Before European Hegemony

This was a fascinating account of how our modern world of trade and commerce came to be by looking at the history of Europe and how behind they were compared to the Asian and Middle eastern commercial societies for a long time in history. It was only around the 1200's that Europe began to catch up with its own advancements in money tendering and the issuance of credit. With the inventions of trade worthy money forms (gold), Europe and the middle east began to make financial gains just as the Chinese had done long before using money in paper form.

In Europe, trade of products and textiles also increased over time, but their were peaks and valleys in the development of Europe. Champagne fairs brought merchants from far and wide but their success was ultimately doomed to changing water routes. The textile trade brought commerce to Flanders and impacted social class. Venice and Genoa allowed great trade with the east. It seemed like Europe was prized to make huge advances that the Plague seemed to really devastate.

I'm not really sure if I find anything to make Europe less important or significant to Asia at this time. I understand that Asia was at times more advanced in some forms of trade and influence as well as commerce, but at the time frame being reviewed during the evolution of Europe's systems as discussed, it seems like their were influences that had little to do with things that can be evaluated as being better or lesser-than. I feel like people from other cultures always try and invent arguments to strengthen their lineage or ancestry world view and this seems like it is making a qualitative-value judgement where there is no need for one. I just don't think we are given a western bias against Eastern history. We are just given more information on our society since we are part of it.