Political & Economic Structures in the Early Modern Era, Strayer 14

21/11/2014

Okay folks, you have nine days to tackle your first non-curved test. Here we begin a real acceleration of the data we need to deal with as the Columbian Exchange, the revitalization of Islam through the Turks, and Russian expansion into Siberia turn up the pace of change. This is not a thematic chapter. A good approach to digesting these societies is to create a SPICE chart for each, then load up with details/evidence.

I'd wish you luck, but luck has nothing to do with this!

19 Comments

Maegan Fahy

22/11/2014 15:04:38

Hello Bingham and forum-goers! I have a question about BPQ #1; when Strayer asks about historians emphasizing the similarities or differences between European empires in the Americas and those of Russia, China, Mughal, and the Ottomans, I have a dilemma. I can't decide whether or not to emphasize differences, because there are obviously more, or similarities because there are so few that they need the emphasis. Is this a subjective or an objective question?

Bingham

23/11/2014 22:46:57

These questions are just designed to get you thinking. The way to answer them is to address both...

For similarities, you could emphasize that Europe was not the only center of vitality and expansion during the early modern period, and that the interaction of culturally different peoples occurred in the European, Russian, Chinese, Mughal, and Ottoman empires.

However, the European empires represented something completely new in human history through their creation of an interacting Atlantic world. They had a far more significant impact on the people that they incorporated than did the other empires, and they had a far wider impact on the world as a whole.

By emphasizing similarities, you counteract Eurocentrism but run the risk of downplaying the significant and unique developments that the Western European empires contributed to the course of world history.

By emphasizing differences, you give weight to the significant and unique developments that the European empires contributed to the course of world history, but run the risk of overemphasizing the importance of Western Europe to the point of downplaying or neglecting the other sources of vitality, expansion, and cross-cultural interaction that shaped the period.

Maegan Fahy

22/11/2014 15:37:57

Secondly, here are my answers for the MQ's (the -> means "led to"):

#1.)What enabled Europeans to carve out huge empires an ocean away from their homelands?

- *Geography: European countries on the Atlantic rim were closer to the Americas than Asia
- *Winds of the Atlantic: went in one direction, different from the alternating currents in Indian Ocean Basin
- *Motivation: bc rich Indian Ocean Basin, China, India & Middle East had all they needed, Europe saw its own marginalization in that trade and rulers were competitive, nobles and commoners saw opportunity for wealth and status in a new place, missionaries saw a new place to spread religion to, and the religiously persecuted wanted a new home
- *States and trading companies allowed for mobilization of people and material
- *Sea technology from China and Islam allowed for easy crossing of the Atlantic
- *Iron working tech., gunpowder, and horses allowed for easy conquering in the Americas (Americans subsequently adopted those things)
- *Divisions in the conquered places -> allies with the invaders
- *Germs and diseases -> native deaths bc of lack of immunity and allowed Europeans to quickly outnumber native populations

#2.)What large scale transformations did European empires generate?

- *Collapse of Native American societies
- *“Great Dying” created labor shortage -> opportunities for Europeans and slaves
- *plants took hold of the landscape and created a distinctly European diet
- *animals multiplied, free of natural predators, and allowed for revolutionizing of society (made possible cowboy culture, ranching economies, and transformation of Native American societies)
- *American crops spread to the Eastern Hemisphere -> immense population growth
- *Societies of America added to globalization and reshaped world economy
- *information flooded Europe known as the Scientific Revolution
- *wealth of the new colonies spurred the Industrial Revolution
- *colonies allowed for European population growth and was an extension of Europe
- *thrust Europe into an increasingly central world role

#3.) What was the economic foundation of the colonial rule in Mexico and Peru? How did it shape the kinds of societies that arose there?

- *Economic foundation lay in commercial agriculture (rural estates and silver/gold mining)
- *Native people provided forced labor (unlike other societies) bc loss of their land & needs to repay debts to employers
- *Racially based hierarchy: Spanish at the top (the minority, divided bc those born in Spain saw themselves above those born in the Americas saw themselves as a new Spanish kingdom that deserved self-governance),
- *New mixed race population, mestizo, numbers grew and they became the majority and the middle class
- * “Indians”, natives, were the lowest class, abused and exploited as primary labor source, had to pay tribute to Spanish masters, many learned Spanish, converted, moved to cities, ate Spanish foods, used Spanish technologies, and took grievances to Spanish court

#4.) How did the plantation societies of Brazil and the Caribbean differ from those of southern colonies in British North America?

- *Tobacco, cotton, rice and indigo were major crops of North America
- *less racial mixing in North America bc more women came as colonizers
- *less recognition of mixed race babies in society bc ^^
- *sharply defined racial system in North America vs. the more widely acknowledged mixed race groups of Portuguese and Spanish colonies
- *slavery less harsh in North America than the sugar colonies
- *slaves could reproduce in North America but couldn’t in sugar colonies
- *more slaves set free in Brazil than in North America and had more economic opportunity
- *in North America, any small percent of African descent made a person black, where in Brazil, mixtures of different types and percentages made a person one of many race groups
- *racial prejudice in both, white characteristics found more attractive and whites had greater privilege and opportunity where skin color in Brazil was only one criterion of class

#5.) What distinguished the British settler colonies from their counterparts in Latin America?

- *Colonists came from a faster changing society than Spain (conflict between catholics and protestants, rise of a merchant capitalist class, emergence of parliament and the checking of kings authority)
- *British settlers were more numerous
- *Native populations didn’t rebound in North America
- *Slaves not needed in North America bc economy dominated by small scale farmers
- *less racial mixing
- *missionaries less interesting in spreading Christianity to North American natives, church and colonial state not so deeply connected
- *greater mass literacy in North America
- *more North American traditions of local self-government
- *British colonies didn’t have the elaborate bureaucracy of Latin America
- *British government paid little attention to internal affairs of

Maegan Fahy

22/11/2014 15:41:48

that was the max number of words i could submit so the rest of #5 and #s 6-10 plus my BPQs are going up tomorrow! Goodnight forum, goodnight John boy, goodnight Mary Ellen! (sorry for the horrible jokes, it's late and I couldn't resist)

Cole

13/1/2016 19:08:57

thanks guys I don't go to ur school but use this for answers

Isabella Jarosz

28/11/2014 12:46:38

Hey Maegan. I think these are good answers, however, I think Bingham's new(-ish) format is something to keep in mind. What broader categories can I make, and what can I use for supporting details?
So, I answered MQ2 (What large-scale transformations did European empires generate?) in this way. For the groupings "environmental changes in the Americas" and "environmental changes in Europe/Asia", I'm pretty sure you could merge the two into one group (environmental changes), but I didn't because I didn't want to. Ok.
1: demographic collapse of Native American societies
...created...
-acute labor shortages
-90% of population estimated to be wiped out
-room for immigrant newcomers
-Central Mexico population diminished from 10-20 million to 1 million
2: environmental changes in the Americas
-Europeans brought plants (wheat, rice, sugarcane) -> transformed landscape/made a recognized European diet/way of life
-Europeans brought animals (horses, pig) -> multiplied in an environment with no natural predators, ranching economies, cowboy cultures, transformation of Native American societies
3: environmental changes in Europe/Asia
-nutritional foundation for immense population growth in Europe
-pushed population from 60 million -> 390 million
-helped sustain population growth in China
-cheap/reasonably nutritious food for industrial workers
-In Africa, underwrote some population growth/offset the population drain of slave trade
4: Columbian exchange
-new information spread into Europe and provided the groundwork for a Scientific Revolution
-wealth from colonies allowed foundation for Industrial Revolution in Europe
Anyone, tell me if you have anything different.

Bingham

30/11/2014 03:37:50

I like it Isabella. As a reward, here's BPQ2.

In what different ways was European colonial rule expressed and experienced in the Americas?
European colonial rule in the Americas varied with the cultures and policies of the colonizing power, the character of the Native American cultures, and the kind of economy established in a particular region.

MESOAMERICA/ANDES (Aztecs & Incas) the Spanish empire ruled over the most densely settled of the indigenous (local) populations in the Americas and developed an economic system based on commercial agriculture and mining. Under these circumstances, colonial rule replicated something of the Spanish class hierarchy while accommodating the racially and culturally different Indians and Africans.

PLANTATION COLONIES OF BRAZIL AND THE CARIBBEAN colonial powers ruled over regions where no earlier formal civilization existed and where the production of sugar for export defined the economy. In these regions, large numbers of Africans were imported as slave labor, and a considerable amount of racial mixing took place. From the mixed-race population were drawn much of the urban skilled workforce and supervisors in the sugar industry, as well as some prominent members of the community.

A variation on the colonial rule of a plantation-based economy occurred in British North America, where the raising of different crops (including tobacco, cotton, rice, and indigo), less racial mixing, and a self-reproducing slave workforce shaped a different society.

BRITISH COLONIES OF NEW ENGLAND ( New York, and Pennsylvania) Upon the arrival of British settlers, these regions were not heavily settled with Native Americans, in part because of the ravages of European-borne epidemic diseases. Because of the availability of land, the climate and geography of North America, and the “outsider” status of many British settlers, they set up an economic and social system of small independent farmers without sharp class hierarchy, large rural estates, or dependent laborers. Because of weak British rule, the largely literate population of the region developed traditions of local self-government, elected colonial assemblies, and strongly contested the prerogatives of royal governors sent to administer their affairs.

Allie Elkhadem

30/11/2014 04:17:39

When Strayer talks about Russia he says that the areas they conquered had long interacted with Russia. I'm confused as to why devastating epidemics occurred since these peoples had already interacted. Can someone explain?

Bingham

30/11/2014 06:18:01

Interaction, but not settlement as with their livestock and their diseases.

Allie Elkhadem

30/11/2014 07:53:01

https://cacoo.com/diagrams/GaXuuYfqbwPzR4L3

https://cacoo.com/diagrams/GaXuuYfqbwPzR4L3-5DF9F.png

Links to Chapter 14 mind maps.

Isabella Jarosz

30/11/2014 13:54:43

Here's the one I was most unsure of. If anyone has any comments, pleeeeasssseeee tell me. ANY help is appreciated!
MQwhatever: What distinguished the British settler colonies of North America from their counterparts in Latin America?
LOYALTY TO ASPECTS OF EUROPEAN SOCIETY:
British settlers- easy availability of land, climate and geography of North America, and their "outsider" status made it hard to follow...
Latin America's pattern of sharp class hierarchy, large rural estates, and dependent laborers.
POPULATION:
British population was far more numerous, outnumbering Spanish settlers 5:1.
In Latin America, racial mixing was prominent, whereas in British settlements, it was not due to the arrival of women at a sooner time.
USE OF SLAVES:
British settlers- slaves not as needed in an agricultural economy dominated by people producing for themselves and their own families. Occasionally household slaves were used.
Latin America- great use of slaves because of great export economy
RELIGION:
British were Protestant, Latin America was Catholic.
British were far less interested in spreading Christianity among native peoples than in Latin America.
Greater literacy in British settlements due to Protestant beliefs in reading the Bible.
GOVERNMENT:
In British settlements, they evolved traditions of local self-government and elected colonial assemblies. Latin American settlements had an elaborate bureaucracy, with a connection between the church and state that British settlements did not have.

Bingham

1/12/2014 01:07:17

Well, you kind of alluded to this, but it's important to note that while the British colonists were trying to create something new, the Spanish/Portuguese were trying to recreate their old world society in the Americas.

Then, again, you alluded to this, but I think you could simply say that the easy availability of land, the climate and geography of North America, and the “outsider” status of many British settlers made it even more difficult to follow the Spanish or Portuguese colonial pattern of sharp class hierarchy, large rural estates, and dependent laborers.

You haven't really missed anything.

Hank Bond

3/12/2014 14:13:34

Hey guys, found something really helpful today with mister binghams assistance and thats the three motives Russia had for their expansion efforts (MQ#6)
1. A religious motive: The westward Russian expansion permeated eastern Europe which was ruled b Christendom. Which impacted the Russian people in a way that created a christian thinking people.

2. A Security Motive: Early Russian history has experienced raids and rule from mongols and others, which later enforced their attitude of being protective of what they had built. As well as ruling and raiding their own.

3. An Economic Motive: The great fur trade or "soft gold" was a boom which Russia now held in Siberia. This gave great attention and revenue to Russia, which helped them grow.

I'm shakey and working on the first argument but I hoped this helped, and any revisions are appreciated

Adele Carlson

3/12/2014 14:53:43

I've been thinking about your first argument a lot and it seems to me that with any religion, you would want more followers. Strayer speaks specifically about this topic in Siberia, but maybe since they were already a fairly big empire, in terms of territory, they had more authority and could impose taxes like the jizya on those who were non believers. Also Siberia wasn't unified with their scattered peoples and various languages so they were a weaker people, which would probably make conquest easier.
... again just a late night thought

Bridget Fenner

4/12/2014 11:56:09

The answer is on page 418, defined in simpler terms, where page 417 expands on the reasons for expansion; Opportunity in Siberia for Soft Gold, which was in high demand, defense of Russian frontiers that had been threatened by the mongols and south-easten pastoralists who frequently raided and enslaved Russian agricultural neighbors, and the desire to enlighten their "savage" neighbors by bringing them Christianity and civilization. Hope this helps

Adele Carlson

3/12/2014 14:17:49

Okay so Bingham mentioned in class to be able to identify how British colonies differed form the Spanish Portuguese colonies...and there are 12 differences. So here's what I found, let me know if I'm missing something

1. Because the British colonized in the Americas one century after Spain, they got the "unpromising leftovers" of the land that lacked wealth and sophisticated cultures that the Spanish possessed.

2. British colonies didn't have as great of a role on the world stage as the Portuguese and Spanish colonies did. (Not until the 18th century)

3. British settlers came form a rapid changing society, whereas Spanish settlers came from a Catholic, semi-feudal, authoritarian society.

4. The British settlers sought to escape European society, while the Spanish and Portuguese sought to recreate their societies.

5. The availability of land, climate, and geography of North America and the "outsider" status of British settlers made it less comparable to Spain or Portugal's sharp class hierarchy, rural estates and dependent laborers.

6. British settlers outnumbered Spanish 5 to 1

7. British colonies experienced less racial mixing than Spanish and Portuguese colonies.

8. The Protestant England was less interested in spreading Christianity as the Catholic missionaries of Spain were.

9. Church and state was less connected that in British colonies than in Latin America.

10. Britain's Protestant religion's emphasis on reading the bible resulted in a greater mass literacy rate than Spanish colonies' church education where 95% of the population were still illiterate.

11. British settlers evolved far more local self government traditions than Latin America

12. The British preferred to rely only on joint stock companies or wealthy individuals operating under a royal charter, whereas Spanish colonies had an elaborate colonial bureaucracy.

Isabella

11/2/2015 12:56:08

I was wondering what.are 5 arguments to counteract eurocentrism?

Daniel Hawe link

7/6/2015 02:27:49

So I have a question for everyone who may have an idea or opinion.
Were European colonists trying to recreate Europe in the Americas? How successful were they? In what ways was American society similar to and different from Europe?

Bingham

7/6/2015 03:49:34

Many of the answers to that question are given above. Your question is quite broad, do have a specific question about society?

Political & Economic Structures in the Early Modern Era, Strayer 14

Leave a Reply.

Bingham

Archives

Categories