Professional Documents
Culture Documents
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Research Foundation of SUNY and Fernand Braudel Center are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to Review (Fernand Braudel Center).
http://www.jstor.org
An Essay-Review
FrankProvestheEuropeanMiracle
ImmanuelWallerstein
"Andthelightshinethso brightitblindethhim."
(Anon,sutra17 of a theological
saga of unknownorigin)
A ndre Gunder Frankhas writtena book ostensiblydevotedto
In reality,
and theory.1
jc\denouncing Eurocentrichistoriography
hisbook turnsout to be thegreatestpaean to Europeancleverness
and ingenuitythathas yetbeen written.Frankhas discoveredthe
trueEuropeanmiracle.You mayhaveheardthatFrankin thisbook
the good fightagainstall the otherswho have neveracis fighting
(well,almost
knowledgedtheEuropeanbias of theirhistoriography
thatFrankbecomesin fact
seemastonishing
never).Itmaytherefore
theleadingapostleof theEuropeanmiracle,makingclaimsforEurope thatare excessiveevenbythestandardsof David Landes.
The centralthesisofFrank'sbook,in thewordsoftheauthor,is
that"therewas a singleglobalworldeconomywitha worldwideditradefrom1500 onward"(1998: 52).
visionoflaborand multilateral
And the centralintentionof the book, he tellsus in the firstsentenceofthepreface,is to "turnreceivedEurocentric
historiography
and social theoryupside down"(1998: xv).So thequestionsforthe
readerare two.Is thecentralthesistrue?And ifitis true,does itactakethesetwoquesLet us therefore
complishthecentralintention?
tionsin turn.
We mustbe clearwhatthe centralthesismeans. It means that,
from1500
accordingto Frank,from1500 on, and mostspecifically
to 1800, sinceafter1800 thereis farless historiographical
dispute,
the entireglobe (and notjust part of it) was linkedtogetherin a
1 ReORIENT: Global
Economyin theAsianAge(Berkeley:Univ. of CaliforniaPress,
1998).
review,xxii,3, 1999,355-71
355
356
ImmanuelWallerstein
trade,"butthat
singledivisionoflabor.Frankadds "andmultilateral
seemsto me redundant.Ifthereis a divisionoflabor,theremustbe
be multilateral.
The questionto
trade,whichwillalmostnecessarily
if
there
is
is
there
is
rather
the
trade,
necessarilya
opposite:
pose
singledivisionoflabor?
Whathas thisdisputeto do withEurocentrism?
Again,Frankis
to
is that
he
wishes
demonstrate
from
the
outset.
What
clear
quite
Asia and notEuropeheldcenterstagefor
"froma globalperspective
most of earlymodernhistory"(1998: xv). He saysAsia, but in the
texthe reallytalksalmostall ofthetimeabout China.Or to be more
exact,Frankhas a hierarchyof importance:China on top, India
somewherein the middle,Europe down below-and the OttomanArab zones largelyand strangely
missingfromhis accountforthe
mostpart.In anycase,Frankclaimsthat,bydoingthis,he "pullsthe
historicalrug out fromunder the an^-historical/scientificreally
Eurocentrism
of
Braudel,
Weber,
Marx,
Toynbee,Polanyi,
ideologicalsocialtheorists"
and mostothercontemporary
Wallerstein,
(1998:xvxvi).The leastI can sayis thatI am in good company.
There are twomore themesadumbratedin the preface,which
are crucialto theanalysis.One is "thequestionofwhatit means,if
anything,to call the worldeconomyor system'capitalist'"(1998:
xix).The secondis theassertionthat"inhistoricalterms,'theRiseof
theWest'came late and was brief"(1998: xxiv).Capitalism,whichis
describedin theprefacecautiouslyas doubtfully
initially
meaningful
becomesbypage 15 a "figment
of [Marx's]imagina("ifanything"),
tion."Accordingto Frank,thereis no such thingas capitalism,or if
thereis, itis thesystemin whichwe havealwayslived.In short,capitalismis not a distinguishing
featureof onlysome momentsand
in
It
historical
time.
is
neither
a systemnora mode ofproducplaces
tion nor a recognizablereality.We shall have to informall those
benightedsoulswho occasionallydemonstrate
againstthemisdeeds
of capitaliststhatthe villainsdo not exist.Poor GunderFrank:he
wastedso mucheffortin such demonstrations
earlierin his life,to
his seriousregrettoday,it seems.
As for"theRise of theWest,"it turnsout to be a considerable
embarrassment
to Frankbecause,as we shallsee, withintheframeworkof the analysishe has established,thereis no wayto account
forthisrise,howeverlate,howeverbrief.Yet even Frankseemsunable to makeEuropeanwealth,military
and imperialdomistrength,
nance of the worldentirelydisappear,at least between1800 and
357
358
ImmanuelWallerstein
359
360
ImmanuelWallerstein
argumentsupside down.Perhapshe has learnedthathe was previouslywrong.Justone question:does he nowwishto concludeon the
basis of his new theorythat,in the late nineteenthcentury,the
underdevelopedcountrieswerestrongerthanGreatBritainbecause
theyweresendingitmoremerchandisethantheyreceivedin return?
Chapterthreemovesthediscussionfromtradeto money.It is entitled"Moneywentaroundtheworldand made theworldgo round."
subjectto thelawsof supply
Money,Franktellsus, is a commodity,
the
and demand.Indeed,it turnsout to be, in Frank'sview,virtually
both
"Itis thedemandformoneythatmakes
possible
keycommodity.
themarketsupplyof goods and theuse ofmoneyto purchasethem.
or
So, thisuniversalpracticeof arbitragein itselfalreadyreflectsa worldmarketin everysense of theterm"(1998: 137;
helpedcreateitalicsadded). Why,he asks,would Chinawantthemoneyso much?
effective
demand,
Because,he says,"moneysupportedand generated
and thedemandelicitedsupply"(1998: 138;italicsadded). Butmoney
demandjustanywhere,
does notgenerateeffective
arguesFrank-only
whereproductivecapacityalreadyexistsand wherein consequence
toexpanditthrough
investment
and improved
thereis "thepossibility
(1998: 138). This China had, saysFrank.This Great
productivity"
Britainhad, saysLandes (1998,passim).The logicis identical.
Thischapterpurports
toshowthattheworld'sproduction
ofsilver,
whichwasthede factomoneystandardduringthisperiodaccordingto
Frank,endedup in China,whichin turnprovesforFrankChina'seconomicstrength.
do notsupporttheemHowever,Frank'sownfigures
I
will
take
all
his
at
face
value.On page 148,
piricalargument.
figures
he has a chartofworldsilverproduction,
and receiptsforthe
exports,
period 1500-1800.Whatdoes it show?It showsthatin thesixteenth
17 thousandtonsofsilverwentfromtheAmericasto Europe,
century,
nonefromEuropetoChina,and 2 thousandtonsfrom
JapantoChina.
Not so good forthesixteenth
In theseventeenth
it
century.
century,
showsthat27 thousandtonswentfromtheAmericasto Europe,13 of
it (or about half)beingsenton to Chinaand 7 thousandtonsgoing
fromJapanto China.In theeighteenth
54 thousandtonswent
century,
fromtheAmericasto Europe,26 (or againabouthalf)transshipped
to
China,and none goingfromJapanto China. In addition,thereis a
jokerofAmericansilvergoingviaManilatoChina.Itis a jokerbecause
Frankis unsurehowmuchwenttoManilaandhowmuchthenwenton
to China.He tellsus that,for1600-1800,totalestimates
rangefrom3
to 10 up to 25 thousandtons.
361
362
ImmanuelWallerstein
363
364
ImmanuelWallerstein
365
366
ImmanuelWallerstein
367
368
ImmanuelWallerstein
369
370
ImmanuelWallerstein
37 I