The Great Divergence brings new insight to one of the classic questions of history: Why did sustained industrial growth begin in Northwest Europe, despite surprising similarities between advanced areas of Europe and East Asia? As Ken Pomeranz shows, as recently as 1750, parallels between these two parts of the world were very high in life expectancy, consumption, product and factor markets, and the strategies of households. Perhaps most surprisingly, Pomeranz demonstrates that the Chinese and Japanese cores were no worse off ecologically than Western Europe. Core areas throughout the eighteenth-century Old World faced comparable local shortages of land-intensive products, shortages that were only partly resolved by trade.
Pomeranz argues that Europe's nineteenth-century divergence from the Old World owes much to the fortunate location of coal, which substituted for timber. This made Europe's failure to use its land intensively much less of a problem, while allowing growth in energy-intensive industries. Another crucial difference that he notes has to do with trade. Fortuitous global conjunctures made the Americas a greater source of needed primary products for Europe than any Asian periphery. This allowed Northwest Europe to grow dramatically in population, specialize further in manufactures, and remove labor from the land, using increased imports rather than maximizing yields. Together, coal and the New World allowed Europe to grow along resource-intensive, labor-saving paths.
Meanwhile, Asia hit a cul-de-sac. Although the East Asian hinterlands boomed after 1750, both in population and in manufacturing, this growth prevented these peripheral regions from exporting vital resources to the cloth-producing Yangzi Delta. As a result, growth in the core of East Asia's economy essentially stopped, and what growth did exist was forced along labor-intensive, resource-saving paths--paths Europe could have been forced down, too, had it not been for favorable resource stocks from underground and overseas.
彭慕兰(Kenneth Pomeranz),美国加利福尼亚大学尔湾分校历史系主任、历史和东亚语言文学教授,加州大学系统世界史研究组主任。其大部分著作围绕着中国和比较经济发展、农村社会变革、环境变革及政府的形成等展开研究,但也著有民间宗教史和家庭结构及性别角色史方面的著作。
所谓的“有缘无分”说的就是和《大分流》与我。 还在念书时,在书店里、文章中和其他地方无数次遇见,甚至将它加进购物车好久,但始终也没真正拥有它。今天去单位图书馆,作为“副产品”借到这本书。似乎比之前见到的薄许多,不到400页。2003年版。 希望这部所谓“尔湾学派”...
评分中国在历史上很长一段时间一直都是西方眼中神秘的,传言为“遍地黄金”的强大的国家。但自从在十八世纪以后,这种强大与优渥似乎渐渐发生了转移—以英国为代表的欧洲迅速发展,成为了新时代的强国。这种变化,以往的学者倾向于以欧洲为主的欧洲中心论,在“欧洲当时很强大的”...
评分2017年3月29日晚,金陵读书会海外中国研究系列专场的第二场沙龙——关于美国学者彭慕兰的《大分流》一书的讨论沙龙如期举办。本期沙龙由钱竹林老师主讲,金陵读书的九位常务理事当中,有五人到场参加讨论,因而讨论气氛相当热烈。包括本书出版方——江苏人民出版社的钟志勤女士...
评分 评分周锡瑞老师以前的1500字命题作文,我就不介绍书了。 十年之后,当彭慕兰先生《大分流》一书仍被不断提及和争论时,即便是持反对意见的学者,也不会不承认此书的经典意义。诚如许多学者已经提出的批评那样,我认为彭氏在此书中即便不是刻意“抬升”了中国各方面与西欧不相伯仲...
書中描繪的“中國”如此反“常識經驗”,是因為作者以孤證乃至誤證為基礎建立起一條看上去很美很給力的邏輯鏈,事實上經不起仔細推敲。
评分需要再读!
评分上周刚和这哥们吃了饭
评分a must-read (though not an easy-read) for comparative world history
评分今天那些喜欢说“在中国”就是会发生很多烂事,“在西方”就会发生很多好事的人,未来大概还会出现一本这样的书告诉你其实都一样。甚至西方不如中国,这时小琥阿姨就会出来唱一首:“没~那么简单~”
本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息,本站不存储任何数据与内容,任何内容与数据均与本站无关,如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 book.quotespace.org All Rights Reserved. 小美书屋 版权所有