Leisure and Culture: Rugby

In the last quarter of the nineteenth century, while it was growing the industrial economy, emerged different kinds of Sport. One of them (maybe the most important) was the Rugby. On the one hand it showed us the new aristocracy from Oxford, Eton, etc. and on the other hand served as cultural event for many people and lifestyles all over the world. 

The picture above is a great example of this: The Roses Match (painted by William Barnes Wollen)

You can also follow me on Twitter 

Borgen: Politics in the 21st Century

You can also follow me on Twitter 

The Bruges Speech

Prime Minister, Rector, Your Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen:

First, may I thank you for giving me the opportunity to return to Bruges and in very different circumstances from my last visit shortly after the Zeebrugge Ferry disaster, when Belgian courage and the devotion of your doctors and nurses saved so many British lives.

And second, may I say what a pleasure it is to speak at the College of Europe under the distinguished leadership of its Rector [Professor Lukaszewski]. The College plays a vital and increasingly important part in the life of the European Community.

And third, may I also thank you for inviting me to deliver my address in this magnificent hall. What better place to speak of Europe's future than a building which so gloriously recalls the greatness that Europe had already achieved over 600 years ago.

Your city of Bruges has many other historical associations for us in Britain. Geoffrey Chaucer was a frequent visitor here. And the first book to be printed in the English language was produced here in Bruges by William Caxton.

Britain and Europe

Mr. Chairman, you have invited me to speak on the subject of Britain and Europe. Perhaps I should congratulate you on your courage. If you believe some of the things said and written about my views on Europe, it must seem rather like inviting Genghis Khan to speak on the virtues of peaceful coexistence!

I want to start by disposing of some myths about my country, Britain, and its relationship with Europe and to do that, I must say something about the identity of Europe itself.

Europe is not the creation of the Treaty of Rome. Nor is the European idea the property of any group or institution.

We British are as much heirs to the legacy of European culture as any other nation. Our links to the rest of Europe, the continent of Europe, have been the dominant factor in our history.

For three hundred years, we were part of the Roman Empire and our maps still trace the straight lines of the roads the Romans built. Our ancestors - Celts, Saxons, Danes - came from the Continent. Our nation was - in that favourite Community word - "restructured" under the Norman and Angevin rule in the eleventh and twelfth centuries.

This year, we celebrate the three hundredth anniversary of the glorious revolution in which the British crown passed to Prince William of Orange and Queen Mary.

Visit the great churches and cathedrals of Britain, read our literature and listen to our language: all bear witness to the cultural riches which we have drawn from Europe and other Europeans from us.

We in Britain are rightly proud of the way in which, since Magna Carta in the year 1215, we have pioneered and developed representative institutions to stand as bastions of freedom. And proud too of the way in which for centuries Britain was a home for people from the rest of Europe who sought sanctuary from tyranny.

But we know that without the European legacy of political ideas we could not have achieved as much as we did. From classical and mediaeval thought we have borrowed that concept of the rule of law which marks out a civilised society from barbarism.

And on that idea of Christendom, to which the Rector referred - Christendom for long synonymous with Europe - with its recognition of the unique and spiritual nature of the individual, on that idea, we still base our belief in personal liberty and other human rights [...]

Full Text and Video

You can also follow me on Twitter 

Interwar: Alt-Berlin

Picture: Alt-Berlin, Waisenstraße, 1927
Artist: Hans Baluschek

You can also follow me on Twitter 

Berlin, 13th August 1961

You can also follow me on Twitter 

Convention of Kanagawa

In Japan, one of the most important facts in the second half of the nineteenth century was the signing of the Convention of Kanagawa in 1854 between the Commodore Perry, on behalf of the United States, and the Tokugawa Shogunate. Because of the weakness of its army, Japan was forced to accept trade relations with western lands.

What did this event? Firstly, opened the ports of Shimoda and Kakodate to the United States trade. Japan, as you know, had been isolated since 1633 and, therefore, this step helped the country to improve and to extend its commercial relations with other nations. Secondly, drove it to enhance its way of living by, for instance, setting up enterprises (without real competition, though) and leaving, gradually, feudal policies. Finally, it triggered upheaveals within the country and, as a result, marked the arrival of the Meiji period.

More: Black Ships

Picture below: Com. Perry carrying the 'Gospel of God' to the Heathen, ca. 1854 (James G. Evans)

You can also follow me on Twitter

The Recovery of Bahía

The Recovery of Bahía de Todos los Santos (Juan Bautista Maíno)

The picture shows one episode of the Thirty Years War in which Spain got back Bahía from Netherlands. It was time of mercantilism and rivalries between european nations, although not only because gold and silver but also about religion (the same issue, actually). You can see on the right side Felipe IV, Olivares (his Primer Minister) and Victoria. Felipe is submitting 'misbelievers'. On the left, the scene is representing peace, piety and other catholic values. The rest explains the aftermath of the battle. That image is a good example of the history of the first half of the 17th century.

You can also follow me on Twitter

Cold War: Kitchen Debate

Khrushchev: It’s clear to me that the construction workers didn’t manage to finish their work and the exhibit still is not put in order ... this is what America is capable of, and how long has she existed? 300 years? 150 years of independence and this is her level. We haven’t quite reached 42 years, and in another 7 years, we’ll be at the level of America, and after that we’ll go farther. As we pass you by, we’ll wave "hi" to you, and then if you want, we’ll stop and say, "please come along behind us" ... If you want to live under capitalism, go ahead, that’s your question, an internal matter, it doesn’t concern us. We can feel sorry for you, but really, you wouldn’t understand. We’ve already seen how you understand things.

Nixon: It’s a very effective exhibit, and it’s one that will cause a great deal of interest. I might say that this morning I, very early in the morning, went down to visit a market, where the farmers from various outskirts of the city bring in their items to sell. I can only say that there was a great deal of interest among these people, who were workers and farmers, etc ... I would imagine that the exhibition from that standpoint would, therefore, be a considerable success. As far as Mr Khrushchev’s comments just now, they are in the tradition we learned to expect from him of speaking extemporaneously and frankly whenever he has an opportunity. I can only say that if this competition which you have described so effectively, in which you plan to outstrip us, particularly in the production of consumer goods ... If this competition is to do the best for both of our peoples and for people everywhere, there must be a free exchange of ideas. There are some instances where you may be ahead of us--for example in the development of the thrust of your rockets for the investigation of outer space. There may be some instances, for example, color television, where we’re ahead of you. But in order for both of us benefit ...
     

If you want to know more about this, click here: (1) Kitchen Debate - (2) Transcript

You can also follow me on Twitter

Taking Different Paths

As you probably know, from last decades of eighteen hundreds to the first quarter of the twentieth century world economies were led by free trade and gold standard, in which social and economic progress settled. Meanwhile, imperialism and rivalries didn´t stop. As a result, the world was doomed to world war (thirty years of warfare, actually) and countries started to adapt their resources to the new context. Certainly, was the aftermath of the first world war what explains the end of the victorian boom, an era characterized by the economic interdependence all over the planet, and also by the idea that goods were manufactured in order to consume them wherever you live and work. One example of those was fordism, that spread the assembly line and mass production everywhere.

Why, finally, main economies left the previous model of economic globalization? Maybe, at this point we must study the post-war conditions. In this way, we can read the following in Worlds Together, Worlds Apart: 'Its causes went back to the Great War, which had left European nations in deep debt as they struggled to rebuild their economies and pay off war debts. To restore stability, Europeans borrowed heavily from the United States. When wobbly governments and small investors defaulted on their loans, the U.S. Federal Reserve reacted by raising interest rates. Starting in central Europe, financial institutions began to collapse. As banks fell, other lenders scrambled to call in their loans. Companies, governments, and private borrowers were soon floating in a sea of debt. The panic then spread to the world’s stock markets, which led to the Wall Street crash of 1929, which spurred more bank closures' (p. 719).

The situation was untenable and the United States enforced penalties to import and export assets, signing the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, and also taking the first step towards protectionism. In response, trading partners cut links and international relations started to break down. We can also read some words in the textbook concerning that worry: 'After the United States enacted protective tariffs, other governments abandoned free trade in favor of protectionism. Manufacturers cut back production, laid off millions of workers, and often went out of business' (p.720). In Europe, actually, the crisis started when an austrian bank, the Kredit-Anstalt Bank, collapsed. In consequence, diplomacy tried to arrange the issue. It failed, anyway. One example to solve it was the Paris Conference of 1931.

Patterns of Recovery

Liberal economies were, hence, put in question, claiming that the market place hadn't a self-equilibrating structure. Here, we must quote figures like John Maynard Keynes, who despite believing in the free market, also argued that it should be controlled by the state. Therefore, following these ideas, countries like the United States applied its policies to stimulate the economy. In this particular case, it was called New Deal. However, there were other kind of responses. Sometimes diametrically opposite. These replications relied on popular support to carry out its strategies, which it could be divided in hard-core command economies and medium-core command economies. In this way, the state became the representative of the common will. Let me analyze them briefly.

Collectivized Agriculture - Soviet Propaganda: 'Let's Achieve a Victorious Harvest'

On the one hand, the most relavant example of hard-core command economy was the Soviet Union, country in which the collective way gained immense importance. What did collective way mean? Roughly, collectivist policies tried to accumulate resources in the hands of the state. That's to say, everything you produce must be property of those who run the country's destiny. Private property and other individual rights were largely beaten in the name of the state. This sort of planned economy was very effective to mobilize people and technology, especially in war time. Nonetheless, it demanded much sacrificies (of all types) and the need of produce new tools caused the population, in the end, remain exhausted. In reality, things were not so easy: 'The realities behind the images (like in the poster above) of smiling farmers were low productivity, enormous waste and often broken-down machinery' (p. 724).

On the other hand, medium-core command economies like Japan and Germany did not take over the organization of production. The state was above everything, that's true, but it left some freedom for the commercial activity (always for the general interest), which was supervised but the state officials. The aim was to create loyalty and capacity to consume, but needing reliance on peripheries to satisfy their needs (great resources), so they kept the persistance in the way of empire because of primary staples for industrial recovery. Although Japan broke down, Germany, the Third Reich, was the best example of this kind of policy. Both of them were great militarized and led societies.

In conclusion, this financial crisis took countries to make decisions like to leave the gold standard and retreat into protectionism. Liberal democracies relied on the state as a key agent to stimulate economy. However, others, like the Soviet Union and Germany pushed for policies in which peoples support, expansionism and popular will played crucial roles, not only in the recovery but also in the nationalist and popular machinery.

You can also follow me on Twitter

Dmitri Shostakovich: Leningrad

You can also follow me on Twitter

Faith, Silver and Mercantilism

Not only social and political changes of the seventeenth century were important, but also their causes and consequences. In this period of time, instability spread all over the world, specifically in Europe, where we must mainly look for the reasons of these important shifts. The steady increase of wealth in states like Spain, Portugal, Netherlands, England or France (especially thanks to the gold and silver extracted from the colonial lands), involved all of them, and eventually others, in serious strains, particularly in the Thirty Years’ War.

In the lectures, Jeremy Adelman often talks about the essential change from interconnection to interdependence happened during this time, that’s to say, the path through which states and regions began to be more sensitives to whatever political and economic transformation that occurred in other parts of the world. One example of this new pattern of behavior was the adjustment of China, that moved southwards in order to produce the goods that europeans needed, which they exchanged for the silver that, meanwhile, was being extracted from the Americas mines and that the Ming Dinasty decided to use for its own consumption. Later, as we will see, the crisis of this commercial interdependence will be, among others, the cause of the upheavals within China and of what, finally, will incite the arrival of the Qing Dinasty. Anyway, as you can see, at that point in time the world was already interdependent from the Atlantic Ocean to the Indian Ocean. Let’s now explain the causes and consequences of this new reality.                                                                                    

Interior of the church of St Odulphus in Assendelft (Pieter Jansz. Saenredam, 1649)

On the one hand, we may point out some causes of this turning point. To start with, in my view, the main one was the paradox of becoming wealthy. While Europe was obtaining more richness, the competition among their states rose deeply. What’s more, they were divided into two religious groups: reformists and counter-reformists. By the way, it’s commonly said that convictions were an excuse to gain bigger revenues, and I strongly agree with this statement. The fact was that when silver, above all, became scarce, states had to deal with this threat through different replications. One of them was warfare (for instance, the long conflict of Spaniards in Netherlands), another one was piracy (Francis Drake’s actions), and so on. Secondly, besides competition, we have to stressed the fact that during the seventeenth century there was a sort of ice age, the world cooled, which caused famines everywhere and harmed seriously the harvests and the whole agriculture in regions like China (the Deccan famine in India was significant, too) where, as I said before, silver were exchanged for new goods in order to sustain its needs. The scarcity of those preciosities rebounded in the trade among China and Europe, forcing the Ming Dinasty to cope with revolts within its own borders. As you probably know, the consequence of that issue was the arrival of the Qing Dinasty, who created a new manchu state and also modified the bureaucracy and military priorities of the ancient one. In consequence, the Han majority was displaced. Finally, what was truly important was the Mercantilism, a new relationship between states and merchants. By quoting some words from the book Worlds Together, Worlds Apart, ‘the lasting prosperity of the landed interest depends upon foreign commerce’, what means that states wanted to ensure that because ‘augmenting our mercantile and royal navies, they necessarily become the means of our permanent prosperity and of the safety and preservation of our happy constitution’. So, as you can read, the aim was to enrich states and to maintain armies in order to defend the general interest of the countries, if necessary, by doing the war. One example of that was the Dutch East India Company. Russia, meanwhile starts to move westwards thanks also to commerce and warfare.

On the other hand, the impacts were crucial to understand the world that was coming. The increasingly importance of mercantilism caused the growth of important companies, which in the mid and long-term would probably have a different vision of their interests than those that previously had the states. Each state had toeholds in Asia, in Africa, in America too, but, from this moment, companies took control of the business in the name of each nation. In addition, the rivalry between europeans smash up the old dream of recreate the ancient Roman Empire. The Treaty of Westfalia (1648), closed the problems within Europe somehow, but moved them abroad, which supposed a reordering of the world. Another important point was the situation in which stayed nations like Spain who, because of the great debts acquired to fund warfare, lost its key possesions in Netherlands and political weight in the global framework after Westfalia. In the Islamic World, the Mughal empire weakened because of the trade with foreign companies.

In summary, the evolution and new behavior of global trade triggered drastic changes in the importance states gave to the monopoly of certain goods, emerging that way mercantilism. That was reflected in strains within Europe, and in the second half of the century, everywhere. If we add to the previous calamities, the answers to natural disasters, famines and discussions on religion, seventeenth century may be considered as the perfect modeler of the post-columbus world.

You can also follow me on Twitter

The Dutch East India Company

You can also follow me on Twitter 

A Financial Crisis

Do you know the story of the South Sea Bubble?

Click and listen (BBC Radio 4)

Hogarthian image of the South Sea Bubble (Edward Matthew Ward, 1816 - 1879)

  
You can also follow me on Twitter 

A History of the World since 1300

You can also follow me on Twitter