From: the_black_sheep@...
Message: 62894
Date: 2009-02-06
--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
> You are putting the cart before the horse. 'Centre of gravity' in the
> description of the geographics of economy is a figure of expression;
> it describes where the production and trade activity is high; it is
> not a separate force, it doesn't cause anything in itself.
However the fact that a certain area or city is or becomes such a centre, while necessitating a pre-existing set of conditions, also increases its urbanisation.
More on Bruges, Antwerp and Ansterdam as cores: http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/4/25/1883285/B_A_A.txt
> The reason trade and production moved to the Netherlands from Northern
> France was the building of a road through the St. Gotthard pass in
> Switzerland around 1250.
> A road which is open half the year is more important than one which
> isn't there. I think I read somewhere that Strassburg, as it was then,
> had a defense alliance with some of the Swiss cities and they held
> manoeuvres down the Rhine with expeditionary forces.
"The fairs of Champagne served as the first means of selling Flemish goods, with northern European trading centres such as Cologne and Bruges gaining importance over time. After 1277, direct overseas trade with Genoa and other Italian cities meant that the traditional northern fairs became smaller centres of local trade. The replacement of the northern trading fairs by overseas routes run largely by Italians affected most mercantile economies of the era." (Jotischky - Hull 2005: 78)
Instead of meeting "half-way", using land routes which were long, expensive and dangerous, a connection and regular sea route was established, joining Genoa and Venice with London and Bruges, and via these ports, with the Baltic coast and its hinterland.
Sea transport from Venice to Flanders increased the product cost by 2%, or 6% incl. insurance, while the same product became 15-20% more expensive if transported overland. (Hay 1988: 324)
> Reformation? That was the Spanish who destroyed the Southern Netherlands.
Reformation > Counter-Reformation > the Spanish
>> It would seem that the gravity centre shrunk rather than shifted.
> See above why.
?
The 'why' is actually more complex:
The proponents of a new history of development, such as Wallerstein and Braudel, propose a world-economy based on the idea of a strong core zone, a developed middle zone, and an underdeveloped periphery. The core shifts from one area to another; the system as a whole experiences cycles c. 3 centuries long consisting of the phase of growth/expansion and the phase of stagnation/contraction. (They differ in that Wallerstein assumes core areas, while Braudel is a proponent of leading cities.) During the second period repositioning of the core takes place, as well as concentration of capital in that core. This phase includes in the relevant period the Dutch Golden Age, as it lasted from c. 1620 to 1750; although almost from the onset London was the rival and the eventual 'winner' in the competition for hegemony. (Ormrod 2003: 4-6)
The foundations of 'why':
"With most of Europe enjoying demographic growth, merchants of the Low Countries found expanding markets for their exports. Between 1400 and 1475, trade volume in the Low Countries doubled, and economic growth was especially marked in northern Brabant, where the annual fairs at Antwerp and Bergen op Zoom generated much activity. Furthermore, shipping in Zeeland and Holland underwent a significant expansion, and Dutch skippers were prominent in the trade with England and along the Baltic and Atlantic coasts." (Blockmans 1999: 100)
"Hollanders expanded their business by transporting the cargoes of third parties, and in this they proved so successful that they thrived at the expense of the German Hanseatic League, which had hitherto dominated trade in the Baltic. Nor did Hollanders confine their activities to the Baltic; they soon established regular routes to England and along the Atlantic coast. The Hollanders further adapted to this trade by developing larger, faster, and more efficient ships. Through all of this, they managed to turn a serious handicap - a perennial grain shortage - into a vehicle for economic growth, in which they both exported their own goods and offered their shipping services. This economic growth would form the basis for the Dutch Republic's commercial system during the golden age of the seventeenth century." (Blockmans 1999: 76)
"The incidence of the absolute decline in European economic life was heightened by shifts and dislocations in the balance of trade. In northern Europe, Flemish predominance faded as England began to use its wool to manufacture its own cloth, and Dutch ports were increasingly able to capture international traffic at the expense of the ports of Flanders." (Cantor 1993: 482-483)
"Simultaneously from the second half of the fourteenth century onwards the Hanseatic economic system was shattered by an irresistible advance of English and more still of Dutch navigation and trade towards Prussia and the eastern Baltic lands. As the large size of ships made it impracticable for them to anchor at Sluis, and as the growth of a cloth industry in Holland provided them with a return freight in their own country, they tended to moor in Amsterdam, the main port in Holland, which was able hereby to lay the first foundations of its prosperity." (Van Houtte 1966: 43-44)
>> The Provinces were a relative latecomer in the Atlantic and the
>> Pacific trade
> Many Spanish ships had Dutch crews before the liberation wars.
'Crews' doesn't equal a region or country participating in trade.
> The Netherlands is closer to the New World than the cities of the
> Hanse. That settled that race,. Various kings of of Denmark-Norway (eg
> Chr II and Chr IV) sought to develop their kingdom to a base of trade
> like the Netherlands and England, but failed too.
Taking into account the Atlantic and Pacific trades, distance advantage of the Netherlands over Scandinavia is of very little or no significance. The reason why the Dutch were successful was because they learnt the secret of Portuguese navigation routes (Bangs 1970: 476).
Bangs, Carl. 1970. "Dutch theology, trade, and war: 1590-1610", Church History 39, 4: 470-482.
Blockmans, Wim. 1999. "The formation of a political union, 1300-1600", in: Johan C. H. Blom - Emiel Lamberts (eds.), 55-140.
Blom, Johan C. H. - Emiel Lamberts. (eds.). 1999. History of the Low Countries. (Translated by James C. Kennedy.) New York: Berghahn Books.
Cantor, Norman F. 1993. The civilization of the Middle Ages: A completely revised and expanded edition of medieval history. New York: Harper Collins.
Ormrod, David. 2003. The rise of commercial empires: England and the Netherlands in the age of mercantilism, 1650-1770. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van Houtte, Jan A. 1966. "The rise and decline of the Market of Bruges", The Economic History Review, New Series 19, 1: 29-47.
Malgorzata