The current paper is an argumentative essay that aims to provide a reasonable disagreement with William Swinton’s thesis on human history development. According to Swinton, there is only one “civilization of progress”, and it belongs to European people (Aryan races). The statement appears to be unreasonable due to the existence of numerous well-known facts in world history that explain the failure of Swinton’s abovementioned argument. In the first part of the present essay, William Swinton’s thesis is presented. The following work presents counterarguments to his ideas by challenging Swinton’s arguments.
To present a reasonable disagreement with the thesis, a summary of Swinton’s ideas should be provided. William Swinton is an American journalist and a historical writer. Swinton developed the abovementioned thesis in his famous text called “Outlines of General History”, which was published in 1874. The main idea of the author is the following: the Aryan people are the race of progress, and they are responsible for the main contributions to the global civilization process. By stating that, William Swinton minimized or even doubted the contribution of other races to the development of human history. In today’s world, this historical view is narrow-minded, not progressive, and, according to many anthropologists, even scientifically racist. However, this opinion was popular and widespread at the end of the nineteenth century and was taught in high schools and universities. Below, the fallacy of this approach is supported by historical examples and logical reasoning.
First of all, one of the arguments that challenge Swinton’s idea of the only one “civilization of progress” is an oversimplification of the rich and complex history of mankind that he defines through a single race. The history of the world and the progress are global and should be considered through the development of different civilizations and people rather than through the focus on the European people as something superior. History is a continuous interaction of different cultures and civilizations, which leads to the overall “progress”. Thus, it is obvious that the aforementioned “civilization of progress” is a failed concept, because it rejects the logic of development through interaction.
Secondly, it is truly wrong to ignore the contribution of other great civilizations to the overall development and historical progress. William Swinton considers world history from the narrow “European people” perspective, leaving forgotten the contribution of other cultures. For instance, the Khmer civilization had a considerable impact on the development of other civilizations. The Khmer civilization existed on the territory of modern Cambodia, Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, and Myanmar. Khmer developed strong trading relationships throughout East Asia, India, Europe, and Africa (passing through Silk Road, and traveling both overland and maritime trade routes), and thus, clearly influencing other cultures and being a part of the overall world and civilizations progress.
To sum up, briefly, the present essay argues that William Swinton’s thesis is an erroneous concept in terms of historical examples and logical argumentation. History demonstrates that all the different cultures and civilizations were tightly connected and influenced each other. To state that European people were the only one “civilization of progress” means to deny the progress of other cultures, which is completely wrong in terms of historical facts.