| |
|
Book
Review |
|
Kearney, Milo. The
Indian Ocean in World History (New York
and London: Routledge, 2004). 160 pp, $26.95.
|
|
|
Milo Kearney, in The Indian Ocean in World History, has a very attractive thesis to offer. His fundamental
argument that binds the volume together is that a major presence in Indian
Ocean trade and maritime activities were a necessary precondition – a 'requirement'
– for world leadership. In his words, "which land (or lands) has (or have)
been in the lead in world wealth, power, and creativity at any particular
time has been determined to a significant extent by, or been correlated with,
control of or significant participation in the trade of the Indian Ocean." (3) The author further argues that for much of history the western hemisphere
lagged behind the eastern hemisphere precisely because the former was distant
from the Indian Ocean world. While the importance of the Indian Ocean for
the littoral societies around the rim is accepted and obvious, the contribution
of Indian Ocean to the rise and fall of European powers, as Kearney claims,
is a controversial addition to the scholarship. |
1 |
|
In presenting this thesis, Kearney looks at the history of the world through
the Indian Ocean lens. He examines five successive patterns of world leadership
and demonstrates how the powers involved in these consecutive phases controlled
the major reins of the Indian Ocean trade. In Chapter 2, the author brings
out the first monopoly of the Indian Ocean trade by the lands on the rim of
the ocean. The earliest trading pattern influenced the rise of the Sumerians
to prominence and enhanced their inventiveness. This also influenced three
other major civilizations, viz. the Indus Valley Civilization, the ancient
Chinese civilization of the Xia dynasty, and the Egyptian pharaonic civilization.
At the same time, the trade generated in the Indian Ocean also incorporated
the Atlantic and Pacific world. In the west, he argues, Iberians rose to prominence
as a result of this impetus, while in the East it influenced the great Indonesian
migration to the Pacific. This state of affairs continued up to sixth century
BCE. |
2 |
|
In Chapter 3, Kearney describes the next phase, which ranges from the sixth
century BCE to sixth century CE. During this period the Persians and the Greeks
dominated the scene. They were then followed by the long tradition of Indo-Roman
trade with the Mauryan dynasty at the helm of affairs. During this period
the Han Chinese entered the scene and, according to Kearney, China rose to
world prominence through participation in the Indian Ocean arena. In Chapter
4, the author describes the period between seventh and eleventh century CE.
In this phase a new pattern of Indian Ocean trade emerged with the Arabian
World in the lead. At the same time, the T'ang Chinese dynasty entered the
Indian Ocean trade. In the next chapter, Kearney argues that between the twelfth
and the fifteenth centuries, both the Chinese (Sung dynasty) and the Mediterranean
powers intensified their influence on the Indian Ocean and thereby also enhanced
their own power and prestige in world affairs. During this phase the global
pattern was warped by two destructive forces that operated in the Old World:
the destructive Mongol 'bulldozer' and the catastrophic Black Death. The Mongol
invasions, however, facilitated the future linkage of different political
units, and the Black Death did away with the impediments that the North Atlantic
powers may have encountered from the southern and eastern states. This change
in the global pattern, Kearney argues, brought the North Atlantic powers into
the global fold, and allowed Western Europe to begin dominating the world
through control of the Indian Ocean trade. In Chapters six, seven, and eight,
Kearney discusses how the North Atlantic control of the Indian Ocean was initiated
by the Portuguese and was continued by the British Raj. After the Second World
War, American global hegemony corresponded with American influence in the
Indian Ocean. |
3 |
|
Although Kearney's core thesis is attractive and holds promise for an alternative
ocean basin-based world historical analysis, Kearney himself does little to
keep this promise. His initial description of the Indian Ocean World for the
first three periods—up to the eleventh century CE—is striking and his recognition
of the four points of entry into the Indian Ocean world (Strait of Malacca
route; Persian Gulf route; Red Sea route; and, Cape of Good Hope route) is
an important generalization as well. However, his central idea of the Indian
Ocean as the 'hub of the (global) wheel' gets considerably weakened after
1500 CE. Further, Kearney's account of the modern age is a strained effort
to see the developments of the Cold War through the Indian Ocean window. |
4 |
|
While Kearney develops his thesis to achieve a 'world
perspective' by highlighting the centrality of the Indian Ocean world, ironically
most of the volume is devoted to European history. Besides, his recognition
of 1500 CE as the watershed mark in world history also comes across as anachronistic,
especially in light of the work of Andre Gunder Frank, R. Bin Wong and Janet
Abu Lughod. These historians have demonstrated that European influence in
the Indian Ocean trade and in Asiatic affairs was not prominent before 1750
CE. Moreover, Kearney's assumption that the participating states in the
Indian Ocean trade throughout time have been the ones making prime contributions
to world progress and cultural creativity is a polemic one at best. Such
an assumption makes for a twisted concept of both progress and creativity.
Where should we place the ancient Mayans and Aztecs? Whose yardstick shall
we use to measure creativity in the cultures and civilizations far removed
in time and space from the Indian Ocean? Finally, Kearney's model, which
sees the world powers who participated in and dominated the Indian Ocean
trade as 'predestined' to be dominant requires urgent review. By recognizing
Indian Ocean as the 'hub of the wheel,' Kearney risks being geographically
deterministic and thus his work falls short of being a 'world history approach.'
Nevertheless, he does provide an interesting and absorbing platform to look
into the global developments of the last five millennia. |
5 |
| Amitava Chowdhury
Washington State University
|
