The Great Divergence is term used to portray the gradual shift of dominance that Europe gained by establishing itself as the most powerful world civilization by the 19th century. While a case could be made that the Great Divergence occurred because of the pre-eminence of Europe and Britain, as well as their supposed superiority in invention and innovation above anywhere else in the world, this argument is flawed. A more compelling argument would be to state that it was rather through the geographical advantages that Europe obtained that lead it into eventually becoming the most powerful civilization after 1500 A.D., as this essay will strive to demonstrate.
A case could be made that the Great Divergence ultimately grew on the basis of European technological invention and innovation. According to historian David Landes, pre-eminence had been present since the Middle Ages, due to the inventions created that had allegedly aided society in an effective manner. Landes cites the inventions of the waterwheel, eyeglasses, and the mechanical clock as having had a great impact on society. It is to his belief that working life was increased and the manual labor decreased with the aid of the waterwheel, and that the invention of eyeglasses helped to path the way towards more revolutionary inventions such as the gauge, micrometer, telescope and microscope. He ultimately attempts to highlight the multitude of methods in which Europe utilized invention and innovation, prior to and after the Great Divergence.
Landes also portrays the supposed innovative manner in which Europe dealt with Chinese inventions. Despite printing having already been invented in China, the ideographic form of block printing limited distribution of publication, sugge...
... middle of paper ...
...tain, this argument has been shown to be flawed, as it without motivation and analysis, and disregards many critical factors, such as the culture of non-European societies. A more compelling case has been made that, instead, the Great Divergence had very little to do with European superiority, and instead occurred because of geographic advantages.
Works Cited
- Landes, D., 1999. The Wealth and Poverty of Nations: Why Some Are So Rich and Some So Poor. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 38-59
- McNeill, William H., 1998. How the West Won. New York: The New York Review of Books, 2-4
- Hobson, J. M., 2004. The Eastern Origins of Western Civilisation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 57
- Blaut, J., 2000. Eight Eurocentric Historians. New York: The Guildford Press, 1-5; 174-195
- Ferguson, M., 2004. Why the West?, Historia Actual Online, Volume 2, Issue 5, 128
Coffin, Judith G., and Robert C. Stacey. "CHAPTER 18 PAGES 668-669." Western Civilizations: Their History & Their Culture. 16TH ed. Vol. 2. New York, NY: W. W. Norton &, 2008. N. pag. Print.
As you can see, geographical luck was the main reason europe was so powerful, and was able to conquer so much of the world. Farming allowed Europeans to form permanent settlements, and spend time coming up with new ideas instead of gathering food. It helped them develop immunities to diseases diseases like smallpox. Europe’s technological, advancements, and superior societies were all due to it’s geographic location. It’s location also helped them develop new metalworking techniques because of knowledge passed down from their ancestors from the Fertile Crescent, and brought them new technologies like gunpowder. In the end, Europe’s success was brought on by many factors, but the main one was their geographic luck.
The effects of the spreading of scientific and technological innovation between 1000 and 1450 were felt across Eurasia. These phenomenon resulted in higher degrees of interregional contact and the entrance
Backman, Clifford R. The Cultures of the West: A History. New York: Oxford University Press,
3. Jackson J. Spielvogel. Western Civilization Third Edition, A Brief History volume 1: to 1715. 2005 Belmont CA. Wadsworth Publishing
Coffin, Judith G, et al. Western Civilizations: Their History & Their Culture. 17th ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Co, 2011. Print.
Kenneth Pomeranz‘s The Great Divergence tries to examine the classic question of ‘How do we account for the economic divergence between Europe and Asia? He acknowledged that ‘a surge in European technological inventiveness was a necessary condition of the Industrial Revolution’, but stressed on the crucial role of ‘coal and colonies’ and their critical geographic location, in lifting the constraints for sustained growth of per capita income. First the local coal deposits in Europe were closer to the cities than in China and this gave Europe a clear advantage. Second, the off-shore colonies, in particular, the closeness of Europe to the New World resources (Jones 1981, Wrigley 1988, Allen 2009) helped Europeans to overcome the difficulties
Howe, Helen, and Robert T. Howe. A World History: Ancient and Medieval Worlds. Volume 1. White Plains, NY: Longman, 1992. 533.
Sherman, D. (2000). Civilizations of the Ancient World. Western Civilizations: Sources, Images, and Interpretations (pp. 8-12). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Smith, Adam. "CHAPTER XI OF THE RENT OF LAND." An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Oxford: Clarendon, 1976. 161. Print.
Spielvogel, Jackson J. Western Civilization. 8th ed. Vol. 1. Boston: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning, 2012. Print.
In Europe, GDP started to increase in the 1500s, pulling away from the GDP of Asia. Those kept growing, while Asia’s remained stagnant. It was also during that time that exploration to the Americas started. This was one of the factors that led to the divergence. This might not have been successful in increasing GDP if there were not institutions in place that kept the traders or kings in line. Without institutions that protect traders and merchants, they may not be incentivized enough to go out and risk trading in foreign lands. If the rulers were not restrained and took all the gains from trade for themselves, then traders and merchants would not want to engage in trade. It was these institutions that allowed the traders and merchants to branch out and make money which allowed GDP to
Crosby explains well that ecology played a minor role in the expansion of Europe into the Neo-Europes. However, it seems that technology played a bigger role in European expansion than any other factor. Penicillin was not a cure for bacterial infections until people discovered its use and the only way the Europeans were able to get to the Neo-Europes was by ship.
Lynn Hunt et al., The Making of the West: peoples and cultures, a Concise History (Boston:Bedford/St. Martin's, 2003), 43, 45, 132, 136, 179-180
Childress, Diana, and Bruce Watson. "The fall of the west." Calliope 11, no. 5 (January 2001): 27.