisargumentwhereheisspeculativeandtentative.ThisintellectualopennessmakesMosquitoEmpiresparticularlyusefulasaclassroomtext;itinvitesstudents(andindeedallreaders)to

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 13

considerhowhistoricalevidenceisweighedandhowhistoricalargumentsareconstructed.MosquitoEmpiresisanexemplarystudyofthecomplexrelationshipsbetweenthenaturalworldandpoliticalpower.

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 14

ReviewbyRichardP.Tucker,UniversityofMichigan

omeyearsagoIstrolledthroughaBritishcolonialcemeteryinMussoorie,intheouterhillsoftheHimalayas,oneofthe“hillstations”wherecolonialofficers,bothcivilianandmilitary,spenttheseasonofmostintenseheatand

rain,awayfromdiseaseanddiscomfortintheplainsbelow.Thecemetery,stillmaintainedbyanassociationofex‐colonials,wasfilledwithastartlingproportionofyoungmilitaryofficers.Ilearnedlaterofaprivatelypublishedbookbyaleadingassociationmember,entitled,ThreeMonsoons.Thetitlereflectedthethenwell‐knownsaying,“IfyousurvivethreemonsoonsinIndia,youcanreasonablyhopetoretirehomeincomfort.”JohnMcNeill’snewbook,thoughitfocusesonaregionofEuropeanempireshalfaworldaway,providescompellingnewperspectiveontheepidemiologicalandemotionallifeofthatexpatriatecommunity. TheboldnessandoriginalityofMosquitoEmpiresareofaparticularcharacter.Aslongastherehavebeenmilitaryhistorians,theyhavedescribeddiseasesinarmiesandnavies,oftenacknowledgingitasamajoradversaryforstrategiststotakeintoaccount.Butmilitaryhistorianshaverarelyviewedthisinthebroaderinterpretivecontextofenvironmentalhistory,intermsofitscentralroleinprocessesofecologicalchange.Conversely,environmentalhistorians,whobegantodevelopawide‐rangingdiscussionoftheroleofwarandmilitarizationasacentraldimensionofhumanhistoryonlyaboutadecadeago,havenotusuallyincludeddiseaseamongtheirthemes.Theessentialbridgedisciplinesofdiseasehistoryanddemographichistoryareonlybeginningtobeintegratedintoanemergingsynthesis.McNeill’sworkindicateswhythissynthesishasbeenhavingadifficultgestation.HefacedthetaskofintegratingthevastliteratureontheEuropeanexpansionintothetropics,withtheverydifferenttechnicalfieldofepidemiologyanddiseaseecology.Thenhehadtofindasingle,consistentlanguagethatwouldrhetoricallyintegratethesedisparatesubjectsintoanarrativecomprehensibletoreaderslesswellgroundedintherangeandcomplexityofthesubject.Hissuccessinfindinganeffectivevoiceisoneofthebook’smajorachievements.

Thisstudyhasemergedintandemwiththreeotherrecentstudies:JamesWebb,Humanity’sBurden:AGlobalHistoryofMalaria(CambridgeUniversityPress,2009),PaulSutter’sstudiesoftheconquestofmalariaandyellowfeverinthetwentiethcenturyCaribbean,andalsoSoniaShah,TheFever:HowMalariaHasRuledHumankindfor500,000Years(Farrar,StrausandGiroux,2010)amorepopularbutyetsubstantialhistory.Webb’ssurveyprovidesaglobalhistoricalcontext(andaregionalsettinginchapter3)forMosquitoEmpires.Inturn,McNeillismoreinclusiveforthetrans‐Atlanticregion.Noneoftheotherstudiescentersontheinteractionsbetweentropicaldiseaseandmilitaryoperations.Demographichistorianshavealsocontributedtomakingthenewsynthesispossible.OnemajorcontributionhasbeenPhilipCurtin’swritings,especiallyDiseaseandEmpire:TheHealthofEuropeanTroopsintheConquestofAfrica

SS

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 15

(CambridgeUniversityPress,1998)andDeathbyMigration:Europe’sEncounterwiththeTropicalWorldintheNineteenthCentury(CambridgeUniversityPress,1989).AswithmuchofCurtin’sworkovertheyears,hisscopestoppedatthefringesofenvironmentalhistory.Ithasbeenindispensabletoayoungergenerationofenvironmentalhistorians,butitleavesthenextstepforhisprotégés’workonthetropicalworld.InthecontextoftheNewWorldtropics’history,thecentralthemeofMosquitoEmpiresisstartling,foritpresentsineffectchaptertwoofcolonialcontrol.Farbetterrecognizedischapterone,thedemographicdisastersthatindigenousAmericanssufferedfromtheintroductionofEuropeandiseasesafter1492.AnearliervolumeintheCambridgeUniversityPressseries“NewApproachestotheAmericas”pursuesthatdiscussion.NobleDavidCook’sBorntoDie:DiseaseandNewWorldConquest,1492­1650(1998)addressesthe“BlackLegend”debatefamiliareversincethelatesixteenthcentury:wastheonslaughtofepidemicslargelytheresultofIberianpolicyintheAmericantropics(asnorthEuropeanssententiouslyargued),orwasittheresponsibilityofallEuropeanforcesastheypursuedconquest,intemperateaswellastropicalzones?McNeill’sthesisembodiestheenormousironythattheintroducedOldWorlddiseases,malariaandyellowfever,becameco‐domesticatedwithbothindigenousandCreolepopulations,whichledthemtoresistanewroundofconquestfromnorthernEuropeformanyyears.Whenitiswritten,chapterthreeofthislonghistorywillmoveusbeyond1914,addressingtheroleofepidemicdisease(ofbothwarriorsandcivilians,andbothhumansandlivestock)inthetwentiethcentury’sglobalandregionalwars.Thereisstillmuchtobedone,toachievealucidandwidelyaccessibleglobalperspectiveonthemassconflictsofthemostrecentcentury.AmajorcontributiontothiseffortisJudithBennett’srecentNativesandExotics:WorldWarIIandtheEnvironmentintheSouthernPacific(UniversityofHawaiiPress,2009),whichsurveysthestrugglesofeachcombatant’smilitarytocontrolmalariaanddengue,aswellasarangeofotherdiseases,inthestruggleforcontrolandvictory.UnlikethedemographicdisastersintheAmericasandOceaniathataccompaniedearlycontactwiththeEurasiangenepool,massconflictinEurasiaandAfricaneverresultedinsuchdevastatinglossofhumanpopulations.Butseveraldiseasesassociatedwithmassconcentrationsofhumansandlivestockhelpedshapemilitarycampaigns.Historiansofwarandenvironmentwilldowelltostudythewritingsofmilitarystrategists,whichareastorehouseofinformation.MilitarymovementsintheMediterraneanandMiddleEastalonearemajorexamplesofthestrategicroleofepidemicsinwartime.MarcusHall’sstudyofthestruggletocontrolmalariainItalyandtheMediterraneantakesusbacktothesettingofoneofJohnMcNeill’spreviousbooks.ThetropicalandmonsoonbeltofAfricaandAsiainvitessimilarstudy.Thehistoriographyofmassmigrationsisrichlydetailed,butmigrationhistorianshavenotoftenencompassedecologicalchangeintheirstudies.Thereisamajoropportunityhereformergingtwolargelyseparatediscourses;epidemicdiseaseand

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 16

socialupheavalaretwokeyelements.Studiesofthemassmigrationsofrefugeepopulationshintatanadditionaldimensionoftheinteractionsamongwar,diseaseandenvironment.Thesestudieswillneedtobeconsideredcarefullybyhistoriansofwarandenvironment.EnvironmentalperspectiveswillinturnreinforceourunderstandingoftheworkoftheUnitedNationsHighCommissionforRefugeesandseveralinternationalnon‐governmentalorganizations.Imustalsopoint–andnotjustinpassing–toMcNeill’suseofhumorinwritingaboutasubjectthathasusuallybeentreatedasmelodramatic,tragic,ortechnical.Hisstartlingmetaphorsandsimiles,usuallyironicordark,startlethereader.Twoexamples,takenfrommany,illustratethepoint.Onp.234:“ThetinyfemaleAn.QuadrimaculatusstandstallamongthefoundingmothersoftheUnitedStates.”Andonp.188:“AtHavana,Britishsoldiershadthesatisfactionofdyingfromyellowfeverasvictors.”Theseimagesareaudaciousbutnotfrivolous,fortheyhighlightimportantanalyticalpoints.Inthisway,andintheclarityoftheexposition,McNeillpresentshiscaseinamannerthatwillbeaccessibletoawiderangeofacademicspecialists,asindicatedintheadmiringreviewintheTimesLiterarySupplementofJuly10,2010,bytrans‐AtlantichistorianGabrielPaquette.Thebookisalsoprovingtobeaccessibleforreadersoutsideacademiclife.RetiredmilitaryofficerswhocanneverforgetWorldWarIIinthePacificortheKoreanWartellmethattheirrekindledmemoriestakeonanewdimensionofmeaning.AndIhavegivenMosquitoEmpirestotwonon‐academicfriendswhohavespentmanyyearsintheAmericanandPacifictropics,withnofearthattheywouldconsidermeeitherquirkyoresoteric.Theyreportthatreadingthebookhasgiventhemafreshintegrativeperspectiveonthecontextoftheirownlives.Anyacademichistorianwouldappreciatethatvalidation.

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 17

ReviewbyPaulS.Sutter,UniversityofColorado

etmebeginbythankingJacobHamblinforprovidingaforumsuchasthis,andforinvitingmetocommentonJohnMcNeill’simportantnewbook.AsIseeit,thisforumallowsmetoapproachthebooksomewhatdifferentlythanI

mightifIwasreviewingitforanacademicjournal.Inparticular,Iwilltakethelibertyofspendingonlyamodestamountoftimerehearsingthebook’smajorarguments,summarizingitsdetails,andpraisingitsmanyvirtues.Instead,presumingthatthepurposeofthisforumistoprovokediscussion,IwanttoraiseseveralbroadquestionsaboutMcNeill’smethodologyandapproachinrelationtothefieldofenvironmentalhistory.Havingtheopportunitytoheartheauthor’sresponsestothesequestionswillbeoneoftheluxuriesofthisparticularformat.

Inhissweepingnewstudy,MosquitoEmpires:EcologyandWarintheGreaterCaribbean,1620­1914,theeminentenvironmentalhistorianJohnMcNeillarguesthatwecannotunderstandthreecenturiesofgeopoliticalhistoryinwhathecalls“theGreaterCaribbean”withoutappreciatingthecentralrolethatdiseaseplayed–specificallyyellowfeverand,toalesserextent,malaria–inshapingandconstrainingtheoutcomesofsettlement,economicdevelopment,and,particularly,warfare.McNeillmakesseveralimportantsub‐argumentstosupportthisbroadclaim.First,hecompellinglysuggeststhat,farfrombeingmereadjunctsofthetropics,yellowfeverandmalariaweretheproductsofa“Creoleecology”intheGreaterCaribbeanthatwasbuiltuponEuropeanandAfricanexchanges,theenvironmentaltransformationsthatcamewiththesugarplantationeconomy,andgrowingtradethroughportcities.Humanactivities,inotherwords,broughtthesediseasestotheCaribbeanandcreatedconditionsunderwhichtheythrived.Second,hedemonstratesthattheprevalenceofthesediseasesintheGreaterCaribbean,whencombinedwiththephysiologicaldynamicsofdifferentialimmunity,resultedinatwo‐phasegeopoliticaltrajectoryfortheregion.Fromthemiddleoftheseventeenthcenturytothelateeighteenthcentury,yellowfeverandmalariaassistedtheSpanishinmaintaininganempirethatwasotherwiseminimallyfortifiedandopentomilitarychallengebyotherEuropeanimperialpowers.Then,fromthelateeighteenthcenturywellintothenineteenth,andfromNorthAmerica’ssoutherncoloniestoHaitiandSurinam,thepresenceofthesediseasesabettedtheageofrevolutionbygrantingacriticaladvantagetolocalswithenhancedimmunitiesintheirbattlesagainstoutsidemilitaryforceslesswell‐equippedfromanepidemiologicalperspective.McNeillendshisstoryintheearly20thcentury,whenthediscoveriesofthemosquitovectorsforthesediseasesdramaticallyimprovedtheefficacyofsanitaryinterventionsandthusendedthegeopoliticalinfluenceoftheirravages(thoughthesediscoveriesalsousheredinanovelgeopoliticalarrangement,beyondthescopeofthebook,inwhichdiseasecontroljustifiedanewseriesofinterventionsintheGreaterCaribbeanbyanincreasinglypowerfulU.S.stateanditsnon‐governmentaladjunctssuchastheRockefellerFoundation).MosquitoEmpires’argumentaboutthesweepinginfluenceofthese

LL

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 18

diseasesonthehistoryoftheregionis,tothisreaderatleast,convincingandimpressive.

MosquitoEmpiresisabookfirmlycommittedtooneofenvironmentalhistory’sfoundationalclaims:thatwecannotfullyunderstandcertainaspectsofthehumanpastwithoutappreciatingtherolethatnon‐humannaturehasplayedinshapingthem.Indeed,MosquitoEmpiresisaninsistentexampleofhowandwhynaturehasmatteredtohumanaffairs.Assuch,Ithinkit’sappropriatetoseeMosquitoEmpiresasamodelfordoingenvironmentalhistoryinthetraditionofsuchdistinguishedscholarsasAlfredCrosby,whoseEcologicalImperialismdemonstratedthewaysinwhichdiseaseandotherecologicalfactorsaidedandabettedEuropeanexpansionintotemperateregionsoftheAmericas,Australasia,andsouthernAfrica;andPhilipCurtin,whoadaptedandreworkedmanyofCrosby’smeta‐themestoexaminehowandwhyEuropeansfailedintheireffortstosettleAfricaandhowtheforcedmigrationofAfricansthroughouttheneo‐tropicsresultedintropicalecologicalexchangesthatCrosbylargelyneglected.Liketheworkofthesescholars,McNeill’sbookisexpansive,ambitious,anderudite.Moreover,beyondbuildinganargumentofimpressivespatialandtemporalscale,hisisalsoaprojectrootedinfar‐flungarchivalresearchaswellasextensivereadinginsecondaryliteraturesinmultiplelanguages.Inshort,therearefewenvironmentalhistoriansworkingtodaywhocouldhavepulledoffsuchastudy.Forallthesereasons,andseveralothers,MosquitoEmpiresisaremarkableachievementandentirelyworthyoftheattentionthisforumisgivingit.

Butpraise,nomatterhowjustified,israrelyausefulcatalystforconversation,andsoIwanttoturnnowtoseveralobservationsandquestionsaboutcausationandnarration–abouthowenvironmentalhistoriansunderstandandanimatetheenvironmentasaforceforchangeovertime–thatlingeredwithmeafterreadingMosquitoEmpires.TheseareissuesthatIbelievearecriticaltothefutureofenvironmentalhistoryasadiscipline,andtohowweasadisciplinarycommunityargueforitslargerhistoricalimportance.

First,whileIfoundMosquitoEmpirestobesuperblyreasonedanddeeplyinformedinitsdiscussionsofthedetailsofhowandwhyyellowfeverandmalariaweresuchpowerfulshapingforcesintheGreaterCaribbeanfrom1650‐1900,anyonecloselyfollowingMcNeill’sargumentswillbestruckbyhowmuchspeculationisbuiltintohisanalysis.Thespeculationisnotsomuchatthelevelofthebroadargument;thereisplentyofdatatosuggestthatthesediseaseskilledextensivelyanddidsowithadiscriminationthatwasofgeopoliticalimport.Rather,thespeculationismostlyinthesecondarymechanicsofhowthesediseasesworkedinparticularplaces,anditusuallyoccurswhereincompletearchivalrecordsintersectwithMcNeill’sreconstruction,fromamodernscientificperspective,ofhowthesediseaseslikelyworked.SoIamlefttowonder,whatdoesitmeantobuildanargumentonsomuchcausalsupposition,andwhatarethepitfallsofdoingso?IshouldsaythatIwonderthisinpartbecauseIaminthemidstofaproject–anenvironmentalandpublichealthhistoryoftheconstructionofthePanamaCanal–

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 19

thatwillinvolveasimilarsetofspeculativeassumptions,thoughIwillhavetheadvantageofstudyingagroupofhistoricalactorswithamuchclearersenseoftheecologyofthesediseases.

Iwanttobeclearthatsuchspeculationisbothnecessaryandunavoidableifone’sgoalisareconstructionofthesortMcNeillattemptshere,andMcNeillisusuallyquitecandidaboutthespeculativenatureofhisefforts.Nonetheless,itseemstomethatcertainspeculationsentertheargumentintooforcefulorconvenientaway,andtheysometimescombinetobuildtowardsgeneralconclusionsinwhichthespeculativecaveatsfade.OnesmallexampleisMcNeill’slogicalsuggestionthatENSO(ElNiño/SouthernOscillation)eventsmayhaveaddedgravitytoparticulardiseaseoutbreaks,anargumentbaseduponscientificstudiesthathaveshownthatENSOweatherpatternscancreateimprovedbreedingconditionsforvectormosquitoes.Myconcernhereisnotsomuchwiththelogicofthesuppositionaswithitsselectiveapplication.WhencertaindiseaseoutbreakscombinedwithENSOevents,McNeillinsertsENSOasapotentialexacerbator(andinatleastonecasehespeculatesthattheabsenceofanENSOeventmighthavemadeanoutbreakmilder).Doesitmakesensethatthismighthavebeenthecase?Sure.Dowereallyknowwithanycertainty,giventhecomplex,multi‐causalnatureofdiseaseetiology?No.WastheremuchmorethatMcNeillcouldhavedonetofortifythisconnection?Inthiscase,theansweris“perhaps.”TheargumentforcausalsignificancemighthavebeenenhancedbycompletingathoroughcorrelationofknowndiseaseoutbreakswithknownENSOeventsoverthecenturiesunderconsiderationtoseewhatkindsofrelationshipsemerge.SuchastudywouldnothaveprovidedproofofENSO’sinfluence,butitwouldhavemadestrongerwhatiscurrentlyanargumentfromcoincidence.Icouldmakesimilarcommentsaboutotherspeculativeargumentsthatworkwithasimilarcausallogic:theinfluenceoflivestockonmalarialoutbreaks,forinstance,orwhetherpossibleprimatereservoirsmatteredtoparticularyellowfeveroutbreaks,oreventheissueofdifferentialimmunity,whichisattheheartofthebook’sargument.Inthelattercase,IshouldsaythatMcNeillprovidesasgoodadiscussionofthedetailsofhowandwhyimmunityemergestobothmalariaandyellowfeverasIhaveseeninthehistoricalliterature,buthisapplicationoftheprincipletoparticularcircumstancesstillstrikesmeasspeculative.InthecaseoftheAmericanRevolution,forinstance,McNeillarguesthatthepresumedexperiencewithandthusacquiredresistancetomalariaamongtroopsfromthesoutherncoloniesgavethemadecisiveadvantageagainstBritishtroopsfromoutsidetheregion–anargumentbuiltupondatathatshowthatBritishtroopssufferedingreaternumbersfromdiseases,includingpresumablyhighratesofmalaria,thandidcolonialforces.Butdowedefinitivelyknowthatdifferentialimmunitywasthemostsignificantforceatworkhere?Mighttherehavebeenotherfactorsthatcouldhavecontributedtodifferentialmorbidityandmortality?It’sultimatelyhardtoknow.Again,whiletheremaybeparticularplaceswhereIwouldtakeissuewithMcNeill’sspecificlogic,myconcernsandquestionsareofalargerorder:whatdoesitmeantobuildthedetailsofanargumentonconsiderablespeculation,nomatterhowwellreasoneditis,andcanahistorianattemptingsuchananalysisavoidthetemptationsofconvenienceandself‐service?Theseare,it

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 20

seemstome,questionsofparticularimportforenvironmentalhistorians,andtohowotherhistoriansreceiveenvironmentalhistory.

Thisleadsmetoasecondconcern,whatIwillcalltheproblemofargumentbysynecdoche.InMosquitoEmpires,itis,asthetitleindicates,themosquitothatoftencomestoembodyandstandinforthecomplexecologyandepidemiologyofmalariaandyellowfever.Inthiscase,thequestionthebookleftmewithwas,whatdoesitmeantoprivilegeapartofacomplexcausalprocess?Letmeexplain.Ifoneweretoaskwhatcausesdiseaseinaparticularplaceataparticulartime,theanswerswouldbemanyandinterlocking.Inthesimplestandmostreductivesense,avirusandaparasitearethespecificcausesofyellowfeverandmalariarespectively.Butforthesediseasestospread,theirvectorsmustbepresent,somosquitoesareobviouslycritical.Soarehumanbodiesofaparticularsort,andsometimesothermammalianbodies.Therearealsofactorssuchasclimate(temperature,rainfall,etc.),geography,topography,andenvironmentalconditionsthatplayimportantcausalroles.Onemightaddtothesesocialconditionssuchaspovertyormalnutritionorpoorhousingorparticularrelationsoflabororaparticularhistoricalstageofurbaninfrastructuraldevelopment.Onemightevenaddculturalexplanationsthatdifferentiatepatternsofdiseaseinplaceswhereenvironmentalandsocialconditionsweresimilar.Inotherwords,the“causes”ofthesediseasesaremanyandtheyspanthenature‐culturedivide.McNeilliswellawareofthis,andanyclosereadingofMosquitoEmpireswillmakethatclear.Indeed,thebookisatitsbestinitsdetailedreconstructionsofthecreoleecologyofthesediseases.Andyet,sometimesfornarrativesimplicityandsometimesforrhetoricalforce,McNeilloffersdecidedlyreductiveconclusionsthatusuallyimplicatemosquitoesasthecriticalnaturalagents.Togivebutoneexample,McNeillendsChapter6(“LordCornwallisvs.AnophelesQuadrimaculatus,1780‐1781”),achapterthatarguesthatmalariaplayedadecisiveroleinthesouthernmilitarycampaignsthatendedtheAmericanRevolution,byconcluding:“ThetinyfemaleAn.QuadrimaculatusstandstallamongthefoundingmothersoftheUnitedStates,”(233‐4).Whyisolatethemosquitoasthesingularcauseinthissummary?Whynotthemalariaparasites?Whynottheimmunesystemsthatallegedlymadecertainsoldiersbettercapableofhandlingbitingmosquitoesandtheparasitestheyspread?Whynotblameswampsorclimateormethodsofwatercollectionorothermaterialenvironmentalfactorsthatcontributedtomosquitobreeding?MypointhereisnotthatMcNeillmissestheimportanceoftheseotherforces,forhedecidedlydoesnot.Rather,mypointisthatviolenceisdonetotheargumentwhenthatcausalcomplexityisreducedtoasinglenaturalagent.Andthatviolence,Ibelieve,isattheheartofwhatmanywhoaredisposedtobecriticalofenvironmentalhistoryoftenfixuponandcalldeterminism.JohnMcNeillisfartoogoodandcarefulanhistoriantobeadeterminist;indeed,headdressestheissueandanticipatesthechargeinthetext.ButIamfairlycertainthathewillbeaccusedofbeingonebycertainreaders(andperhapswaschallengedonthispointinpeerreview?)asaresultofreductivesummarieslikethese.Theycertainlyprovidenarrativepunch,butIwonderifsuchreductivenessservesthecauseofenvironmentalhistory.

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 21

Onereason,Ithink,thatMcNeillmovestowardssummariessuchastheseisthatheisadedicatedmaterialistwhenitcomestoenvironmentalcausation.Themosquitoworksnicelyasastandinnotonlyfordiseaseandallofthefactorsthatcauseit,then,butalsoforthematerialnon‐humanenvironmentasaneglectedforceinhistory.Toadegree,Isharethatcommitmenttomaterialism.Indeed,inmylesstolerantmomentsIaminclinedtothinkthatenvironmentalhistory,bydefinition,mustdealwithmaterialcausesfirstandforemost.ButIalsothinkit’sworthnotingthewaysinwhichthegeneralmaterialismofMosquitoEmpiresrunsagainstthegrainofsomeofthebestrecentworkintheenvironmentalhistoryofhealthanddisease–GreggMitman’sBreathingSpace,LindaNash’sInescapableEcologies,andConeveryBoltonValenčius’sTheHealthoftheCountryinparticular.11Toanextent,wemightjustchalkupthesedifferencestothefactthatthesehistoriansareaskingdifferentquestions.WhereMcNeillisprimarilyinterestedindiseaseasamaterialcauseofcertainbroadgeopoliticaloutcomes,thesehistoriesaremorefocusedonquestionsabouttheculturalconstructionofdisease,howdiseasesandpublichealtheffortsshapedandrespondedtosocialandeconomicinequalities,andhowsufferersexperiencedtheirmaladiesandthusknewnaturethroughdiseaseandhealth.MosquitoEmpires,ontheotherhand,seekstodistilltheenvironmentaldimensionfromalargerfieldofcausationratherthantoinfuseenvironmentasacategoryofanalysisintothatlargercausalfield.Asaresult,theargumentcanbeabitreductiveandmonocausalpreciselybecauseitsetsouttoelevateoneparticularsetofcausesaboveothers.Or,toputitanotherway,McNeill’sveryquestion–howdidtheecologyofyellowfeverandmalariashapethegeopoliticsoftheGreaterCaribbean?–isaimedatgeneratingadistinctenvironmentalcausation.Andtheoneheproducesissuperb.ButIwonderwhathisenvironmentalanalysismighthavelookedlikeifhehadaskedquestionslessfocusedonisolatingenvironmentalexplanation,questionsthatrequiredthatenvironmentalanalysisbemorefullyintegratedwithothercausalfactors.Ratherthanasking,forinstance,howdiseaseprovedcrucialtothesuccessoftheHaitianRevolution,tociteoneofhismostcompellingexamples,whatifMcNeillhadasked,simply,howdoweexplaintheoutcomeoftheHaitianRevolution?McNeill’sbookconvincesusthatwecannotanswerthatlatterquestionwithouttakingintoaccountdiseaseecology,butitdoesn’tshowushowtofullyintegratediseaseecologywiththemanyotherfactorsthatshapedthatoutcome.Anditleadsmetowonderwhetherenvironmentalhistoriesthatemphasizeenvironmentalcausationattheexpenseofotherfactors–oftenwiththeexpressedlogicthatplentyofpeoplehavealreadyexplainedthepoliticalorsocialoreconomicaspectsofthisorthattopic–ultimatelymakethecasefortheimportanceofenvironmentalhistoryattheexpenseofbothbalkanizingitandmakingitseemtoodeterministic.

11 Gregg Mitman, Breathing Space: How Allergies Shape our Lives and Landscapes (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2007); Linda Nash, Inescapable Ecologies: a History of Environment, Disease, and Knowledge (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2006); Conevery Bolton Valenčius, The Health of the Country: How American Settlers Understood Themselves and Their Land (New York: Basic Books, 2002).

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 22

Toanextent,McNeillalreadyansweredmanyofthequestionsraisedhere,inabriefsectionatthebeginningofthebookinwhichhediscussessomeofthelimitationsofhisargument.Itisworthquotingatlength.“This,then,”hewritesofMosquitoEmpires:

isnotquiteanessayinmosquitodeterminism,orevenenvironmentaldeterminism,althoughattimesitwillseemjustthat.Intryingtohighlightwhatisnovelinthisargument,Iwill,asauthorsoftendo,underplayotherconsiderations.Iwillmakemycaseinboldandbaldterms,andnotrepeatendlesslytherelevantcaveatsandqualifications.Passagestakenontheirownwillseemfartoodeterministicforsomereaders,withasimplisticsenseofcauseandeffect...But,Ihope,thebooktakenasawholewillseemtoprovideablendedperspectivethatemphasizesthemutualandreciprocalimpactsofgeopoliticsandecology.Eachguidedtheotherinanongoingprocess,acotillionofco‐evolution.(6‐7)

Fairenough.ButIalsowonderwhetherMcNeillcouldhavewrittenthisbookinawaythatavoidedtheneedforsuchanapologia.Maybenot.Thecaveatsandcomplexitiesmaywellhaveoverwhelmedtheambitionsofthissweepinghistory.Butoneresult,itseemstome,isthatthiswillbeahistorythatwillcommandtheattentionoffuturescholarsinelucidatingthedetailsofthevariouscasesthatMcNeilldiscussesinbroadterms.Moreover,Iamnotreallysurethathehasconsistentlyproducedthe“blendedperspective”thathehopesfor,ofsufficientlyfillsoutallthatexistsinthegapbetweengeopoliticsandecology,thoughagainthatmighthavemadeforadenserandlesscompellingnarrative.Therearecertainlymanypointsatwhichhisargumentelegantlytakesaccountofmultiplelayersofcausation,buttheveryquestionsguidingthestudy,andthescaleatwhichtheanalysisoperates,meanthattheconclusionsoftendoseembothboldandbald.Andperhapsthat’sthepoint.Ultimately,MosquitoEmpires,initsbreadthandambitionaswellasitsboldnessandbaldness,isabookthatdeservestheattentionandadmirationofscholars,abookwhosetruelegacywillbetheconversationsthatitprovokesandtheproductivequestionsthatflowtherefrom.

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 23

Author’sResponsebyJ.R.McNeill,GeorgetownUniversity

irstthingsfirst:IamdeeplygratefultoallconcernedfortheopportunitytoengagewiththoughtfulcommentaryonmybookMosquitoEmpires.IamdoublygratefultoprofessorsBrady,McCook,SutterandTuckerforthemany

kindwordsintheirassessmentsofthebook.ButasPaulSutternotes,kindwords,welcomeastheyare,rarelygiverisetofruitfulexchanges.Intheparagraphsthatfollow,IwilladdresssomeoftheissuesraisedandcriticismsofferedasbestIcan.McCooknotesthatMosquitoEmpiresisconcernedwithepisodesinwhichdifferentialimmunity(orresistance)shapedpoliticalevents,butdoesnotgointoepisodesinwhichtheabsenceofyellowfeverormalaria,ortheabsenceofdifferentialresistance,affectedtheoutcomesofwarsorrevolutions.WhenIfirstreadhisremarksonthishead,myreflexivereactionwasalongthelinesof:“Of,course,that’sbecauseIwaspointingouttheremarkableratherthanthemundane.IfahurricanechangesthepoliticalbalancebeforeanelectioninJamaica,orasnowstormdoesthesameinChicago,thatisworthdrawingattentionto,butifthereisnohurricaneorsnowstorm,whyshouldanyonebringthatup?”Butmysecondreactionmightbemoreinteresting.McCookexplainsthatwiththeendoftheslavetrade(agradualprocessextendingroughlyfrom1807to1850)theopportunityforre‐introductionofAedesaegyptiandofyellowfevervirusdirectlyfromWestandWest‐centralAfricanarrowedsharply.Thedeclineofsugarplantations(outsideofCuba)afterabout1830diminishedA.aegpytibreedinghabitat.So,reasonsMcCook,thescopeforyellowfeverintheWestIndiesbecamemorerestricted,atleastoutsideofCubawherethesugareconomythrivedthroughoutthenineteenthcentury.Thisisplausible,ifasPaulSuttermightnote,speculative.Ofcoursetherewereseveralyellowfeveroutbreaksafter1830,butindeedtheyseemtohavebeenfewerandsmallerthanthoseintheeighteenthcentury.ButtheplacewherethisdynamicwassurelymoststronglyatworkwasintheUnitedStates.ThatisbecauseA.aegypticouldnotoverwinternorthofFloridaandhadtobere‐introducedeverysummerfromsomewherewarm,presumablyeithertropicalAfricaortheWestIndies.WiththeabolitionoftheslavetradetotheU.S.in1808,oneavenueforA.aegpytitoNorthAmericadisappearedalmostcompletely.WiththedeclineofCaribbeansugarproductionoutsideofCuba,routesbetweentheU.S.AtlanticseaboardandtheWestIndieswereperhapslessoftenused,andthemainremainingpathwayforre‐introductionlaybetweenCubaandtheGulfofMexicoports,notablyNewOrleans.AllthismighthelpexplainwhyyellowfeverstoppedattackingPhiladelphia,NewYork,andBaltimoreaftertheearly19thcentury,andbecamelessofamenaceinSavannahandCharleston,butkepthammeringNewOrleans.IwishIhadthoughtofthissubjectbeforeIfinishedthebook,becauseitbearsinvestigation.IshouldhaveaskedMcCooktoreadthemanuscript!

FF

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 24

BradynotesthatwomenscarcelyfigureinthestoriestoldinMosquitoEmpires.Thisisentirelyaccurate.Iwasfullyawareofitwhenwritingthebook,andonthealertforwaystochangeit.But,forreasonsBradyoffers,Ifoundnowaytoavoidamale‐dominatednarrative(mosquitoesaside).InearlymodernEuropeanwarfare,womenroutinelymarchedandcampedwitharmiesinthefield,tendedthesickandwounded,cooked,washed,andsewed,andnodoubtmuchelsebesides.JohnLynnhassummarizedtheslenderavailableevidence.12Butwomenweremuchlesslikelytobeinvolvedwithexpeditionaryforcessentacrossoceans,orwithmilitiasraisedincolonialoutposts.So,atleastasfarasthesurvivingdocumentationindicates,womenwerescarcelypresentinthemilitaryeventsdescribedinmybook.Inthesettlementefforts,atDarienandatKourou,womenwereinvolved,andwheneverIfoundevidenceofthatImentionedit.Theonlyrealdiscussionofwomenaswomeninthebookconcernsthebelief,widelyheldinthe17thand18thcentury,thatwomenwerelessvulnerabletoyellowfeverthanweremen.Thisisalmostcertainlyuntrue,anillusionproducedbydifferentialriskofexposuretomosquitoandvirus.Theotherdiscussions,ormentions,concernforexampleAfrican‐Americanhealerswhojusthappenedtobefemale.SoIthoughtaboutthismatter,struggledwithit,butfoundnosensiblewaytofeaturewomenmoreprominently.BesidesthetwoBonaparteswhomBradynotes,theindexincludestwootherwomen,slavesnamedCubaCornwallisandJoannarespectively.ButBrady’spointstandsnonetheless.BradyalsoraisestheissueoftheU.S.CivilWar,amatteronwhichshehasconsiderableexpertiseandwhichIdealwithonlyonpp.292‐94.Myclaimisthatyellowfeverandmalariahadonlyaminorimpactonthatwarandnoimpactonitsoutcome.IhadhadsomeexchangeswithAndrewBellduringthewritingofmybook,althoughhisowncameouttoolateformetociteit.IthinkthatfearofyellowfeverandmalariadidaffectthestrategicplanningoftheUnionforcesintheCivilWar,butnottheresultofthewar.Togethertheyaccountedforunder2%ofdiseasedeathsintheUnionArmy(healthrecordsfortheConfederateArmydidnotsurvive).SotheroleofthesediseasesintheCivilWarwasratherdifferentfromwhatIclaimwasthepatternintheWestIndies,wheretheyroutinelykilledmostofthemenwhodiedoncampaign.Manysoldiersfellillwithmalaria,itistrue,anddeathisnottheonlywayinwhichdiseasecanbeimportant.ButunlessIcouldarguethatmalariahamstrungtheConfederacycontributingnon‐triviallytoitsdefeat,whichinthefirstinstanceisprobablynottrueandinthesecondwouldrequiredocumentationthatdoesnotexist,theCivilWarseemstomeacaseapart.Forreasonsexplainedinthebook,yellowfeverandmalariadidnotwreaknearlythehavoctheynormallydidintheWestIndieswars.TheyformaninterestingaspectoftheCivilWar,wellpresentedinBell’sbook,butIstillthinkacaseapartbecauseothermattersgovernedtheoutcomeofthatcontest.BradyalsofoundherselfunabletomaketheleapoffaithinvolvedtobelievethatmonkeyshadaplaceinthestoryofdiseaseandwarintheWestIndies.Thisis12 John Lynn, Women, Armies, and Warfare in Early Modern Europe (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008).

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 25

perhapsanexampleofthemoregeneralpointthatSutterraises,thatoftheproportionofspeculationinmybook.Asregardsmonkeys,Ididindeedspeculatethattheymighthaveservedasareservoirofyellowfevervirusexplainingitsfrequentirruptioninareasfarfromitstypicalurbanfoci.TheyapparentlydosoinAmazoniatoday.Butiftheydidsointhepast,neitherInoranyoneelseknowsforsure.Mybookisindeedfullofspeculationsofthissort.Again,Iwasawareofthiswhilewriting,andtriedtoidentifymyspeculationsasjustthatinthetext.But,asSuttersuggests,thisisawiderissueforenvironmentalhistory.Abigpartofthereasonforthat,Ithink,isthatsoils,snakes,andsulfurdioxidedonotleavememoirsandmemoranda.Theyscarcelyshowupinarchives.Historianswhoconfinethemselvestoaversionofthepastthatisreliablydocumentedmustsaylittleifanythingaboutthem.Asforvirusesandplasmodia,theyleftevenfewertracesbecausebefore1890snobodywasawaretheyexisted.Butexisttheydid.Theissueofdocumentationisageneraloneforhistorybutespeciallyinterestingforenvironmentalhistory.Atroot,theissueisaquestionofwhatistheproperambitionforhistorians.Isittoofferthemostplausiblevisionofthepast,ortoofferareliablydocumentedvisionofthepast?Theformernecessarilyrequiresspeculation,andcouldthereforeeasilybemisleading.Thelatteravoidsspeculation,butmustleavelargeblanks.Whatcanhistorianssayaboutsub‐SaharanAfricabefore1800thatisreliablydocumented?WhatcantheysayaboutthelivesofIndianpeasantsorChinesewomenbefore1500?Verylittleindeed.Asaprofessionaldiscipline,historyemergedinatimeandplacethatmadethenotionofreliabledocumentationarealisticambition.In19th‐centuryGermany,aslongashistorywasunderstoodtoconcerntheaffairsofEuropeanstates,historianscouldaspiretocarefuldocumentationandcoulddisciplinethemselvestoavoidsayingthingstheycouldnotdocument.But,ashistoryevolvedsoastoincludethestudyoftimesandplaceswithouttextualrecords(mosttimesandplaces,asithappens),andtoincludethestudyofpeoplewholeftnotextualtraces,thisevidentiarystandardbecameasuffocatingconstraint.Thosewhostillaccepteditweretemptedtosay,astheRegiusProfessorofModernHistorydidintheearly1960s,thatAfricahasnohistory.Evenwithinregionswithlongtraditionsofsurvivingdocumentation,saynortheasternChinaorsouthernEurope,onlytinypartsofhumanexperiencewereseenasworthytobecommittedtopaper(orclaytablet,papyrus,etc.),andonlyrandomsubsetsofthatpapersurvivedcenturiesoffire,flood,decay,andpaperrecycling.Sohistoriansfindthemselvestemptedbyspeculation,whileatthesametimeheirstoadisciplinaryculturethateitherdisallowsitoratleastcautionsagainstit.And,asIsaidabove,theproblemofevidentiarystandardsgrowsmoreacuteifhistorianselecttotakeintoaccountthenon‐humanworld.ThisissuewasoneIwasfullyawareofbeforewritingMosquitoEmpires.Myapproachistotakeheartfromthebehaviorofastrophysicists.Almostallofthembelieveinsomethingtheycall‘darkmatter,’althoughtheycannotseeit.Indeed

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 26

theythinkmostofthematterintheUniverse,about80%,isinvisibletothem.Buttheyaresuredarkmatteristhere,becausesomethingisexertinggravitationalpullonmanyobjectstheycansee,andcertainobservedphenomena,suchastherotationalspeedsofgalaxies,areinexplicablewithoutdarkmatter.AsIseeit,historyispackedwiththeequivalentofdarkmatter.Historianscouldchoosetoignoreit,onthegroundsthattheycannotseeitinthesurvivingdocuments.Butthentheycouldnotexplainmostofwhattheycanseeinhumanhistory.ThusIfindmyselfamongthosehistorianswhochafeattheconstraintofreliabledocumentation,andunabashedlyengageinspeculation,inhopesofpresentingamaximallyplausiblevisionofthepast.Sutteralsofindsacertain“reductiveness”inmyprose,ahabitofusingmosquitoestostandforacomplexconfigurationsofconditionsandconnectionsthatunderlieepidemics.ThiswassomethingIdidnotdofullyintentionallyorconsciously.IhadnotnoticedituntilSutterpointeditout.Butitappearsfrequentlyintheintroductionsandconclusionstochaptersandsub‐chapters,andinthetitleofthebookaswellasthetitleofChapter6.AsIreflectuponit,IsuspectallIintendedwasbrevityandsimplicity.Iesteemthosequalitiesingeneral,andwhenIwritebooksItryhardtoachievebrevityandsimplicityinhopesofexpandingmyaudience.Twoinspirationsguideme.Thefirstismymother,whoreadmostofwhatIpublisheduntilsoonbeforeherdeathin2006.ShehadacollegeeducationandafinecommandofEnglish,butnointellectualpretensions.Shenevervoluntarilyreadanythingmorechallengingthanmurdermysteries.Iwanttowritemybooksinalanguagethatshecouldunderstandandperhapsenjoy,evenifsheisnolongeraroundtodoso.ButIthinktherearemanypeoplelikeher,orlikeRichardTucker’s‘non‐academic’friends.ThesecondinspirationistheNewZealandphysicist,SirErnestRutherford(1871‐1937),whoallegedlysaidthatallgoodphysicscouldbeexplainedtoabarmaid.Wemightprefertheterm‘server’or‘barista’nowadaysofcourse.ButIadmirehispointnonetheless:withenougheffort,itshouldbepossibletopresenttheessenceofcomplexmatterssimplyandbrieflyenoughtowintheattentionofpeoplewhowouldgrowimpatientwithbaroquelanguage(orpostmoderndialect)andfullrespectforsocialandecologicalcomplexitiesateveryturn.ThatiswhatIbelieveIwashopingtoachievewhenconscriptingmosquitoesasstand‐insforcomplexconfigurations.Thereisprobablyanother,related,reasonbehindmyfrequentresortto“reductiveness.”In(pale)imitationofAlfredCrosby,Ihaveaweaknessforattemptingphrasesorsentencesthatmightbememorableorprovocative.So,forexample,theoneabouttinyanophelesmosquitoesstandingtallamongfoundingmothersoftheAmericanrepublic,whichseemstohavecaughttheattentionofthreereadersforthreedifferentreasons,alsorepresentsatemptationIsuccumbedtointhishope.

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 27

This“reductiveness”isnot,asfarasIcantell,thereasonIwroteanintroductionthattacklestheissueofenvironmentaldeterminism.Norwasthatintroductionaresponsetopeerreview.Iwrotethatbecauseenvironmentaldeterminismisachargethatdogssomeenvironmentalhistory(andsomeotherscholarshipaswell).IleveledthataccusationmyselfagainstJaredDiamond’sGuns,Germs,andSteelataboutthesametimeIwasgettingunderwaywithMosquitoEmpires.AndinthosedaysRichardGrovegood‐naturedlyaccusedmeofmosquitodeterminismwheneverIaccusedhimofElNiñodeterminism.SotheissueofenvironmentaldeterminismwasintheforefrontofmymindasIworkedonthebook,andadozenormoreaudiencesfortalksIgaveonthebookkeptitthere.Itisaseriousandjustifiedobjectioninmanycases,andsoIwantedtoexplainmypositiononitattheoutset.AndIwasawarethatifIdidso,Icouldstreamlinethebookandavoidrepeatingthecautionsandcaveatsthroughout.TheriskIchose,then,istheoneSutterpointsto:thatsomereaderswilllosesightofthatintroduction,willlosesightofthetreatmentsofsocialandecologicalcomplexitywithinthechapters,andreadtheshorthandusagesof“mosquitoes”asoverlydeterministic.ToavoidtheriskImighthavefleshedouteachpassagewithappropriatecaveatsandcomplexities–attheriskoflosingtheattentionofmymotherandherilk.OrImighthavewrittenadifferentbook,perhapsconfiningmyselftotheHaitianRevolutionorthesiegeofCartagena,andexploredthefullrangeofcausation,balancingdiseaseandenvironmentwitheverythingelse.Thatwouldhavecomeatacost,however,asitwouldnotlayoutthepatterns,thesystematicpartisanimpactofyellowfeverandmalariaacrossabroadspaceandoverthreecenturies.Asinmostoflife,inwritingbookstherearetradeoffs.SutteralsonotesthatMosquitoEmpires‘runsagainstthegrain’ofmuchgoodrecentworkintherealmoftheenvironmentalhistoryofhealthanddisease.ThistoowassomethingIrecognizedfromtheoutset.Inmyyoungerday,Iwouldhaveworriedmoreaboutit.AtmanyofthetalksIgave,especiallythosethathadtheword‘disease’inthetitle,audienceswantedmetoaddressthesocialorculturalconstructionofdisease,orperhapsofyellowfeverormalariaspecifically.Workalongthoselineswouldsurelyberewarding,butIfeltnourgetoconformtoexpectations.Iamcontenttoletothersdoit,andwriteonlywhatIwanttowrite.Thisisalibertythatcomeswithage,growingcussedness,andtenure.Ifeltmoreuneaseatanothernonconformityinthebook.WhendiscussingEuropeanmedicine’sineffectiveapproachestoyellowfeverandmalaria,Ididnotkeepcompanywiththehistoriansofmedicinewhoscrupulouslysympathizewiththelimitationswithwhichmedicalthinkerscontendedinpastcenturies.Instead,Iincludedsomeofthewackier(bytoday’sstandards)ideasandtreatmentswhichseemedtomeamusing.Ididnotmockmedicineanddoctors(MolièreandSmollettcorneredthatmarketlongago),butwroteofthemwithironyandbemusement–againstthegrainofserioushistoryofmedicine.Intellectually,Ihavetosidewiththehistoriansofmedicineagainstmyself.ButIchose,consciously,tosuccumbtothistemptationaswell.Inote,withadditionalunease,thatIwouldprobablynot

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 28

havedonesohaditbeenAfricanorAmerindianhealers,ratherthanEuropeandoctors,blisteringpatients’scalpswithcauteringironsandadministeringhorse‐dungposset.Inhiscommentary,RichardTuckernotesmyresorttoirony.MosquitoEmpiresasawholeisbuiltonironies.TheironythatAfricandiseasesbroughttotheWestIndiesin(mainly)Africanbodies,combinedwithAfricans’resistance,acquiredorinherited,tothesediseasesradicallyimprovedtheoddsthatAfricanswouldbesoughtasslavesforWestIndianplantations.TheironythatthemorepeoplewhomigratedtotheWestIndies,themoredangerousitsdiseaseenvironmentbecame.Theironythatthelargeramilitaryexpeditionwas,thegreatertheoddsitwouldbedestroyedbydisease.TheironythatthemostsociallyandmilitarilypowerfulpeopleintheWestIndiesweretheweakestinthefaceofyellowfeverandmalaria.TheancientGreeksthoughtthatthegodsamusedthemselvestoyingwithourhopes,ambitions,andvanities.AsaresidentofWashingtonDC,Iamdailyremindedofthemyriadwaysinwhichcircumstances(not,asfarIcantell,Zeusandhisilk)conspiretofoilhumanambitions,thewaysinwhichtheforcesofcosmicironyundermineourprojectsandoverwhelmourconceits.PerhapsbecauseIspendsomanyofmywakinghoursatauniversityunusuallydedicatedtothedetailedscrutinyofthepoliciesandintentionsofthegreatpowersoftheday,Ifindmyselfunusuallyattractedtosituationalironyandunintendedconsequencesinhumanaffairs.LastlyIwishtosettherecordstraightwithrespecttoProf.Brady’scommentthatI“effortlessly”guidemyreadersthroughtherelationshipsbetweengeopoliticsandecology.Iwishithadbeeneffortless,butthatisnotatallthewayIrememberit!

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 29

AbouttheContributors

LisaM.BradyearnedherPh.D.attheUniversityofKansasin2003.SheteachescoursesinenvironmentalhistoryandontheAmericanCivilWaratBoiseStateUniversity,wheresheiscurrentlyAssociateProfessor.Herprimaryresearchinterestisintheenvironmentalhistoryofwarfare,butextendstoothertypesofconflictaswell.SheiscurrentlyworkingonahistoryofconflictandenvironmentalchangeontheKoreanpeninsuladuringthe20thcentury.Herfirstbook,tentativelytitled"WarupontheLand:NatureandStrategyintheAmericanCivilWar,"isundercontractwithUniversityofGeorgiaPress.JacobDarwinHamblinearnedadoctorateinHistoryfromtheUniversityofCalifornia,SantaBarbarain2001.BeforehisarrivalatOregonStateUniversity,heheldresearchorteachingpositionsattheCentreAlexandreKoyréd’HistoiredesSciencesetdesTechniques(Paris),CaliforniaStateUniversity,LongBeach,andClemsonUniversity.HeistheauthorofOceanographersandtheColdWar(UniversityofWashingtonPress,2005)andPoisonintheWell:RadioactiveWasteintheOceansattheDawnoftheNuclearAge(Rutgers,2008).StuartMcCookisAssociateProfessorofHistoryandAssociateDeanofArtsattheUniversityofGuelph.Hisresearchisontheenvironmentalhistoryoftropicalcommodities.Heiscurrentlywritingaglobalhistoryofthecoffeerustepidemic,andisalsostartingresearchonanenvironmentalhistoryofthecoffeeplant.J.R.McNeillearnedaB.A.fromSwarthmoreCollegeandaPh.D.fromDukeUniversity.Since1985hehasservedasafacultymemberoftheSchoolofForeignServiceandHistoryDepartmentatGeorgetown.From2003until2006heheldtheCincoHermanosChairinEnvironmentalandInternationalAffairs,untilhisappointmentasUniversityProfessor.Heteachesworldhistory,environmentalhistory,andinternationalhistoryatGeorgetown;andwritesbooks,anddirectsPh.D.students,mainlyinenvironmentalhistory.PaulS.SutterisAssociateProfessorofHistoryattheUniversityofColorado,Boulder.HeistheauthorofDrivenWild:HowtheFightagainstAutomobilesLaunchedtheModernWildernessMovement(UniversityofWashingtonPress,2002),co‐authorofTheArtofManagingLongleaf:APersonalHistoryoftheStoddard­NeelApproach(UniversityofGeorgiaPress,2010),andco‐editorofEnvironmentalHistoryandtheAmericanSouth:AReader(UniversityofGeorgiaPress,2009).HealsohaspublishednumerousarticlesandbookchaptersontheAmericanwildernessmovement,southernenvironmentalhistory,U.S.imperialenvironmentalhistory,andothertopics,andheistheacademiceditorofthe“EnvironmentalHistoryandtheAmericanSouth”bookseriespublishedbytheUniversityofGeorgiaPress.

H­EnvironmentRoundtableReviews,Vol.1,No.1(2011) 30

RichardP.TuckerisAdjunctProfessorintheSchoolofNaturalResourcesandEnvironmentattheUniversityofMichigan.HeistheauthorofInsatiableAppetite:TheUnitedStatesandtheEcologicalDegradationoftheTropicalWorld(UniversityofCaliforniaPress,2000).HecontinuestodoresearchandwritingonthehistoryofAmericancapitalinvestmentintropicalandsubtropicalnaturalresources,andtheexpansionofAmericanconsumermarketsfortropicalproducts,includingmineralsandpetroleum.HiscurrentprimaryresearchistheenvironmentalconsequencesofwarsandmilitarypreparationsaroundtheworldsinceWorldWarI.