[PEN-L:11627] re: colonialism

["Charles Brown" <CharlesB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>>> "J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." <rosserjb@xxxxxxx> 09/21/99 02:44PM >>>
       Ironically we may have the conclusion that the
Europeans ended up getting ahead because they
were behind.

(((((((((((((

Charles: Precisely, Barkley !

This is the law of evolutionary or revolutionary potential. The area that is least developed at one period has the greatest potential to develop the next qualitiative change, or revolution.


Charles Brown



((((((((((((((((((((((((


Jim,
     Certainly there were Chinese at various periods
in such Central Asian cities as Samarkand.  I also
think you are right that Muslims out of China would
go to Mecca on the Hajj.

       Ironically we may have the conclusion that the
Europeans ended up getting ahead because they
were behind.

They wanted to get at the Asian goods
and the Asians were uninterested in getting at their
goods.  This led to the concerted efforts by the Europeans
to make long voyages for trading (and conquest) that
the Asians did not bother with.
      But it was not dumb luck regarding geography of
the oceans.
Barkley Rosser
-----Original Message-----
From: James M. Blaut <70671.2032@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: INTERNET:pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 3:34 AM
>Subject: [PEN-L:11396] Re: Re: re: colonialism


>Barkley:
>
>I'll have to delve to find references on Chinese travellers in the --
>generic -- West. You may be right that they only got as far as Byzantine
>Constantinople. From memory I recall reading that a Chinese envoy resided
>in Samarkand around (?) 1400 and maybe in the same period a Chinse junk
>called at Jeddah and I think Chinese made the hadj to Mecca.
>
>Re the Vikings: see my  earlier post today in which I emphasized the
>(obvious) point that we're not talking about discovery in the abstract  but
>about consequential contact, involving developed medieval merchant
>communities that would, upon discovering a place to loot, would invest in
>more and more voyages, more and more looting, etc. Lots of
>mercantile-maritime comunities had that capability but America at that time
>was accessible only (speaking in terms of extremely high probabilities) to
>the Europeans. Distance and wind systems. Experience in  utilizing the
>Atlantic circulation for voyages to the Azores and -- yes! -- to Iceland.
>
>A comment, finally, on your post to Lou.
>
>" The Chinese or Koreans or Japanese could fairly easily
>have sent out expeditions to get furs from Northwestern
>North America.  They did not do so.  Why not?
>
>I would guess that enough furs could be gotten in northeastern Asia,
>including maybe Manchuria. It wouldn't surprise me if Chinese or (more
>probably) Japanese ships made it to the NW coast of America, but what would
>have justified the transformation of one chance voyage into a Conquest?
>
>Cheers
>
>Jim
>
>