When we talk about China, I always remember this civilization history professor from Yale, the one who studied with W.Bush. What was his name, Halil Berktay, right?
So he had this modernist, post-marxist human civilization development scheme with three layers where the industrial revolution preceeded with gathering and agricultural mode of production, is the last layer.
Of course, the course started from the details of very first production method. As we forwarded during the year, we reached the middle ages and started to read about how the middle ages was experienced all around the world.
It was when we saw that Chinese iron production, almost sole prerequisite of the industrial revolution, increased 12-fold between 9th and 11th century. Such that, at the end of 11th century North China alone had been producing more than the double of what England was producing at the end of 18th century, 8 hundred years later, during industrial revolution.
So, after telling this, the professor said that "it was a trial of Industrial Revolution. and it failed."
The steel production decreased again. China continued to agricultural mode of production. Industrial products didnt came out. And so on so fort.
Of course, this comment is open to discussion like every theory in the history. Such as it assumes the necessity of three steps of production, etc. etc.
But since then it is one of the biggest questions I asked myself. How the world would be if China could achieve to launch the Industrial Revolution at the end of 11th century? What if they could have invented steam engine to launch the Industrialism, just like they have invented gunpowder, compass and printing that ended Middle Ages?
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder