The distinctive characteristic of a mountain land is the height of
isolated groups. Great differences of elevation within small distances
characterize mountain regions; small differences within great distances
characterize plateaus. The plateau depends upon uniform evenness of
surface, or an approximation to it, over a large extent of territory.
The mountain range is the exact opposite, the development of all kinds
of extremes within a limited space, and the consequent individualization
of the locality where it stands. Mountain lands cannot therefore be
identified with the type of the highland and the plateau. The mountain
chain has a character of its own, whether existing in unbroken unity, or
subdivided into subordinate ranges, ridges, and spurs, and whether the
summits are conical or sharply pointed,—whether also of moderate, medium,
or loftiest elevation.
And high as mountains rise, their height is equivalenced by the depth of
the depressions which form their valleys; the higher the mountain, the
deeper the abyss which cleaves to the base. The immensely elevated peaks
of the loftiest chains find their correspondence in the narrow ravines
and the mountain lakes at the foot; the precipitous summits of the great
American chain have their barrancos in the Andes and their cañons in the
Rocky Mountains. The valleys are in natural contrast with the summits.
They have just as little of the uniformity of lowland plains as the
mountain tops have of the uniformity of elevated table-lands. They are
infinite in variety, highly individualized, and always adapt themselves
to the characteristics of the chain which conditions them. The mountain,
too, has no uniformity in its character; it embraces within the smallest
compass the production of all climes, and unites the characteristics of
both highland and lowland. Mountain regions have therefore had a great
influence in history and in the development of humanity, even greater
than the more monotonous plateaus, which in general harbor nomadic
races and give little encouragement to permanently settled people. For
this reason the geographer cannot, like the geologist, classify high
table-lands and mountains together; he cannot draw the same inferences
from the plateau as from the mountain range; to the geographer the
plateau is not a lower type of mountain, but the two, in their relations
to man and to history, suggest entirely different results and condition
entirely different processes.
And yet it must be confessed that mountains do stand in intimate
connection with plateaus of both classes, and that the transitions from
the one form to the other are well worthy of study. Yet the present lack
of correct measurements has made this little understood.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account