17th Century England: MERCANTILIST TOO; bourgeoisie, trade, beginnings of capitalism; capital accumulation; investment in textile production; (See Stav p. 86) Spanish Dependency: significance, p. 87.*** Commercial not feudal agriculture; diversified agriculture and diversified economy; most people small, independent farmers; proprietors; healthy, internal circulating market economy w/many linkages; Not religious fanatics: few witch burnings, the inquisition never came to England; little censorship, Protestant reformation secularizes culture, separates Church and State; freedom of and from religion; widespread literacy; secular, education. Those who came to New England wanted to work the land themselves; but in the South, landlords and slaves; Few natives (killed or driven off); many English men and women; practically no intermarriage; race more definite, more of a social factor; more of a divide. THUS: CLASS STRUCTURES: explain p. 165 how social patterns relate to political stability. Stav. p. 89: Who colonizes not enuf to explain dependency: 1) Mercantilism and dependency: Crown economic policies also caused dependency and underdevelopment in the colonies: Colonies to provide products and markets for owning country; state monopolies, price fixing, regulation; forced production and export of raw commodities: name them; import of manufacturers; forbidden to mfg any competing stuff in colonies; what was the source of colonial wealth? What did colonial wealth finance? (their own colonization; Spain and Portugal’s dynastic and religious wars). 2) But Spain unable to absorb (provide market for) all the commodities produced in colonies, Spain's market small, didn't mfg much itself; few independent traders, entrepreneurs, manufacturers; no modern financial or commercial sector; nobility looked down on commerce; Spain took the gold, but spent it on a) wars, and b) mfg; exported raw mats: wool, iron, wine; imported mfgs (cloth, iron) from Belgium, France, England who profit; foreigners controlled much of foreign trade in Spain and Portugal. (1580-1640 Portugal under Spanish rule)
THE LATIN AMERICAN PLANTATION ECONOMIES: (the American South too) mines haciencas, 12 million slaves. underdeveloped vs. diversified, independent, capable of development: monocrop capable only of growth: explain growth without development vertical vs. horozontal linkages: internal circulating economy: transportation; Can plantation economies generate internal horozontal linkages? Why or why not? versus: Colonial North America: independent, diversified, small producers for domestic consumption AND export: therefore wealth stays at home: little wealth, poor soil, climate; mercantile restrictions; So, Am colonies supplied carrying trade & Caribbean: fish, beef, grain for rum, to Africa for gold, slaves; No direct supervision by England.
p. 97 Why was European trade with Latin America more lucrative that with India and China together, even as late as 1807? WHAT DOES THE EXAMPLE OF BARBADOS (Stav 89) TELL US? CUBA? Barbados: sugar cane introduced in 1640 with what consequences? The NATURE of the colonial economy explains dependency: Large plantations destroy or marginalize rural smallholders, the independent farmers who could provide an internal economy w/linkages; slaves not consumers.
What ELSE happens in a monocrop economy re: the example of Guiana p. 97? What can you conclude about plantation economies? ruins local economy, ecology; replaces it with forced labor monocrop, for export; extractive infrastructure; SAME PATTERN TODAY.
Stav. p. 95: chart: If one in four made it, how many people came out of Africa?
back to the syllabus