Ch.'s 17, 18, & 20

Blog: Ch’s 17, 18 & 20

I really enjoyed reading chapter seventeen because it is a great example of Strayer’s method of reflecting how events throughout history influence and ignite other events and ideas oceans away.  The spread of these European ideas was enabled by the Chinese invention of the printing press: “newspapers, books, and pamphlets” (pg. 500).  This mode of communication was utilized by abolitionist efforts in Britain in the late eighteenth century, provoking religious, economic, and political sentiments against slavery.  Interestingly enough while slavery had become unpopular in Britain, racial superiority was exercised throughout the British colonies of South Africa.  Racial separation developed for years into the nineteench and twentieth century. This system of inferior housing, educational systems, and public facilities was termed apartheid. 

In reading about the Haitian Revolution, and the renaming of Haiti after the natives had gained independence from Europe, I was shocked to learn that some natives referred to themselves as “Incas”  (pg. 509).  Strayer does not expand on this and this was the first time I have heard a historian state this fact.  This begs the question, how would Incan natives, who demographically belong to the Andean region, end up in an island in the Caribbean?  One would reasonably assume that since the Andean region and Caribbean islands were both under Spanish colonial control, Inca natives could have been relocated by way of slave trade.  But this assumption does not coincide with the Atlantic Slave trade of the time, flowing east to west.  Before the arrival of the Spanish to Haiti, there were natives on this island.  So, where did these natives originate from?  Flipping back to Strayer’s map of early planet population, humans did migrate from North America into South America about 12,500 years ago, also migrating to the Caribbean islands.  But this preceded the emergence of the Incas in the 1500’s.  I would be interested in researching any archaeological or linguistic evidence in Haiti that may link the natives to the Quechua speaking Inca people. 

In reading about the industrialization of the United States I was intrigued on the topic of socialist movements.   I often wondered why this idea never took root in the United States since we echoed many European ideas of that time.  I always chalked it up to our strong capitalistic roots, but this was never satisfactory to me.  Why did working class frustrations in Europe, during the Industrial Era, spur trade unions and socialism, yet the United States which was struggling with the same social struggles, did not appeal to these reforms? Strayer points to the American Federation of Labor, the major union organization at the time, did not align with any political party.  The second answer Strayer indicates, is land owners were less likely to be attracted to socialism and the United States (thanks to many land grants) had greater land owners than that of our Industrialized cousins in Britain.  The final answer that Strayer gives in response to this question is the sharp class and racial divides at the time, not found in the more homogenous Britain. 

Ch.'s 14, 15, & 16

Blog:  Ch’s 14, 15, & 16

Learning history as a child from a very Eurocentric viewpoint, I learned of the European dominance over the remainder of the globe throughout the modern era.  China seemed to be this very foreign and long enduring country, very separate from the rest of the developments and actions of European powers.  What I have enjoyed about reading Strayer, is he makes it very clear that China has remained a fulcrum in the world economy since they arose as a civilization in the Ancient era.  Chinese tea, silk, porcelain, and South East Asian spices motivated Western European powers to search for other ocean going routes, bypassing the Muslim dominated merchant routes of the Indian Ocean.  Strayer states that “Europeans were increasingly aware of their marginal position in the world of Eurasian commerce” (pg. 406).  This statement holds a lot of weight.  Since the collapse of the Roman Empire, Europe had lost its dominance in the Eurasian affairs, and had no domestic product of interest to trade with.  If Europe had maintained competitive market dominance since the emergence of markets, such as I was under the impression,  in my younger historical learning,  then European powers would have had little incentive to venture outside of their own waters.  Europeans wanted access to the products of China but had nothing of interest to trade with.  The result was emerging new world colonies, in which their native populations, their land, and resources were exploited for European market advantage.  Strayer quoted a prominent world historian, “Without a New World to deliver economic balance in the Old, Europe would have remained inferior, as ever, in wealth and power, to the great civilizations of Asia” (pg. 409).  One could argue that the U.S’s thirst for foreign products derived from the European intensification of Capitalism during the early Modern Era. 

Commerce and mercantilism was expedited through the discovery of silver deposits in Spanish America Bolivia.  Potosi, Bolivia was the primary export site for silver during the early Modern Era.    85% of the world’s silver came out of Spanish America during the early Modern Era by the use of slave labor.  If you look at early Spanish drawings of Potosi, including the drawing Strayer included on page 443, and compare to present day photos of Potosi, one can see how the mountain of Potosi has depleted by centuries of mining.  Yet who really benefited from the new supplies of wealth found in the New World?   With Europe’s hunger for splendor and Chinese products, the majority of this new found and exploited silver bullion made its way into China by way of Manila.   Europe finally had a product to trade with.  The silver fed the Columbian exchange and Europe’s Industrial Revolution but the majority of the silver was used to pay for Asian goods that the French, British, and Dutch desired.   Strayer quoted a Portugese merchant from 1621, which I believe can still be applied to today’s economy, “silver wanders throughout all the world…before flocking to China, where it remains as if at its natural center” (pg. 443).  Europe finally acquired the goods of China and enjoyed the splendor and lifestyle its goods and products represented.  Yet with the benefit of hindsight, Europe acquired material goods that were consumed or depreciated in value while China benefited in the exchange for silver as this bullion became the basis of many economic systems, only appreciating in value.