Monday, February 2, 2009

Globalization + Coincidence = Worldwide Absolutism

The Age of Absolutism, which began between the 16th and 17th centuries, was a time period when many of the world's most powerful civilizations were becoming linked. This time period could also be called the dawn of true globalization, when the world became drastically smaller due to a combination of technological advances that allowed for further travel and expanded trade routes. Various magnificent societies including the Ottoman Empire, the Mongol and later Qing dynasties in China, and European kingdoms became trading partners that relied on each other to maintain their high standards of living. The most important thing that these societies traded, however, was ideas. These ideas were scientific, technological, philosophical, and even political in nature. This allowed for increased competition between these advanced civilizations because now, they could now see each other's advances. This competition, in short, came to be because of this marvelous "shrinking of the world."
The other main factor in this worldwide age of absolutist governments was coincidence. There is no factor that could have determined what leaders came to power of these world superpowers, and it is sheer happenstance that each of these major civilizations had rulers that were audacious enough to enact policies with the main goal of competing with the rest of the world. Many of these rulers (Louis XIV, Akbar, Sokollu Mehmet Pasa) that had trade desires could have very easily had more introverted political philosophies. If any of these civilizations had been more inclined to not trade with the outside world, the Age of Absolutism would have not occurred with such magnitude. It was this coincidence, along with the world's rapid globalization of trade, that created the prefect atmosphere for the Age of Absolutism.

2 comments:

  1. Of course there are many factors that add up to the world's early globilization. Indeed it is true about trading, but if it had not been for the leaders that were in place, none of these empires would be around. I do believe, in a sense, the idea of manifest destiny where that person in power had some type of divine privilege to lead. Louis XIV, Genghis Khan, Sokollu Mehmet Pasa all had one thing in common. They believed that they had some type of right to lead. Technology...yes, curiosity...maybe, egotism...most definitely.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Small detail. Genghis Khan was a few centuries earlier in the 1100's.
    Otherwise I think I agree.

    ReplyDelete