To Pete on The Great Divergence

Hi Pete, 

I went through this same investigation when I first started teaching world history. "Why the West?" is such a provocative and -- I think -- the main question of modern world history. It's posed really well as "Yali's Question" in the prologue to Guns, Germs, and Steel, where a Papua New Guinean asks, “Why is it that you white people developed so much cargo … but we black people had little cargo of our own?” (I used to start my modern world history course with this reading, attached below.) 

The Great Divergence is the title of a definitive book by economic historian Kenneth Pomeranz that was all the rage a while ago; not sure if it's still the seminal work, but the Amazon book blurb sums up his thesis about natural resources as determining factors: 

I have long been obsessed with this question and with variants of the associated Needham Question, i.e., basically "Why not China?" which was historically the most advanced society in nearly every way until the 15th-16th century.  (My curiosity about this plays some role in my wanting to live/work/travel in Asia, in fact.)

Side note: In writing this email, I fell down an internet rabbit-hole that led to Columbia University's "Asia for Educators" site, which offers a new unit written by Pomeranz on the question of What is "Modern"?, challenging the European perspective and conventional wisdom. I'm excited to explore this!

I haven't read any of Niall Ferguson's work; I'd like to, though I know his book has been harshly criticized. One thing I've learned is that there are a lot of different answers scholars give; those responses, which often become politicized, may reveal more about the perspectives/approach of those scholars than anything else. For example, Jared Diamond, as a scientist/geographer, pinpoints ecological and geographic factors in GGS, but historian David Landes's book (which came out about the same time as Diamond's) argues for cultural factors. (Ferguson seems to follow in those footsteps; he cites Landes as an influence.) On the other hand, Pomeranz seems to align more with German economic historian Andre Gunter Frank whose book ReOrient goes a totally different direction. I'll attach an article that summarizes his take, but it's basically about silver, summed up well here:

I've often (but not always) tended to lean away from the cultural explanations (Landes, Ferguson) in favor of the environmental/economic explanations, because I personally favor that kind of data/evidence. BUT... I am humbled by the arguments on all sides and have come to accept that I can never know for sure. I'm a novice, too, and I'm just not sufficiently trained in all the various disciplines and perspectives from which the experts approach the question. There are so many people way smarter than I am who disagree. Example: Paul Krugman criticizes Landes-type cultural arguments as "just stories," while David Brooks loves them.

What does all this mean for teaching kids? I figure the best I can do it to offer students a lot of ways of digging into the question. For example, in past years I've assigned a DBQ for 8th graders to wrestle with the counterfactual question about why the Age of Exploration wasn't launched from China. At least they get to see that there are a variety of factors (geopolitical, economic, cultural, etc.) that serve as forces of change. I don't know the answer, but questions like these make great debates that force you to think about how to use evidence to prove arguments about historical change.

Phew. Sorry so long. I got carried away. Happy Saturday!

.m

P.S. A whole new perspective has opened up to me recently by learning the role of steppe nomads in world history. Jack Weatherford argues that the Mongols created a new world order in the 13th century; there would have been no European expansion, in fact no modern world at all, without the Mongol conquests. Europe benefited by being on the edges of the conquest and on the receiving end of technologies exchanged between the Islamic and Chinese worlds under the Pax Mongolica -- namely gunpowder, which they used to invent weapons like field artillery and mounted guns on oceangoing ships that changed the balance and locus of world power.

Last thing, promise: two great sites for world history stuff -- World History Connected and the World History Association.


Pete's response: 

Thanks, again, Michelle, for patiently and generously engaging with me in my efforts to try to prepare myself for history 9 (and for forgiving what is probably my alarming ignorance!) I really appreciate it. 

Here’s a useful summary! 

https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/courses/ap-world-history/classroom-resources/review-essay-teaching-great-divergence

My response to Pete's response: 

That's such a clear and useful summary. I wonder why there's no mention of Jared Diamond and/or Ian Morris? (Maybe it was written before these books were published.)

A couple random but related thoughts:

• "Context," the Brad Harris podcast you introduced to me earlier this summer has an episode on the David Landes book (YouTube link). I haven't listened to it myself, but you might find it useful? The thesis is at about 6:25: "What Landes impressively demonstrates... is that Europeans in particular achieved unprecedented wealth and power in large part by cultivating a more curious, independent, and entrepreneurial culture than anyone else.... If we learn anything from the history of economic development, it is that culture makes all the difference." 
• I really liked the Ian Morris lecture you shared. Thanks! I like his approach (though I also have some questions about his methodology, and especially how he defines and measures outcomes for the "West," around 15:00). His thesis is stated clearly at about 25 minutes: "The explanation for the shape of history has been geography. It's not great men, it's not religion, it's not institutions, it's not culture, it's not any of the things we used to talk about in the History of Western Civilization course.... Large groups of people are pretty much the same everywhere... so societies develop in very similar ways everywhere. What differs are the places where you're doing the developing, and that explains to me pretty much all the cultural and social and economic diversity we see in the modern world.... Geography drives social development." I think it'd be great to start your course by having students contrast these two thesis statements (maybe through watching relevant clips?). 
• The Pomeranz/Wong site on China and Europe I shared the other day has a fascinating resource on the influence of Chinese ideas in the Enlightenment and in European political/economic theory. Apparently Voltaire idolized Confucius! 9th graders would appreciate this connection, having been introduced to Confucianism as 8th graders.
• Students make a lot of maps in History 8 -- East Asia, South Asia, Southwest Asia, Central Asia. They don't know much about Europe, however. I'd recommend 9th graders start their year with a map exercise to orient themselves to the western side of Eurasia. Here's one.
• It's cool how your summer interests run up against mine in a couple ways: Brad Harris also has an episode on the Weatherford book about the Mongols, one of my favorites! Ian Morris gives a hat-tip to the positive effects of steppe nomads, too!