Trends in Globalization
Georgetown University
World History
December 2002
According to the American Heritage Dictionary, globalization is the process of “making [something] global or worldwide in scope or application.” That explanation seems a bit limited, confining this type of development to mere geographical expansion. It is much more than that. Globalization as a phenomenon comprises and is inexorably linked to increasing interaction and ever-greater collaboration with others—other peoples, places and ideas. With this expanded definition in mind, history has been on a trajectory of globalization since the beginning of time.
Cross-cultural relationships were not unique to the period 1500-1800 C.E. However, the interactivity at this time was “much more intense” and encompassed more areas of the world than ever before. In fact, many historians believe that human civilization crossed a key threshold during this era—one that “brought the world’s various peoples for the first time into permanent and sustained communication with one another” to form a newly “interconnected” and “interdependent world.”
Attempts by European mariners to establish new transportation routes to Asia led to all sorts of exchanges: cultural, as human populations increasingly traveled to different, far-off lands; biological, as diseases, plants and animals crossed the oceans along with humans; and commercial, as global markets were launched to trade products from around the world. These developments caused disparate and significant transformations in various regions of the world: Asian and Islamic lands tended towards isolationism, Africans took advantage of new crops but were enslaved en masse, peoples of the Americas were largely destroyed by new diseases, and Europeans, while instrumental in cross-cultural trade (a positive development for most peoples), began a trend of colonization and enforcement of their will upon others which was much more negative.
Taken together, these interactions promoted economic development, increased populations, dissemination of technologies, religions and ideas, and allowed ever-greater access to previously isolated parts of the globe. It is no wonder that historians Bentley & Ziegler chose to title Part V (1500-1800) “The Origins of Global Interdependence,” given that these centuries encouraged “peoples from all parts of the world [to enter] into sustained interactions with each other for the first time in history.”
The Geographical Extent of Globalizing Trends
Globalization began slowly, building up size and momentum much like a snowball rolling down a hill. Facilitated by the era’s increased political stability, economic opportunities, and population growth, regional empires joined the extensive trade and communication networks that spanned the eastern hemisphere. The geographical extent of this “global” network might be construed as unimpressive by today’s standards. At the turn of the first millennium C.E., however, it represented a significant increase in range, connecting peoples from upper western Europe to lower eastern Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, as well as many in between. The Pacific Islands (“Oceania”) and the Americas, while not yet in contact with the eastern hemisphere, were making simultaneous attempts to network with peoples at ever-longer distances—laying the foundation that allowed for their encounters with the east after the fifteenth century.
For the most part, the scope of the geographical area covered by these “globalizing” forces was determined by the facility of long-distance travel, either on the sea lanes or the so-called Silk Road overland passes. In turn, the ability to travel was determined by two factors: transportation technology and political stability (or lack thereof).
While people traveled for various reasons, the main impetus behind it was trade. In search of commercial opportunities, “by the thirteenth century European peoples traded actively throughout the Mediterranean, Baltic, and North Sea regions … [even] as far away as China.” It was this quest for economic prosperity that “favored movement toward [government] centralization,” in part because the tariffs levied upon traded goods provided financial support for the ruling political system, and in part because each society grew more dependent upon trade to supplement their own goods production capabilities. The resulting prosperity strengthened the governments, who were then able to consolidate their military forces and gain leverage against insurgents, thus stabilizing the political systems. Such security and affluence allowed the realms’ administrations to build and police interregional highways or ports so crucial to the continuation of long-distance trade. The seeds of globalization were thus fashioned from the positive feedback loop of government prosperity, security and long-distance trade.
The travels of the Polo brothers (Niccolo, Maffeo, and Marco) while admittedly not the norm during the thirteenth century, are illustrative of this burgeoning globalization. That they could travel “the whole distance from Venice to China and back” successfully was due to “the pax mongolica, which brought most of Eurasia under one administration for the first time in history.” By maintaining peace and good road conditions, non-merchant travelers, such as missionaries, scholars, or curious explorers like Ibn Battuta could venture great distances. This led to “continuous movement, encounters, mutual reactions and responses, adaptation and change,” as various technologies, religions, goods, and beliefs were disseminated across the eastern hemisphere. The resulting “cross-pollination of cultures and ideas” created the first quasi-“global” economy.
The Socio-Economic and Cultural Importance of the Globalizing Trend
The beginnings of globalization were no doubt socio-economically and culturally intensive, touching nearly every aspect of societies. Along with traded goods and government diplomacy, “songs, stories, religious ideas, philosophical views, and scientific knowledge all passed readily” among those who traveled along the networks that connected societies of the first millennium. Religions such as Buddhism, Nestorian Christianity, Roman Catholic Christianity, and especially Islam saw their influence grow with the spread of communication along greater distances.
Economically, trade stands out as a distinctive force in the socio-economic globalizing process. Not only was there an expansion in the types of goods traded—including a significant increase in transportation of bulky goods, such as building materials like timber and steel, food like grains and dates and other commodities like coral—but the goods themselves left a great impact upon their societies. For example, Muslim travelers introduced sugarcane to southwest Asia as well as north Africa citrus fruits and rice to sub-Saharan Africa, which “enriched diets in west Africa after the 11th century.” They also introduced cotton to west Africa, which eventually became the most popular textile produced in the region by 1500.
As societies increased their reliance on trade, they were able to focus on producing their best goods and importing the rest. This encouraged merchants and explorers to search for new trade routes—leading eventually to their discovery of Australia, the Pacific islands and the continents of the Americas. The diffusion of a simple invention such as the magnetic compass, conceived in China during the Tang or Song dynasty “spread throughout the Indian Ocean basin during the 11th century, and by the mid-twelfth century [was used by] European mariners … in the Mediterranean and the Atlantic Ocean.” The compass increased the mariners’ ability to sail long distances, and became “a boon” to maritime trade, further opening up the sea routes, and continuing the process of globalization.
Advantages & Disadvantages of the Globalization Model of World History
There is no doubt that there are some problems applying the concept of globalization to the period 1000-1350 C.E. The older tradition of historical writing, pioneered by Ibn Khaldun, would argue that history occurs as a series of parallel, sequential events. Using the organic metaphors of birth, growth and death to explain the rises and falls of states or civilizations, Khaldun might say that the globalization approach overstates or overemphasis inter-societal events at the expense of a thorough intra-societal analysis. As Professor McNeill noted , Khaldun is most likely more correct in the earlier stages of world history—before the proliferation of efficient long-distance travel and communication networks.
Furthermore, the term “globalization” is admittedly a bit misleading, as the territory connected does not in fact, encompass the entire globe. The Americas and Oceania did not participate in the economic and demographic expansion and integration of the eastern hemisphere. That having been said, they did continue to build more centralized states of their own and had trade routes from Mexico to the Great Lakes region, in effect “globalizing” in a regional sense.
One last disadvantage in using globalization to describe the period of 1000-1350 C.E. is the spectacularly disruptive epidemic health crisis of the mid fourteenth century: Bubonic Plague. Bringing many of the eastern hemisphere’s civilizations to their knees, the plague wrecked havoc, requiring almost a century of recovery. Perhaps that is why the famous explorers—Zheng He in the Indian Ocean (1405-1433), Bartolomeu Dias’s trip around Africa (1488), Christopher Columbus and the western hemisphere (1492), and Vasco de Gama’s venture to India (1497-1498)— did not occur until the late 15th century. It was these voyages that brought the simmering pot of globalization to a boil.
The advantages to viewing this era in history with an eye towards the process of globalization are powerful. Historians Bentley & Ziegler emphasize cross-cultural interactions—and it is obvious from both primary and secondary sources that the spread of religions, technologies, and long-distance trade that these exchanges facilitated were crucial to their civilizations’ development. A strong argument can be made that 1000-1350 C.E. is the first opportunity historians have to really call these long-distance relationships “global” as they were the “initiation of a long-term process … that brought all regions and peoples of planet earth into permanent and sustained interaction.”
Perhaps the decisive advantage to writing history with an eye towards the process of globalization is that it allows historians to paint a more complete picture. History does not always fit into divisions by continents and it does not come neatly packaged within borders. Actions, events, ideas and people have important ramifications not only in their own country, but in others. As Professor McNeill noted, “no individual and no societies operate autonomously—they’re all influenced by other societies elsewhere.” Ultimately, historians who use methodologies that allow them to explore “global” themes of inter-cultural relationships can better understand the development of an increasingly interdependent world.
World History
December 2002
Trends in Globalization 1000-1350 C.E.:
Setting the Stage for the Modern Era of World History
Setting the Stage for the Modern Era of World History
According to the American Heritage Dictionary, globalization is the process of “making [something] global or worldwide in scope or application.” That explanation seems a bit limited, confining this type of development to mere geographical expansion. It is much more than that. Globalization as a phenomenon comprises and is inexorably linked to increasing interaction and ever-greater collaboration with others—other peoples, places and ideas. With this expanded definition in mind, history has been on a trajectory of globalization since the beginning of time.
Cross-cultural relationships were not unique to the period 1500-1800 C.E. However, the interactivity at this time was “much more intense” and encompassed more areas of the world than ever before. In fact, many historians believe that human civilization crossed a key threshold during this era—one that “brought the world’s various peoples for the first time into permanent and sustained communication with one another” to form a newly “interconnected” and “interdependent world.”
Attempts by European mariners to establish new transportation routes to Asia led to all sorts of exchanges: cultural, as human populations increasingly traveled to different, far-off lands; biological, as diseases, plants and animals crossed the oceans along with humans; and commercial, as global markets were launched to trade products from around the world. These developments caused disparate and significant transformations in various regions of the world: Asian and Islamic lands tended towards isolationism, Africans took advantage of new crops but were enslaved en masse, peoples of the Americas were largely destroyed by new diseases, and Europeans, while instrumental in cross-cultural trade (a positive development for most peoples), began a trend of colonization and enforcement of their will upon others which was much more negative.
Taken together, these interactions promoted economic development, increased populations, dissemination of technologies, religions and ideas, and allowed ever-greater access to previously isolated parts of the globe. It is no wonder that historians Bentley & Ziegler chose to title Part V (1500-1800) “The Origins of Global Interdependence,” given that these centuries encouraged “peoples from all parts of the world [to enter] into sustained interactions with each other for the first time in history.”
The Geographical Extent of Globalizing Trends
Globalization began slowly, building up size and momentum much like a snowball rolling down a hill. Facilitated by the era’s increased political stability, economic opportunities, and population growth, regional empires joined the extensive trade and communication networks that spanned the eastern hemisphere. The geographical extent of this “global” network might be construed as unimpressive by today’s standards. At the turn of the first millennium C.E., however, it represented a significant increase in range, connecting peoples from upper western Europe to lower eastern Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, as well as many in between. The Pacific Islands (“Oceania”) and the Americas, while not yet in contact with the eastern hemisphere, were making simultaneous attempts to network with peoples at ever-longer distances—laying the foundation that allowed for their encounters with the east after the fifteenth century.
For the most part, the scope of the geographical area covered by these “globalizing” forces was determined by the facility of long-distance travel, either on the sea lanes or the so-called Silk Road overland passes. In turn, the ability to travel was determined by two factors: transportation technology and political stability (or lack thereof).
While people traveled for various reasons, the main impetus behind it was trade. In search of commercial opportunities, “by the thirteenth century European peoples traded actively throughout the Mediterranean, Baltic, and North Sea regions … [even] as far away as China.” It was this quest for economic prosperity that “favored movement toward [government] centralization,” in part because the tariffs levied upon traded goods provided financial support for the ruling political system, and in part because each society grew more dependent upon trade to supplement their own goods production capabilities. The resulting prosperity strengthened the governments, who were then able to consolidate their military forces and gain leverage against insurgents, thus stabilizing the political systems. Such security and affluence allowed the realms’ administrations to build and police interregional highways or ports so crucial to the continuation of long-distance trade. The seeds of globalization were thus fashioned from the positive feedback loop of government prosperity, security and long-distance trade.
The travels of the Polo brothers (Niccolo, Maffeo, and Marco) while admittedly not the norm during the thirteenth century, are illustrative of this burgeoning globalization. That they could travel “the whole distance from Venice to China and back” successfully was due to “the pax mongolica, which brought most of Eurasia under one administration for the first time in history.” By maintaining peace and good road conditions, non-merchant travelers, such as missionaries, scholars, or curious explorers like Ibn Battuta could venture great distances. This led to “continuous movement, encounters, mutual reactions and responses, adaptation and change,” as various technologies, religions, goods, and beliefs were disseminated across the eastern hemisphere. The resulting “cross-pollination of cultures and ideas” created the first quasi-“global” economy.
The Socio-Economic and Cultural Importance of the Globalizing Trend
The beginnings of globalization were no doubt socio-economically and culturally intensive, touching nearly every aspect of societies. Along with traded goods and government diplomacy, “songs, stories, religious ideas, philosophical views, and scientific knowledge all passed readily” among those who traveled along the networks that connected societies of the first millennium. Religions such as Buddhism, Nestorian Christianity, Roman Catholic Christianity, and especially Islam saw their influence grow with the spread of communication along greater distances.
Economically, trade stands out as a distinctive force in the socio-economic globalizing process. Not only was there an expansion in the types of goods traded—including a significant increase in transportation of bulky goods, such as building materials like timber and steel, food like grains and dates and other commodities like coral—but the goods themselves left a great impact upon their societies. For example, Muslim travelers introduced sugarcane to southwest Asia as well as north Africa citrus fruits and rice to sub-Saharan Africa, which “enriched diets in west Africa after the 11th century.” They also introduced cotton to west Africa, which eventually became the most popular textile produced in the region by 1500.
As societies increased their reliance on trade, they were able to focus on producing their best goods and importing the rest. This encouraged merchants and explorers to search for new trade routes—leading eventually to their discovery of Australia, the Pacific islands and the continents of the Americas. The diffusion of a simple invention such as the magnetic compass, conceived in China during the Tang or Song dynasty “spread throughout the Indian Ocean basin during the 11th century, and by the mid-twelfth century [was used by] European mariners … in the Mediterranean and the Atlantic Ocean.” The compass increased the mariners’ ability to sail long distances, and became “a boon” to maritime trade, further opening up the sea routes, and continuing the process of globalization.
Advantages & Disadvantages of the Globalization Model of World History
There is no doubt that there are some problems applying the concept of globalization to the period 1000-1350 C.E. The older tradition of historical writing, pioneered by Ibn Khaldun, would argue that history occurs as a series of parallel, sequential events. Using the organic metaphors of birth, growth and death to explain the rises and falls of states or civilizations, Khaldun might say that the globalization approach overstates or overemphasis inter-societal events at the expense of a thorough intra-societal analysis. As Professor McNeill noted , Khaldun is most likely more correct in the earlier stages of world history—before the proliferation of efficient long-distance travel and communication networks.
Furthermore, the term “globalization” is admittedly a bit misleading, as the territory connected does not in fact, encompass the entire globe. The Americas and Oceania did not participate in the economic and demographic expansion and integration of the eastern hemisphere. That having been said, they did continue to build more centralized states of their own and had trade routes from Mexico to the Great Lakes region, in effect “globalizing” in a regional sense.
One last disadvantage in using globalization to describe the period of 1000-1350 C.E. is the spectacularly disruptive epidemic health crisis of the mid fourteenth century: Bubonic Plague. Bringing many of the eastern hemisphere’s civilizations to their knees, the plague wrecked havoc, requiring almost a century of recovery. Perhaps that is why the famous explorers—Zheng He in the Indian Ocean (1405-1433), Bartolomeu Dias’s trip around Africa (1488), Christopher Columbus and the western hemisphere (1492), and Vasco de Gama’s venture to India (1497-1498)— did not occur until the late 15th century. It was these voyages that brought the simmering pot of globalization to a boil.
The advantages to viewing this era in history with an eye towards the process of globalization are powerful. Historians Bentley & Ziegler emphasize cross-cultural interactions—and it is obvious from both primary and secondary sources that the spread of religions, technologies, and long-distance trade that these exchanges facilitated were crucial to their civilizations’ development. A strong argument can be made that 1000-1350 C.E. is the first opportunity historians have to really call these long-distance relationships “global” as they were the “initiation of a long-term process … that brought all regions and peoples of planet earth into permanent and sustained interaction.”
Perhaps the decisive advantage to writing history with an eye towards the process of globalization is that it allows historians to paint a more complete picture. History does not always fit into divisions by continents and it does not come neatly packaged within borders. Actions, events, ideas and people have important ramifications not only in their own country, but in others. As Professor McNeill noted, “no individual and no societies operate autonomously—they’re all influenced by other societies elsewhere.” Ultimately, historians who use methodologies that allow them to explore “global” themes of inter-cultural relationships can better understand the development of an increasingly interdependent world.