An Introduction to Mountains - Mountain Geography: Physical and Human Dimensions - page 3

In many cultures, mountains have special spiritual, cultural, and sacred significance.
Inspirational to most, mountains are held sacred by more than 1 billion people world-
wide (Bernbaum 1997; Mathieu 2011; this volume, Chapter 9). As the highest and most
impressive features of the landscape, mountains tend to reflect the highest and most
central values and beliefs of cultures throughout the world. In the United States, moun-
tain environments such as those found in the Rocky Mountains of the West or the Ap-
palachians of the East enshrine cultural and spiritual values basic to American society,
embodying what is interpreted as the original, unsullied spirit of the nation; others are
sacred to native American peoples. The Japanese reverence for beauty in nature, an in-
tegral part of religious observance, bestows upon Mount Fuji a symbolic meaning for
the entire nation. At 6,705 m (22,000 ft), Mount Kailash in Tibet is sacred to over a bil-
lion Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, and followers of the Bon religion.
Defining Mountains
Everyone can agree that every mountain has a summit. But how high should a feature
be to be considered a “mountain,” and how much of the Earth's surface do mountain
areas cover? Such questions have long been discussed by geographers, explorers,
mountain people, and mountaineers (Mathieu 2011).
During the 1930s, it became fashionable among members of various U.S. alpine clubs
to climb the highest point in each of the continental 48 states. The highest of all was
Mount Whitney in California at 4,418 m (14,496 ft); the lowest, Iron Mountain in Florida
at 100 m (330 ft) (Sayward 1934). No one would doubt that Whitney is truly a mountain,
but there is considerable question about Iron Mountain. Merriam-Webster's (Merriam-
Webster 2013) defines a mountain as “a landmass which projects conspicuously above
its surroundings and is higher than a hill.” By this definition, Iron Mountain may be
properly named, but most of us would judge this an exaggeration and regard it as a
hill. At the opposite extreme, there is the story of a British climber in the Himalayas
who asked his Sherpa guide the names of several of the surrounding 3,500 m (11,500
ft) peaks. The guide shrugged his shoulders, saying that they were just foothills with no
name.
The difference between the two extremes is one of con-spicuousness. The lesser
peaks were lost in the majesty of the high Himalayas, whereas even a small promontory
on a plain may be a “mountain” to the local people. Thus, Iron Mountain in Florida or
landforms of only slightly larger stature, such as the Watchung Mountains in New Jer-
sey, are important local landmarks to which the name “mountain” apparently seems ap-
propriate even though they may not exceed 150 m (500 ft) in elevation. A similar pattern
of place names can be found in South Africa (Browne et al. 2004). Nevertheless, calling
a feature a mountain does not make it one.
Roderick Peattie, in his classic Mountain Geography (1936), suggests several sub-
jective criteria for defining mountains: (1) mountains should be impressive, (2) they
should enter into the imagination of the people who live within their shadow, and (3)
they should have individuality. He cites Mount Fujiyama in Japan and Mount Etna in
Italy as examples. Both are snowcapped volcanic cones that dominate the surrounding
landscapes, and both have been immortalized in art and literature. They produce very
different responses in the minds of the people who live near them, however. Fujiyama is