At 07:16 PM 7/22/97 -0200, barendse wrote:
>Very many interesting questions raised in this interesting discussion and
>very few answers:
>
>Rather than making sweeping statements about N.Rosov's list which I better
leave to the social scientists out there I would like to provide a
`clarification of doubtful issues' to quote ayatolah Khomeini:
>
>Mike Shupp:
>
>2.)Islam did n't expand in the sixteenth century ? Hmm .. most of
>eastern Europe was overrun by the Ottoman empire in that period, ...
It is important to keep this in mind, I think. It may be
a mistake to view the conclusion of the work of the reconquistadores
(1492 for the central Iberian peninsula, earlier for the portuguese) and
the Iberian maritime ventures leading eventually to the conquistadores
as a coincidence. It was one thing to win the conquer the peninsula:
going on to try to get to the East over the top of the Ottoman empire
would have been an entirely different kettle of fish -- it would have
been silly. With the Portuguese running out of peninsula (!) they
would get a head start going around the Afrasian landmass, leaving
Columbus' venture a more tempting stab in the dark for the central
kingdoms.
Virtually,
Bruce McFarling, Ourimbah
ecbm@cc.newcastle.edu.au
PS. Label me a regional economist, but I still think a town (Puebla) is
a group of people just as much as a neighborhood (Barrio) is.