Customer Reviews

Expansion and Global Interaction: 1200-1700

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I was surprised that no one else had made a comment before to this work. Although the subject is very interesting, because of the author's style, the book, without being dry, is often somehow not engaging. So my rate is between 5 (content) and 3 (pleasure).

Anyhow, on the vexing question of why Western countries have dominated the world during the last few centuries [the very way the question is posed is controversial!], I would suggest reading the following books: 1) "Power and Plenty: Trade, War, and the World Economy in the Second Millennium" by Ronald Findlay and Kevin H. O'Rourke; 2)"The Great Divergence", by Kennetz Pomeranz; 3 - 4): "The world economy. A millennial perspective" (2001) plus "The world economy: Historical Statistics" (2003) by Angus Maddison (a combined edition of these two volumes appeared on December 2007); 5) "Why Europe Was First: Social Change and Economic Growth in Europe and East Asia, 1500-2050" by Erik Ringmar; and 6) "The Mystery of Capital Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else" by Hernando de Soto.

Used this for a gen-ed History class and I'm also a Global History major(History is awesome!!).

It's not a bad book; it does draw upon a lot of history and it really packs it in with some small text. But I could only give it three stars for the following reasons: It just seems to be rather technical or, as the other reviewed stated, dry. And what isn't drawn from history feels more like his personal opinions, conclusions or suppositions about history. So that leaves part of this book open to argument and as I proposed in the Finals essay of the class I used it for, very easy to dispute, which I would have been able to do even without being interested in history.

Just as an example: My essay question stated that according to Ringrose, "Before 1700, European contacts with other cultures often ended as standoffs or as cultural transactions rather than in conquest or domination." I found that to be pretty laughable and stated that in my essay response(in a polite way of course), using the examples of India, Africa and the Americas. And since I got an 98 on that Final and an A in the class I'd say that I was largely correct :)

As long as you can realize what information in this book is actually drawn from historical sources and what are his opinions, you'll be alright and you might learn a bit from the factual parts of the text.