Theory "continental axis" occupies the minds of scientists for decades. According to her, the more chances for prosperity and the rule have civilization living on an extended from East to West territory. The inhabitants "vertical" of the States, elongated from North to South, more likely to suffer from civil wars and die. Is this a strange idea has a scientific basis? American researchers believe that found a link between geography and progress.

Geographer Jared diamond in his famous book "Guns, germs and steel", released in 1997, said: one of the reasons why the world is ruled by Eurasian civilization, is that his native continent more elongated in the direction East-West, than from North to South. This, at first glance, absurd theory he was supported by some reasonable arguments.

First of all, we must remember that the length of the territory depends on the variety of climatic zones. Country, stretched latitude (North to South), cover more areas with different climate, and therefore variegated flora and fauna. Unfortunately, such a nice variety has its drawbacks. Agricultural innovation slowly spread from one region to another - and it is for them, according to diamond, should culture.

Indeed, the world has entered a new stage of development, learning how to grow plants and cattle. In the state with "motley" climate zones innovations spread worse, as the inhabitants of each region must adapt them to fit their conditions.

But in the countries and whole continents, covering a narrow strip latitudes, less diversity of climates, which means that it is home to plants and animals adapted to approximately the same conditions. This advantage, says diamond, proved decisive in the fight for progress. That is why Eurasian civilization took the lead, he said.

American researchers from Stanford University decided to check this hypothesis. Because continents too little to ensure statistical reliability of the findings, scientists have focused on individual countries. As an indicator of cultural diversity in their model was the persistence of languages. The experts analysed the survival rate of languages of indigenous peoples in 147 countries that have different shapes.

For example, Mongolia, whose width" about twice "height", compared with Angola, shaped like a square. The study also took into account the proximity to the equator (historically, these areas linguistic diversity above), the highland areas (as mountain ridge can be a barrier to language contact), and the age of the state (in younger countries more languages, because the population had little time to mix and to develop a common).

It turned out that in countries extending the breadth, the likelihood of many indigenous languages below. The researchers even brought a percentage, which naturally depended on the length of the state from North to South or East to West. For example, in Mongolia, width," which is about twice the size "height", this probability preservation of indigenous languages by five percent less than in Angola, shaped like a square. Meanwhile, in Peru (width," which is about twice less "height") survival of languages by five percent higher than in Angola. Languages replaced with new ones, and progress should be faster - this is quite a controversial conclusion made by scientists from Stanford.

Researchers for some reason rejected the possibility that the observed effect may be due to the greater interest of countries extending from East to West, in the centralization of the state and the creation of a single national language. They argue that repeated the simulations involving 538 "artificial" countries (models created by combining existing States with neighbors) and got the same result.

The idea of the geographical location of the countries affects their development probably makes some sense. But Eurasian civilization, which, according to diamond, is a leader on progress at the moment is preoccupied by the preservation of endangered languages. As life shows, they miraculously preserve the traces of culture and history, which may be useful to existing generations.

This perfectly illustrates the example with the name of the fish living in canadian lakes. In these basins are two species of fish, like trout in the English language was called "steelhead trout" (literally - "Steelhead trout"and "cutthroat trout" ("slaughtered trout", "trout with his throat slit" - the name came from peculiarities of the coloring of fish). However, on halkomelem - language Indian tribe Macvim, once inhabited the territory of modern Canada, these fish called salmon. The aborigines were not mistaken: genetic analysis showed that both belonged to the subfamily of salmon and not trout.

Indeed, States with cultural and geographical diversity have their strengths and weaknesses development. How justified is an American study who took the survival of indigenous languages as an indicator of stagnation culture, is not clear.