There are two major schools of thought. Most of the answers are answers drawn from the ‘specific’ school. Meaning people looking to explain the decline of the Muslim world with reference to specific trends or characteristics that are unique to the situation. Thus you get answers like: the Quoran; lack of technological advances; inability to mobilize labor; and the like. But there is an alternative, macro, explanation about why great empires declined and, in some cases, even collapse. The explanation suggests a more universal proposition, and attempts to explain the cycle of history itself.
If we describe a super power as a nation that can project power over the whole of the world, then Alexander the Great, Rome, Genghis Khan, the Chinese Empire and even the Ottoman Empire would not be super powers. Due to the technology of their time, they could not project power over the whole of the world - only the world as they knew it. On this basis, Spain was the world’s first super power. Spain dominated the world for nearly 300 years between the 15th to 18th Century. I would argue that Spain’s rise to dominance in board terms, and repeated by subsequent super powers, was by: securing its domestic base; then mobilizing its domestic economic power; then stemming the ambitions of neighboring powers; then projecting its power outwards reaping significant economic benefit; and then using those gains to intimidate or exert influence over its neighbors. I would also argue that Spain’s subsequent decline, repeated by other super powers, was the reversal of this trend: problems prompts Spain to look inward; neighbors become more assertive; inability to increase domestic productivity; and increased domestic insecurity.
Spain secured its domestic base through the dynastic marriage and when Isabella I of Castile married Ferdinand II of Aragon in 1469 (though there was the small issue of the 1475–79 war of succession for Castile and Ferdinand did not inherit until 1479 when Juan II died).
Mobilizing domestic economic power: The Catholic Monarch, while not uniting Castile and Aragon (and Valencia), created a regulated and common market. The Holy Brotherhood, the common judicial system and the pacification of Castile took power from fractious nobles and gave it to those who generated economic wealth.
Stemming the ambitions of neighboring powers: The first major battle after Ferdinand II succeeded his uncle, was the battle of Granada. This battle in 1492, forced the last of the Moors out of the Iberian Peninsular. It was very popular with the Pope (Alexander VI who was Valencia born) and cemented their standing in Rome. Building on this success, They supported the Aragonese house of Naples. This threw them into a three corner fight against France and Venice for the control of Italy. In a brilliant military move, the Spanish military developed the Tercio, an administrative unit of 3,000 men divided into 12 companies made up of sword (close range very mobile), pike (mid close range), musketeers (mid range spray) and arquebusiers (long range sniper type). To flank the rise of the Hapsburg, Spain also moved into North Africa (1505 to 1510). In 1510 both Algiers and Tripoli fell to Spain.
Projecting its power outwards reaping significant economic benefit: While Isabella I had effectively won the throne of Castile in 1476, the war of succession continued because her niece, whom she was fighting against, was married to Afonso V Portugal. Part of this war was over the ‘Gold Coast’ of Africa and its riches. However, and in 1479, the Castile forces were overwhelmed in the battle of Guinea and the Catholic Monarchs agreed to sign treaty of Alcacovas. It is said that by being denied West Africa, was the reason they finally agreed to back Columbus in 1492. While Columbus was famously trying to find China and India, he stumbled instead of the Americas. The decentralised system of the Spanish Government coupled with a common market instigated by the Catholic Monarchs allowed a massive and rapid expansion of Spanish power in the Indies and into the Americas. This is evidenced by the red ‘bits’ below which all belonged to Spain.
So how did the world’s first super power lose it all?
If you accept the macro argument, it was the reversal of the steps that took Spain to the peak.
Could not maintain the projection of power coupled with significant economic benefit became significant cost causing Spain to look inwards. Restlessness in the America’s, monopolies resulting in inefficiencies and inability to produce sufficient goods & services to match rise a supply of gold (resulting in inflation) caused the crown to start losing money. This in turn started it to look inward.
Unable to stemming the ambitions of neighboring powers. The spark to this was the success of the Dutch revolt. The reasons of the revolt, as was its progression, (80 years - 1568 to 1648) is complicated but the key was that it encouraged Spain’s neighbors to be more assertive. This in turn led to the Franco-Spanish war (1635–59), the Anglo Spanish war (ended 1604) and the Portuguese war of independence (ended 1668).
Unable to enhance domestic economic power: The Wars drained Spain. Thus and when the new world wealth became problematic the domestic pressures ballooned. Catholicism, a major positive force in the early days of Spanish power (creation of common market and conquest of North Africa) became a millstone. Protestantism was more dynamic and in the Netherlands was a force for technology. Catholicism, which its natural tendency towards conservatism, provided a background less conducive to change.
Fragmentation of its domestic base: The reversals and the pressures led to cracks in national Spain. This resulted in the Catalan revolts I & II, the war of Spanish Succession, the Siege of Gibraltar etc.
SEEN from this perspective, the rise and fall of the Islamic empires can also be characterized by these empires having first secured their domestic base, then creating a common market, then looking outward, then securing resources outside their boundaries and then projecting their power outward. In the same vein, their decline was due to their inability to sustain their outward projection of power, resulting in fewer resources but as many responsibilities. This in turn put pressure on their domestic resources and encourage their rivals to be more assertive. Instead of meeting this challenge by changing they looked inward towards their past resulting in it forgoing opportunities. This macro economic based argument does not rely on the fact that Abbasid or Ottoman Empire was Islamic but on their failure to evolve and adapt fast enough when they were at their peak.
No comments:
Post a Comment