PEN-L
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
[PEN-L:11380] A forward on why they didn't ?
El 18 Sep 99 a las 19:13, Charles Brown nos dice(n):
>
>
>
> Barkley writes:
>
> >Of course this does not answer the crucial question as to
> >why the Chinese
> did not go around the Cape of Good Hope in the 1400s while
> the Portuguese did in 1497 with Vasco da Gama. Thus we
> had the Portuguese in Goa and Macau rather than the
> Chinese in Cadiz and Lisbon.<
Well, we would also think of something so obvious that it
may seem stupid: the Chinese were _the rich ones_, they
were _the core_. They were not as interested in getting to
Europe by sea as the Portuguese were in getting to the
East. If I do not recall wrongly, Blaut himself makes this
point. Long distance seafaring was more appealing to the
Europeans. It was _others_ who had the valuable goods, and
it was _on them_ to look for a way to get to these goods.
Nestor.
- Thread context:
- [PEN-L:11386] Re: Re: Re: Capitalist development,
Charles Brown Tue 21 Sep 1999, 04:07 GMT
- [PEN-L:11385] Re: Re: Person work hours at the dawn ofcapitalism,
Charles Brown Tue 21 Sep 1999, 04:07 GMT
- [PEN-L:11382] Re: Capitalist development,
James M. Blaut Tue 21 Sep 1999, 03:50 GMT
- [PEN-L:11381] why do we care?,
James M. Blaut Tue 21 Sep 1999, 03:50 GMT
- [PEN-L:11380] A forward on why they didn't ?,
Charles Brown Tue 21 Sep 1999, 03:30 GMT
- [PEN-L:11379] Re: colonialism,
James M. Blaut Tue 21 Sep 1999, 03:22 GMT
- [PEN-L:11375] Re: Re: Re: IMF to become autonomous?,
Patrick Bond Tue 21 Sep 1999, 01:23 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]