I don't reject the role of fortunate navigating conditions, dumb luck etc for
Europeans as Jim Blaut and Mike Shupp argue:
> From: james m blaut <70671.2032@CompuServe.COM>
> Europe rose relative to the other Eastern Hemidphere civilizations because
> Europe acquired an advantage after 1492 by breaching the system boundary:
> getting literally unlimited wealth from the Americas. Europe breached the
> boudary, reached the Americas, for mundane reasons: distance and navigating
> conditions. Europeans were not uniquely "venturesome," "inquisitive,"
> "acquisitive," "adventurous," etc., etc.
Mike Shupp:
> The Moslem strategy led to
> eventual defeat and exhaustion. The Europeans were more
> successful, largely because of sheer dumb luck.
But we must also take into account such complex factor as the documented
existance of a special project of world envasion and division combined with
intensive geographical studies and purposeful transoceanic expeditions.
I mean here Papa's
bulla of the division of ALL non- Christian lands to be discovered in future
between Portugal and Spain, and geographical 'clubs' in Europe that looked
after results of each expedition very carefully, corrected maps, that were
used in further expeditions.
We know that Chinese emperators were shure to rule all Under-Sky, and
about their one (or two? but not many) grand expeditions in the Indian Ocean,
We know of global ambitions of Rome, Alexander, Chingis-Chan and Tamerlan,
we know of magnificent land and oceanic expansion of Arabs (also supported
by intensive map-creating and geography).
But when and where did take place another case of such triplet: 'legal'
division of the whole globe, permanent global-geographical studies, and
systematic far-distance expeditions, directed namely for discover and grab
new lands?
such another case (besides the European one) can be really a serious
argument contra unique character of European expansion, but where is it?
best, Nikolai Rozov