The paper “ Colonialism and Access to Trans-Atlantic Trade” is a perfect variant of the essay on macro & microeconomics. In the medieval ages, Asia had in its possession different industrial techniques long before the occurrence of the industrial revolution. Asia’ s riches and economic growth placed it in a unique position as a commercial center in world trade. Although Western Europe had its own inventions too, Asia thrived because European communities had regressed greatly to an extent that the probability of European global supremacy was next to zero. In the tenth century, Western Europe had lost grip of its scientific power and its economy had retreated into autarky due to invasion and pillage by enemies.
However, in the nineteenth century, despite the privileges Asia had enjoyed for centuries Western Europe arose with technological developments identified by historians as the Industrial Revolution. The question thus arises: if Asia had such a huge mileage in its technological advancement, economy, and social institutions, and given that in the 18th century the standards of living in Asia were at the same level as those of Western Europe, why did Industrial Revolution take off earlier than Asia. Over the past decade social scientists, historians, and economists alike have attempted to answer this question and this has consequently given rise to the spawning of literature centering on the “ Great Divergence” theme (Frank 2001).
The perspective taken by this theme is that Western Europe had enjoyed excellent economic conditions and stable social institutions in the eighteenth century. However, a few Asian historians have come forward and contested this view by providing evidence to the effect that Asia’ s and Western Europe's development levels were at per up to the eighteenth century.
This is because Asia’ s technological developments did not stagnate at some point. They attribute the tilt in economic equilibrium to ‘ chance effects’ in the form of Western Europe’ s invasion of the old world and the new world and the coal discovery. The answer to this question might therefore lie in historical occurrences and impacts that were lacking in Asia which favored the advancement of Western Europe both technologically and economically (Romano 2010).
Acemoglu, D, Johnson, S, & Robinson, J. 2005. The Rise of Europe: Atlantic Trade, Institutional Change, and Economic Growth. The American Economic Review. 95(3): 546-579.
Buck, D. 1999. Was It Pluck or Luck that Made the West Grow Rich? Journal of World History, 10(2): 413-430
Fergusson, N. 2003. Empire: How Britain Made the Modern World. England: PENGUIN BOOKS
Romano, M. 2010. European History. Canada: Wiley Publishing Inc.
Goldstone, J. 2002. Efflorescences and Economic Growth in World History: Rethinking the “Rise of the West” and the Industrial Revolution. Journal of World History. 13(2): 323-389
Landes, David S. 2006. Why Europe and the West? Why Not China? Journal of Economic Perspectives. 20(2): 3-22
Marks, R. 2007. The Origins of the Modern World: Fate and Fortune in the Rise of the West. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.
Pomeranz, K. 2002. Political Economy and Ecology on the Eve of Industrialization: Europe, China, and the Global Conjuncture. The American Historical Review. 107(2): 425-446
Vries, P. 2002. Governing Growth: A Comparative Analysis of the Role of the State in the Rise of the West. Journal of World History, 13(1): 67-138
Zanden, J., and Luiten, V. 2008. The Road to The Industrial Revolution: Hypotheses and Conjectures about the Medieval Origins of the “European Miracle.” Journal of Global History. 3(4): 14-30
Pomeranz, K. 2000. The Great Divergence: China, Europe and the Making of the Modern World Economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.