![[]](/sites/all/modules/ubercart/uc_cart/images/bullet-arrow-up.gif "Expand cart block."){kind=icon}
There are no products in your shopping cart.
Seems like there are more and more books these days on "the history of the world". Each with a different slant -- including one a few years back detailing time through the development of three essential beverages. Well, here goes another. This time, "how trade shaped the world". Oh, I know, it sounds very "business like". True. But you don't have to wear wing tips to enjoy this ride through history.
The notion of "carry and barter" was probably invented by a caveman who had a bit too much mammoth on his hands. Fish helped to build early flotillas and unravel secrets of prevailing wind and current patterns. Romans were addicted to silks from Asia. Grains brought camels to their knees millennia ago. In the 1600's, wars between nations were seeded by greedy navigators sailing off the ends of the earth to fill their holds with nutmeg, cloves and other exotic spices. For a time, pepper was more valuable than gold. Hey, even tulips became more valuable than gold. On a dark note, trade involving slaves squished into holds of vessels reeking of human waste and death endured long beyond rational time limits. Even the improbable became expected. In 1833 a clipper ship from America landed in Calcutta, India -- after sailing all summer through sweltering heat -- with a load of more than a hundred tons of "crystal-clear New England Ice".
Trade has been the "blood stream" of human existence, quietly accompanying all the other events that have colored our views of history. From the very beginning, it's taken on a mantle of goodness or otherwise. "Free Trade" in the U.S. since the Civil War or so has been favored by the Democratic Party... until the Eisenhower administration, when the issue flipped to the Republicans. Why? Well, it's all very complicated, you see. But worth reading this book to its very last chapter to find out. At the very least, you'll have a much better perspective on how to view globalization today and the (seemingly endless) "Doha" negotiations.
Tony Horowitz has a funny way of regurgitating history -- He trips to the places where it happened, talks with the locals, eyeballs the strip malls and tries to imagine what things were like when. In his 2002 book, Blue Latitudes, he revisited many of the nautical nooks and crannies Captain Cook sailed to in the 1700's -- but to my taste, he frequented far too many Tiki bars and downed way too many drinks with umbrellas in them. With his current "Voyage", he stays closer to home and explores the historic chasm between when Columbus dug his toes into new world sand in 1492 and when the Pilgrims stepped on their infamous rock. For some reason, there's this gap of over a century where our history books claim amnesia. And wow, were there a lot of stray Europeans running around America during this time!
Ponce de Leon recorded the first landing on what is now U.S. soil in 1513 -- not finding one retirement village in La Florida. Vasco Nunez de Balboa hop scotched his way to the Pacific Ocean. Hernan Cortes met and conquered the hapless Aztecs in Mexico. And Francisco Pizarro laid waste the entire Inca Empire with about 168 men on horseback. Hernando de Soto spent four years wandering hundreds of miles inland bludgeoning the natives of our deep south in the 1540's.... while Francisco Vasquez de Coronado was baffled by buffalos and barbequed indians tied to stakes in what is now our southwest. Texas. New Mexico. Even Kansas and the plains. So, why isn't more attention given to these mostly Spanish predecessors to the Pilgrims? Was it that most of our American history books were generated by English texts? I suspect. Oh well. A Voyage Long and Strange is all about these early ventures. Horwitz serves up this history in a very readable voice. Bottom line: You might want to read this book before you sit down for another Thanksgiving dinner. It sheds a whole new light on the significance of turkey and sweet potatoes in our diet.
What were the leaders of the thirteen colonies thinking? They were broke -- dependent upon trade with Britain. And as fiery declarations of independence were penned, America had shortages of everything needed to wage war.
But if anything, the rebellious rabble knew how to get things on the cheap. Float some boats and steal things. Now, these were not skull-and-cross-bone, peg-legged barbarians with parrots on their shoulders... rather, the patriotic pirates were civilized sorts from up-standing families who knew how to make money. Oh, everything was for "the cause". Ships of all sizes shoved off from shores to pillaged and plunder at will. A mosquito fleet was sanctioned, and off they went. Off the coast of Britain. Into the Caribbean. Up and down the colonies. Munitions. Rum. Blankets and shoes. More rum. Even slaves. Often, these opportunists hid their identities to spare their names, but made a killing. And in the process, English spirits and fortunes took a merciless drubbing.
All's fair in love and war. And gains from patriotic piracy dwarfed those of the fledgling Continental Navy. France, Holland and Spain watched with smug glee as the invincible British Navy flailed about swatting freebooter flies. When captured, any pirates unlucky enough to find their way to British prison ships in New York Harbor suffered mightily -- a fate making today's distaste of "water-boarding" seem frivolous.
The author, Robert Patton -- who is General George Patton's grandson -- knows a thing about war. And he takes readers on a ride, introducing them to an entirely different side of the American Revolution. It followed a parallel course to the conflicts of General Washington's army -- and netted results every bit as effective, yet have remained seldom told. So have a seat. Set your eyes a-sail. The moon lies fair across the straits.
As our Revolutionary War dawned, England was armed with a seaworthy naval force -- manned by experienced warriors. The 13 Colonies sported the moral equivalent of a few dinghies and a canoe or two -- with no one aboard who appreciated the value of combat at sea.
The tragedy of lack stretched to the highest echelons in the Continental Congress who had no clue how to build a blue-water capability, or integrate it with a competent land defense (which was also sorely lacking). Patriots were chosen to build the navy with backs of hands and little funding. They were clueless bumblers. And couldn't recognize sea faring leadership if it hit them over the head like a large dead fish across the brow. In skirmish after skirmish, luck would have it. Fortunately, privateers -- a kind word for pirates -- acted otherwise, successfully skimming the coast of British merchants. A strategic mistake? When we should have built "speedy insurgent crafts" we opted to replicate the bulky, British behemoths. Most of our ships never left harbors, and when they did (with inexperienced crew) they got summarily blown out of the water.
Washington acted like he didn't really grasp the importance of choreographing naval exercises with his army -- until it was too late. Adams understood the importance of investing in sea power -- but did so with the instincts of a farmer. It was only in 1815 that Madison admitted Jefferson's and his failure of blockading the development of a U.S. Navy and not being prepared. But by this time, the War of 1812 had petered out and a century of relative calm descended across The Atlantic and among spent European adversaries.
If By Sea is a towering book -- capturing evolutionary moments from an off shore perspective. You know the landed version. Anyone with salt water running through veins will appreciate Daughan's 15 years of research to assemble a naval view.
