In Abu-Lughod's last section she discusses Asia. This involved the trading along the sea passages down through India, the straights of Malacca, and China. Abu-Lughod explains how the weather had severe impact on the trading and how it really made traveling difficult. Do to India's wealth and resources however, they became more of a producer rather than traders and that's what kept them going. China too played a major role in these trading routes. China's society was becoming highly advanced which led them to be one of the top leaders in this world system.
Overall, Abu-Lughod explains how the west regions were able to overcome conflicts and obstacles which led them to become the winner over other parts of the trading world. This primarly had to do though with all of the sicknesses such as the Black Death which killed hundreds of thousands and wiped out other regions along the trading routes. Also if not lastly, another key factor that changed the world was that of slaves. The trading from Africa was a major influence that led to new beginnings in the Americas and other regions.
After reading this third and final section, I found it very interesting how China especially though not really recorded in books was advacing their technology which was almost in not more advanced than Europes. China's production of paper, steel, iron weapons, and other products definately showed their knowledge and capability over all the other regoins.
In conlcusion , after reading these sections I often wonder how centuries ago, people back then dealt with all the conflicts and obsticles that got in their way. Also were there problems like we have today in particlular the United States with all of the debt. It just makes me think how people then would have fixed these problems and continued their success.
In thinking about your last question, I think people today act differently about debt and conflict than they did back then. Debts are truly owned by an entire state these days, where as back then, debts were either personal or owned only by an emperor or King or dictators of some form. Countries would go to war when credit or goods were unobtainable and commerce might have been connected, but their was not as much as a global economy to worry about. Now markets and currency are so interconnected, any major country can throw off the entire worlds economic health if their debt is too big or their economy is too sick. Their might have been conflicts back then, but I think the mentality was more of a free-for-all.
ReplyDeleteComparing the dealing of conflict in the past to today is an interesting topic to think about. I mean back in the day, it was a long ride on a boat, in which many died and then a battle was fought. Our warfare today is so much different, that the start of beginning a war is even scary because so many countries are so powerful.
ReplyDelete