Weeks 7-9 Lecture notes
Weeks 7-9 Lecture notes HIS 101 Cr.3
UW - L
Popular in Global Origins of the Modern World
Popular in History
This 12 page Bundle was uploaded by Rebecca Hansen on Sunday November 8, 2015. The Bundle belongs to HIS 101 Cr.3 at University of Wisconsin - La Crosse taught by Dr. Gerald Iguchi in Fall 2015. Since its upload, it has received 42 views. For similar materials see Global Origins of the Modern World in History at University of Wisconsin - La Crosse.
Reviews for Weeks 7-9 Lecture notes
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 11/08/15
White Man's Burden/Imperialist Ideology/Orientalism Rudyard Kipling (18651936), most famous for this. Take up the White Man's burden Send forth the best ye breed Go bind your sons to exile To serve your captives' need; To wait in heavy harness, On fluttered folk and wild Your newcaught, sullen peoples, Halfdevil and halfchild. Take up the White Man's burden In patience to abide, To veil the threat of terror And check the show of pride; By open speech and simple, An hundred times made plain To seek another's profit, And work another's gain. Take up the White Man's burden The savage wars of peace Fill full the mouth of Famine And bid the sickness cease; And when your goal is nearest The end for others sought, Watch sloth and heathen Folly Bring all your hopes to nought. Take up the White Man's burden No tawdry rule of kings, But toil of serf and sweeper The tale of common things. The ports ye shall not enter, The roads ye shall not tread, Go mark them with your living, And mark them with your dead. Take up the White Man's burden And reap his old reward: The blame of those ye better, The hate of those ye guard The cry of hosts ye humour (Ah, slowly!) toward the light: "Why brought he us from bondage, Our loved Egyptian night?" Take up the White Man's burden Ye dare not stoop to less Nor call too loud on Freedom To cloke your weariness; By all ye cry or whisper, By all ye leave or do, The silent, sullen peoples Shall weigh your gods and you. Take up the White Man's burden Have done with childish days The lightly proferred laurel, The easy, ungrudged praise. Comes now, to search your manhood Through all the thankless years Cold, edged with dearbought wisdom, The judgment of your peers! Robinson Crusoe (Daniel Dafoe, 1719) as the Foundation Myth of Modern World, Robinsonade literature (and art) and Us Why is the Crusoe story so apparently popular and influential? Difference between most of these later versions and the original Crusoe? The Form of the Novel and the West/Modernity Some believe Robinson Crusoe is world's first true novel. Premodern literature, the epic and verse, not prose, recited, performed (often with people in masks or extreme makeup and men playing women's roles). Basic novel form = Bildungsroman. Novel arose at same time as Enlightenment (and West/Orient binary), Industrial Revolution, liberal industrial capitalism (as opposed to mercantilism), and intensification of imperialism. Novels tell story of development of human from something like Oriental as it was imagined to something like West/modern as it was imagined. The structure of the novel mirrors this movement from being Oriental (or child, or woman, or slave) to being Western (or adult, or man, or master); this movement is the accumulation of sovereignty (selfness/ownership of self/self control) or subjectivity. Robinson Crusoe and Capital Accumulation What is capital? Capital accumulation? Capitalism? Difference between th 18 century and previous capitalism (?). Some generalizations: Old (feudal) system = o Reproduction of same. Take one's products to market, exchange for money, use money to buy needed commodities, including whatever materials (seeds, etc.) needed to keep process going. Consume any surplus. Go home. o Any growth is relatively inadvertent. Accumulation is not the point. New (modern) system = o Production of new (accumulation). Take one's products to market, exchange for money, buy what is needed for reproduction, BUT use as much surplus as possible to reinvest in processes of production and profit making (buy better seeds, buy more land, build factory, buy machines, hire workers or more workers, take a class, pay for research and development, buy a business suit or its equivalent, hire a public relations firm, advertise, lobby/bribe a politician, pay gangsters to beat up union organizers) o Entire point is growth, development, accumulation as intheory never ending process. Note on mercantilism: may be (early modern) intermediary step, which = growth with emphasis on taking directly/piracy because wealth is zero sum game, whereas with more fully developed capital accumulation growth occurs exponentially (like compounding interest) through process of reinvestment of profit/surplus into improvement of mode of production (application of division of labor, scientifictechnological innovation, mechanization, etc.). Robinson Crusoe and the Rationalization of Space (Privatization of Property), Time, and Everything Private Property Fundamental to capitalism is private property. This means not so much items of personal use: jacket, shoes, etc., but the privatization (claiming as private property) of what historically was communally shared. In British history / the history of the agricultural and industrial revolutions, what was the fundamental privatization that led to the formation of a pool of laborers willing to sell their work in factories, and thus helped lead to industrialization? Crusoe: o "Jan. 3. I began my fence or wall; which being still jealous (apprehensive) of my being attack'd by some body, I resolv'd to make very thick and strong .... When this wall was finished, and the outside double fenc'd with a turfwall raids'd up close to it, I pereswaded myself that if any People were to come on Shore there, they would not perceive any Thing like a Habitation...." o "April 16. I finish'd the Ladder, so I went up with the Ladder to the top, and then pulled it up after me and let it down in the Inside: this was a compleat Enclosure to me; for within I had room enough, and nothing could come at me from without, unless it could first mount my Wall." o "I built me up a kind of bower (pleasant shady place), and surrounded it at a Distance with a strong Fence, being a double hedge, as high as I could reach, well stak'd, and fill'd between with Brushwood...." o "I ... sow'd my Seed in two large flat Pieces of Ground , as near my house as I coul find them to my mind, and fenc'd them in with a good Hedge, the Stakes of which were all cut of that Wood which I had set before, and knew it would grow, so that in one Year's time I knew I should have a Quick or LivingHedge, that would want but little Repair." o "I had my Enclosures for my Cattle, that is to say, my Goats: And as I had taken an inconceivable deal of Pains to fence and enclose this Ground, so I was so uneasy to see it kept entire, lest the Goats should break thro', that I never left off till with infinite Labour I had stuck the Outside of the Hedge so full of small Stakes, and so near to one another, that it was rather a Pale than a Hedge, and there was scarce Room to put a Hand thro' between them, which afterwards when those Stakes grew, as they all did in the next rainy Season, made the Enclosure strong like a Wall, indeed stronger than any Wall." o " I removed ten young SheGoats and two HeGoats to this Piece; and when they were there, I continued to perfect the Fence till I had made it as secure as the other, which, however, I did at more Leisure, and it took me up more Time by a great deal." o "I begun now to consider, that having two Mouths to feed, instead of one, I must provide more Ground for my Harvest, and plant a larger Quantity of Corn, than I us'd to do; so I mark'd out a larger Piece of Land, and began the Fence in the same Manner as before, in which Friday not only work'd very willingly, and very hard; but did it very cheerfully." Rationalization of Time A tenet of the new way of thinking about productivity, development, accumulation is that (with perhaps a Calvinist influence) “time is money,” which means as corollary that wasted time is something like a sin because time spent developing and accumulating glorifies God and is thus in itself virtue. This is related to the how in industrial societies labor and its value are measured th th clocks, which became increasingly reliable in the 18 to 19 centuries. Crusoe: o "After I had been there about ten or twelve days, it came into my thoughts that I should lose my reckoning of time for want of books, and pen and ink, and should even forget the Sabbath days; but to prevent this, I cut with my knife upon a large post, in capital lettersand making it into a great cross, I set it up on the shore where I first landed'I came on shore here on the 30th September 1659.'" o "Upon the sides of this square post I cut every day a notch with my knife, and every seventh notch was as long again as the rest, and every first day of the month as long again as that long one; and thus I kept my calendar, or weekly, monthly, and yearly reckoning of time.” o "... I was very seldom idle, but having regularly divided my time according to the several daily employments that were before me, such as: first, my duty to God, and the reading the Scriptures, which I constantly set apart some time for thrice every day; secondly, the going abroad with my gun for food, which generally took me up three hours in every morning, when it did not rain; thirdly, the ordering, cutting, preserving, and cooking what I had killed or caught for my supply; these took up great part of the day. Also, it is to be considered, that in the middle of the day, when the sun was in the zenith, the violence of the heat was too great to stir out; so that about four hours in the evening was all the time I could be supposed to work in, with this exception, that sometimes I changed my hours of hunting and working, and went to work in the morning, and abroad with my gun in the afternoon.” Rationalization of Everything, the Logic of Accounting The modern self, Robinson Crusoe and Carl Linnaeus, masters the world through KNOWING, FIXING, NAMING it: what it is, what time it is, where it is, whom whatever it is belongs to, etc. As part of this mastery, the modern self also accounts for all his possessions, keeping inventory, but not only of material possessions, of everything. Crusoe: "The account of the whole is as follows: Three killed at our first shot from the tree; two killed at the next shot; two killed by Friday in the boat; two killed by Friday of those at first wounded; one killed by Friday in the wood; three killed by the Spaniard; four killed, being found dropped here and there, of the wounds, or killed by Friday in his chase of them; four escaped in the boat, whereof one wounded, if not deadtwentyone in all." Crusoe, Social Mobility, Development, and Civilizing Mission (Ideology of Imperialism) Crusoe starts off as lower middle class and “makes something of himself,” “pulling himself up by his own bootstraps.” His story mirrors that of the burghers/bourgeoisie that rose from medieval lack of status to being ruling class of modern period; he repeatedly calls himself king, which means king of the place the HE MADE (so being king is not a status he is born into; he is a “selfmade” man). His development in the novel, from youth to man, geographically mirrors this development or progress from British Protestant perspective: Starts out lower middle class in England (an island that became center of the world in modern period). Becomes slave to Muslim ruler in North Africa (the ORIENT) (he has sunk very low). Becomes plantation owner in Roman Catholic Brazil (now he is at level of southern Europe or how many North Americans think of Latin America). And “finds himself” on deserted space that is from his perspective a clean slate (and another island), which he MAKES HIS AS HE MAKES HIMSELF HIMSELF and makes himself a kind of (selfcrowned) KING; only having gone through the earlier stages “proves” that he has earned his royal status, unlike nobility who traditionally receive theirs from birth And because Robinson is a MAN who supposedly made his/the world as he made himself, it seems he has sovereignty over his world and himself. It seems he also has sovereignty over the people he encounters (Friday and other indigenous people, British criminals, Spanish Catholics). According to this logic he not only has the right to dominate others, he has the RESPONSIBILITY to educate/develop those who supposedly cannot educate/develop OR EVEN NAME themselves, i.e., “his man Friday,” whom he names (because he previously does not know his name or have a name, or at least one worth knowing or having) and teaches to speak (because he does not previously know or have a language, or at least one worth knowing or speaking) (this is similar to how many think “real men” have the responsibility to take care of women and children; it's the only “noble” thing to do). By making himself himself, he in a sense makes someone else (Friday) a mirror only, a reflection of himself, a dependent, an object, a thing, a nonself. Ironically, “his man Friday” is not to him a man at all. Imperial Dynasties of China Chinese dynasties: Some say, go back at least to 1600 BCE, dynasties lasting from decades long to centuries long. But: o Usually not anywhere near like the territory of China today; borders had different conception than modern ones, meaning there was relatively little clarity; there was shifting, ambiguity, and shifting ambiguity. o Not always unified. Not all people “Chinese” (even today, but definitely not in premodern times). Not all dynasties were originally ethnically Chinese at all: biggest (but not only) examples: Yuan (Mongol) Dynasty (12711368 CE) and Qing (Manchu) Dynasty (16441911). Marco Polo visited in time of Yuan. Extensive contact with outside world occurred during Ming (13681644). By Yuan Dynasty times, all dynasties definitely appropriated prestige of “Central Kingdom” status. Capital shifted from around a lot (Beijing or Peking, which means northern capital was capital in Yuan, Ming and Qing Dynasty times). Idea is that Chineseness remained despite various dynasties of various ethnicities, fragmentation, shifting borders, etc. I have some doubts. Nevertheless one can think of China as a machine that various groups could appropriate and make their own, transforming themselves into Chinese in the process (similarity to Nile valley and Egyptian civilization as system). Varieties of Confucianism, traceable to teacher Kungfuze or Kungze (551479 BCE) are key to these processes. Confucius' teachings are quintessence of conservatism. Confucian ideal is "rectification of names" (正正, Zhèngmíng). On microscopic level: father acts like father, eldest son acts like eldest son, wife/mother acts like wife/mother, youngest daughter acts like youngest daughter, etc. On macroscopic level: emperor acts like emperor, governors act like governors, officials act like officials, landlords act like landlords, and peasants act like peasants. If somebody fails in this, there (especially at the top) is loss of heavenly mandate and the system fails. Ideal Chinese/Confucian system is always in the past temporally (the legendary rulers of very early times and the way the people behaved then) and the center spatially (the place of the emperor, the capital). Borders shifted, dynasties changed, but what was righteous did not. Tributary system: o Polities (political entities) around China (Siam [Thailand], Malacca, various other kingdoms or polities [sultanates, rajahs, etc.] of Southeast Asia, Korea, Ryūkyū Kingdom [Okinawa], etc.) were in tributary relationship with China through much of history, and definitely by Ming and Qing times. o This meant: no permanent embassies in capital; embassies sent intermittently brought “tribute” which in part was really form of trade. Tributary relations were twoway street; surrounding countries rulers paid respect with Kowtow and so on, but gained prestige/power in their own locale because of the relationship. By Qing period at least, Chinese developed insular sense of superiority. There was sense of not needing anything from outside world. MORE fundamentally and historically important: the temporal attitude of Chinese rulers contrasted with what was becoming the European ruling class in the early modern and modern periods. Chinese rulers were NOT interested in accumulation. They had not caught that disease, and everything about Chinese politics, culture, society was developed so as to PREVENT change, which was totally contrary to the world of wannabe Robinson Crusoes on the other side of Eurasia (and increasingly in North America). Roots of Modern British Imperialism East India Company—16001873; royal charter, monopoly on trade with Asia. Ultimately had its own military, civil service and government of India, flag, etc. 1615, begins business of negotiating footholds in India with right to trade at Surat on northwest coast. 1634, Mughal emperor of India grants right to trade in Bengal (in northeast), and in 1717 waives customs duties for the company there. Economy of company was still preindustrial, trading for tea, silk, indigo, Indian manufactured textiles, saltpeter, tea. Mughal empire was falling apart by 1707. 1711, company trading post at Canton (Guangzhou [city], Guandong [proince) in southern China, with trade for silver and tea. As partial extension of wars between French and British crowns in Europe, battle of Plassey, 1757. Battle of Buxar, 1764, and Mughal emperor grants right to collect revenue in Bengal, Bihar, Orissa. Gradually, the company extended rule across subcontinent, with moreorless complete rule by time of rebellion against it (ironically) in 1857. The company had trade deficit with Qing = silver in and tea (etc.) out and not very much profit for the British. British tea drinking went back to 1664. Less than 50 years later, favorite drink of British. 12 million pounds of tea a year by 1785. Between 1710 and 1759, 26 million pounds sterling silver to China and only 9 million worth of goods sold there. In 1659, answer for British and company started to become opium. In 1773 company created monopoly on opium buying in Bengal. Company merchants used credit to buy tea in Canton, and then paid debts in Calcutta after selling company opium that others would smuggle into China. Qing reaffirmed ban on import of opium, 1773, but to no avail. Macartney Embassy to China, 17924 ScotchIrish George Macartney was Viscount (given high noble rank) and had illustrious career as diplomat, was to some extent “made man” as newly endowed highranking nobility; was Presbyterian (Scottish Calvinist). Macartney's mission was to go to Beijing on behalf of company (which financed the trip) and king (whose official representative he was), and to establish permanent embassy in Beijing, open ports within China besides Canton to British trade, make British outpost on Zhousan (Chosan) Island. Macartney brought a variety of gifts including two carriages, telescopes, brass howitzers, globes, chime clocks, musical instruments, coming as well with a hot air balloon and balloonist; in all 600 gifts. Eightyyearold Emperor Qianlong—who had palaces much more grand than any European monarch of the time—chose to meet Macartney in a yurt. Foreign embassies were according to Chinese logic supposed kowtow (bow and touch head to floor nine times) to emperor. Macartney refused to unless Chinese officials did same to picture of British King George III. Nobody kowtowed. By William Alexander, official artist of Mission, note presence of George Staunton (Jr.) in image. In the end, Qing were not impressed and saw no use for increased diplomatic relations and trade with Britain. Macartney was prepared to offer to make efforts to curtail opium trade but never got a chance to advance the proposal. In the end the Qing emperor Qianlong was not impressed and put British gifts in the outhouse of his “summer palace.” In 1797 East India Company began direct control of opium plantations in India. Worldview Revolution, Industrial Revolution and the Weaving of Empire Why might one surmise that the British Empire and the Qing Dynasty were bound to clash? Remember: Chinese had invented crossbows, rockets, natural gas as fuel, restaurant menu, fork, gunpowder, the printing press, the compass, (probably) the lateen sail, advanced rudder, the use of coal, umbrellas, paper, seismograph, kite, abacus, blast furnace, potters wheel, printed money, cast iron, increasingly highquality steel, (moreorless) stirrup, tea, tofu, toilet paper, rotary fan, toothbrush, wheelbarrow, etc. They had higher technology in various areas, including hydraulics, metallurgy, shipbuilding, and of course porcelain. The SUPERIORITY of China and its products is why Europeans had come to China to trade in the first place (was also, of course, part of the reason why they stumbled upon the Americas and continue to explore them). Ming period Chinese visited areas far away (Southeast Asia, Africa, Middle East, some think the Americas as well). Late eighteenth century is when industrial revolution fully arrived. Steam engine led to mechanized production of textiles in English factories by early 19 century. This reversed the flow of textiles from India to England to England to India, which put Indian weavers out of business eventually because they could not compete with mechanization. In early British imperialism—before industrial revolution—the British state protected domestic markets, with high tariffs on textiles and other commodities (and most British people wore wool), but with the industrial revolution this changed because British manufacturers now had the advantage and they began to push for “free trade.” British textiles paid for Indian opium that paid for Chinese tea that the British (and others) drank, and British people who invested in all stages of the process made a fortune; by 1828, 55% of British imports to China were Indian opium. Opium was important element in the British weaving of an empire built on a “comparative advantage” (international division of labor) system they controlled and overwhelmingly profited from. But opium was only part of how the British empire worked: “The Plains of North America and Russia are our corn fields; Chicago and Odessa [Ukraine] our granaries; Canada and the Baltic are our timber forests; Australasia [Australia and New Zealand] contains our sheep farms, and in Argentina and on the Western prairies of North America are our herds of oxen [cattle]; Peru sends her silver, and the gold of South Africa and Australia flows to London; the Hindus [Indians] … grow tea for us, and our coffee, sugar, and spice plantations are in all the Indies … and our cotton grounds, which for long have occupied the Southern United States, are now being extended everywhere in the warm regions of the Earth… [T]he several quarters of the globe [are] our willing tributaries” (W. S. Jevons, The Coal Question, 1865). A New British (and more generally AngloSaxon) Identity From Thomas Babington Macaulay (colonial administrator for East India Company), "Minute of 2 February 1835 on Indian Education": o “It will hardly be disputed, I suppose, that the department of literature in which the Eastern writers stand highest is poetry. And I certainly never met with any Orientalist who ventured to maintain that the Arabic and Sanscrit poetry could be compared to that of the great European nations. But when we pass from works of imagination to works in which facts are recorded, and general principles investigated, the superiority of the Europeans becomes absolutely immeasurable. It is, I believe, no exaggeration to say, that all the historical information which has been collected from all the books written in the Sanscrit language is less valuable than what may be found in the most paltry abridgements used at preparatory schools in England. In every branch of physical or moral philosophy, the relative position of the two nations is nearly the same.” o And o “We have to educate a people who cannot at present be educated by means of their mothertongue. We must teach them some foreign language. The claims of our own language it is hardly necessary to recapitulate. It stands preeminent even among the languages of the west. It abounds with works of imagination not inferior to the noblest which Greece has bequeathed to us; with models of every species of eloquence; with historical compositions, which, considered merely as narratives, have seldom been surpassed, and which, considered as vehicles of ethical and political instruction, have never been equalled; with just and lively representations of human life and human nature; with the most profound speculations on metaphysics, morals, government, jurisprudence, and trade; with full and correct information respecting every experimental science which tends to preserve the health, to increase the comfort, or to expand the intellect of man. Whoever knows that language has ready access to all the vast intellectual wealth, which all the wisest nations of the earth have created and hoarded in the course of ninety generations. It may safely be said, that the literature now extant in that language is of far greater value than all the literature which three hundred years ago was extant in all the languages of the world together.”
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'