Introduction
The book “Empires of the Weak: The Real Story of European Expansion and the Creation of the New World Order,” written by J. C. Sharman, brings a revisionist perspective to the assumption that Europe governed the world due to its military supremacy. The book also shows how the West rose from the previous world order. The existing literature on the subject is supplemented with new information and an interesting angle provided by this book. This book briefly explains the Military Upheaval and the first international order. It then proceeds to analyze in depth the causes behind the emergence of the state, the foundation of the major international systems, and the West’s subsequent dominance over the rest of the world. It also provides an interpretation of Iberian conquerors and supplicants, company sovereign states and the kingdoms of the East, The Asian Conquest of Europe, and how the Europeans emerged victorious in the end, among other topics.
Professor Philip Hoffman of the California Institute of Technology released “Why Did Europe Conquer the World?” (2015), which seeks to answer the question, “What caused the formation of states, the development of the initial international systems, and the West’s subsequent dominance?” Tournaments, which he defines as a rivalry that, under the appropriate conditions, can encourage participants to invest considerable effort in the expectation of winning a prize, are what he believes propelled the speed of invention in Europe’s military, he contends. Unlike the Ottoman Empire and China, he thought Europe was hopelessly fractured and lacked a unifying leader. Rivalry instincts were honed by living in an environment with dozens of minor states and principalities. Darwinian military competition molded Europeans’ technical, tactical, and institutional superiority, giving them a clear edge over other civilizations.
Furthermore, the author of Empires of the Weak contends that early modern Europe was not characterized by European military supremacy. J. C. Sharman (2019) argues that the most significant explanation for Europe’s growth from the late 15th to the late 18th centuries is the continent’s quick assimilation of foreign elites through trade, mercenary work, and backing for the nobility of other countries in their struggles against European elites. The Europeans would bribe their officials or shut their ports if everything else failed. Much of the credit for the European victory in the New World goes to the developing infectious diseases (Moravcsik, 2019). Because the land-based local governments had no interest in going to war or trading with ships, the Europeans had an immediate strategic advantage.
Even while Sharman does not present any wholly novel historical information, he does successfully draw numerous previously unconnected dots. He then draws a parallel between the two time periods, saying, “From one era to the preceding one: There is a common misconception that the West dominated the world for four centuries between 1757 and the 19th century, starting with Cortés and Da Gama and ending with Place. It is possible to connect this viewpoint to the widespread debate over whether or not the “rising” of Asia and China specifically represented a new trend or merely a return to the status quo before the year 1700. ( Gordon, 2019). According to the research presented by Shaman (2019), the “settler states” of “the Americas and Oceania” have followed distinct paths. The concept of political rights for native Europeans, as opposed to the pre-colonial indigenous people, was frequently at the center of revolution throughout North and South America. Perhaps most intriguingly, Sharman’s formulation may imply that China has insisted that its “rising” does not pose a threat. Let us say it is assumed that the West’s military superiority leading to imperial actions abroad is not just counterproductive but illogical as well. If that is the case, Western observers and politicians’ assumptions that China is lying about its lack of expansionist aspirations may not be entirely founded (Gordon, 2019). Sharman differentiates the centuries-long rule of the Qing, Mughal, and Ottoman empires on land from the decades-long rule of the European maritime empires connected by trade. Those countries that have historically orbited China could pause, but those separated from it by water might be able to retake a deep breath.
The Conclusion of Sharman (2019): “The classic story of independence from Western hegemony makes our contemporary position fresh.” “The questions we ask and do not ask about the past have altered our perception of our past and present and future.” Sharman refutes the notion that Europe always comes out on top by noting that it was not until the onset of the Industrial Revolution in 1760 that Europe began to catch up and ultimately beat Asia and the Ottoman Empire. Because of their rivalry, Europe ultimately ended up conquering most of Africa. In addition, the imperialism that prevailed in international politics throughout the half of the 19th century and the early part of the twentieth century was a peculiarly ephemeral and fleeting trend that was eventually brought to a stop by Western setbacks in several revolutions (Power, 2019). Having a non-Western power like China at the helm in the twenty-first century would welcome returning to the status quo.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Europe was a stagnant wasteland prior to the 18th century. The Middle East, India, and China were also influential regions and countries, and it was the Arabs who preserved the scientific, medical, architectural, and philosophical knowledge of the ancient Greeks (Power, 2019). However, the causes of the West’s inevitable ascendancy deserve serious thought and investigation. What is clear is that Sharman is ambitious in providing a valuable and fascinating window through Empires of the Weak. This book attempts a revisionist historical reading of Western imperialism in over 150 pages. He proposes a reversal of the traditional view of Western global expansionism, that the West “won” history mainly as a creed and that this “victory” was largely illusory, and that few modern states could not rule around them by the use of force. However, there are still some weaknesses in the book that Sharman cannot fully explain. However, Empires of the Weak is a book that offers a different perspective and has sparked an honest debate in the academic pews.
Reference Lists
Andrew Moravcsik, 2019, “Review of Empires of the Weak: The Real Story of European Expansion and the Creation of the New World Order,” Foreign Affairs https://www.foreignaffairs.com/reviews/capsule-review/2018-12-11/empires-weak-real-story-european-expansion-and-creation-new-world
Philip T. Hoffman, 2015， “Why Did Europe Conquer the World? Princeton: Princeton University Press”, vii + 272 pp.
Sharman, J. C. (2019). “Empires of the Weak: The Real Story of European Expansion and the Creation of the New World Order，” Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv4g1r25
Peter Gordon，2019， “Review of Empires of the Weak: The Real Story of European Expansion and the Creation of the New World Order，” Asian Review of Books
Jonathan Power, 2019, Review of Empires of the Weak: The Real Story of European Expansion and the Creation of the New World Order”， New York Journal of Books https://www.nyjournalofbooks.com/book-review/empires-weak
write