In the last chapter of Re-Orient, Frank proudly proclaims the 
evidence he has presented against the "eurocentric" view "is so 
abundant and systematic that it empirically invalidates" it (321).
I believe the evidence I presented here is substantial enough to call 
into question his own theory. I have not dealt here in pen-l with 
Frank's critique of Europe's claimed superiority in science, technology, 
guns, ships, printing, and financial institutions, a critique which 
really claims too much - that Asia was superior in these areas until 
the industrial revolution  - but offers too little in historical 
analysis. 

But we shouldn't forget that Re-Orient is  one part  (actually a 
summation) of  a much wider effort which rejects the whole notion  
of European "uniqueness". Re-Orient presupposes much of this effort, 
as can be seen in the bibliography, including Amin's *Eurocentrism*; 
Blaut's *Colonizer's Model*; Goody's *East in the West*; and books by 
Perlin, Rowe, Wong, Pomeranz, and many others. 

>From what I read briefly, Goldstone and Pomeranz appear to be 
searching through a pile of coal to see if they can find the explanation 
for Britain's industrialization! Frank too takes into consideration the 
location and comparative costs of inputs like wood/coal. I mean, 
as Goldstone put  it  in a post to the world history list last Spring, 
if "it is difficult to find empirical evidence that sustains a view of an 
inherently advantaged Europe centuries before industrialization, and 
that much empirical evidence suggests equality or superiority for 
Asian societies relative to Europe, as late as 1750", [then we must 
ask] "the question of what positive theory do we have 
to account for Europe's  eventual emergence (however brief) as 
`top dog' in this global  system...Pomeranz and I both believe easy 
access to coal by people who needed fuel was crucial".  So much 
trouble for nothing; the answer was under our feet -  no earth, 
no coal, no industrialization!  

But it is not even that China had no coal but that, as Frank says 
its "deposits were distant from its possible utilization...so that 
progressive deforestation still did not make it economical to switch 
to fuel from wood to coal" (315).

In fairness, Goldstone, author of  the brillian book, Revolution and 
Rebellion in the Early Modern World,  does add  "I believe 
institutional and cultural shifts c. 1650-1750 were a crucial 
part of the story."   



Reply via email to