“Batı'nın Yükselişi” Mevzusunda Kronoloji Sorunu Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme

Öz

“Rise of the West”, “Grand Question”, “The Great Divergence” are all different nomenclature for a pristine problematic in social sciences: The supposed discrepancy between the “East” and the “West” in a variety of domains whereby the “West” is assumed to acquire supremacy over the “East”. In the former part of our essay we try to acquaint the reader with the aforementioned literature. We do not intend to present a detailed account but just the important milestones delineating only the broadest contours of the discussion. After providing a general overview of the “Rise of the West” literature we dwell upon the “Problem of Chronology” haunting it. We call it the “Problem of Chronology” since it is essentially providing an adequate answer to the following question “When had the West Risen?” We think the researchers have too much engaged in providing an answer to the “Why” question, which is both harder to address and prone to much prejudice. According to us, a better approach is to put “Problem of Chronology” as the central piece of the argument. It is a clear cut and more tangible question to tackle. However, we pinpoint that, providing a solution to the problem requires answering a preliminary question: “In which domains should we seek a chronology?” We argue that a three pronged approach derived from Mann's theory of social power and realist International Relations theory may be useful in achieving a methodologically satisfactory solution to the problem.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Rise of the West, Problem of Chronology, Eurocentirsm, Mann'st heory of social power,

An Appraisal of the Chronology Problem in the “Rise of the West” Question

Öz

“Batı'nın Yükselişi”, “Büyük Sorun” ve “Büyük Iraksama”, sosyal bilimlerdeki çok eski bir problematike işaret eden farklı terimlerdir. Burada, Batı'nın Doğu üzerinde üstünlük sağladığı varsayılan bazı alanlar vasıtasıyla “Batı” ile “Doğu” arasında bir fark oluştuğu düşünülmektedir. Çalışmamızın birinci bölümünde okuyucuya ilgili literatür tanıtılmaya çalışılmıştır. Ayrıntılı bir anlatımdan ziyade, konuya ilişkin önemli hususlar ön plana çıkarılarak, tartışmanın ana hatları belirlenmeye çalışılmıştır. “Batı'nın Yükselişi” literatürüne yönelik bu genel değerlendirmenin ardından, konunun önemli bir boyutunu oluşturan “kronoloji sorunu” üzerinde durulmuştur. “Kronoloji Problemi” olarak adlandırdığımız problem, şu sorunun cevabını aramaktadır: “Batı ne zaman yükseldi?”. Araştırmacıların cevaplaması daha zor ve önyargılara daha açık olan “Neden ?” sorusuna odaklandıklarını düşünmekteyiz. Bize göre daha belirgin ve somut olması nedeniyle “Kronoloji Problemi”ni tartışmaların merkezine koymak daha faydalıdır. Ancak burada da öncelikle cevaplanması gereken soru, “Kronoloji Problemi”nin hangi alanlarda inceleneceğidir. Mann'ın sosyal güç teorisi ile realist Uluslararası İlişkiler teorisinden türetilen üçlü bir yaklaşımın bu soruya metodolojik olarak tatmin edici bir cevap vermede faydalı olabileceğini düşünmekteyiz.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Batı'nın Yükselişi, Kronoloji Problemi, Avrupamerkezcilik, Mann'ın sosyal güç teorisi

Kaynakça

1. ABU-LUGHOD, J. (1989), Before European Hegemony, New York: Oxford University Press.
2. AMIN, S. (1989), Eurocentrism, New York: Monthly Review Press.
3. ASTON, T.H., and PHILPIN, C.H.E. (eds.) (1987), The Brenner Debate: Agrarian
4. Class Structure and Economic Development in Pre-Industrial Europe, Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press. BAECHLER, J. et. al. (eds.) (1988), Europe and the Rise of Capitalism, Oxford: Blackwell.
5. BERNAL, M. (1987), Black Athena, Vol. I: The Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization,
6. New Brunswick, New Jersey, and London: Rutgers University Press. BLAUT, J.M. (ed.) (1992), 1492: The Debate on Colonialism, Eurocentrism, and History,
7. Trenton, N.J.: Africa World Press. BLAUT, J.M. (1993), The Colonizer’s Model of the World: Geographical Diffusionism and Eurocentric History, New York: Guilford Press.
8. BLAUT, J.M. (2000), Eight Eurocentric Historians, New York: Guilford Press.

9. COLLINGWOOD, R. G. (1993), The Idea of History, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
10. DAWSON, C. (1955), “Toynbee’s Study of History: The Place of Civilizations in
11. History”, International Affairs, 31 (2), pp. 149-158. DİRLİK, A. (1999), “Is There History after Eurocentrism ?: Globalism, Postcolo- nialism, and the Disavowal of History”, Cultural Critique, 42 , pp. 1-34.
12. DOBB, M. (1949), Studies in the Development of Capitalism, London: Routledge,
13. DUCHESNE, R. (2001/2002), “Between Sinocentrism and Eurocentrism: Debat- ing Andre Gunder Frank’s Re-Orient: Global Economy in the Asian Age”, Science & Society, 65 (4), pp. 428-463.
14. DUCHESNE, R. (2005), “Defending the Rise of the Western Culture against its
15. Multicultural Critics”, The European Legacy, 10 (5), pp. 455-484. 26 For a comparison of the military practices of Europe and non-Western societies and the rele- vant debate of Military Revolution see Parker, G., The Military Revolution: Military Innovation and the Rise of the West, 1500-1800, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988); Ralston, D.B.,
16. Importing the European Army: The Introduction of European Military Techniques and Institu- tions in the Extra-European World, 1600-1914, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996)
17. FINLAY, R. (2000), “China the West and World History in Joseph Needham’s Sci- ence and Civilisation in China”, Journal of World History, 11 (2), pp. 265-303.
18. FRANK, A.G. (1995), Review of “The Colonizer’s Model of the World”, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 85 (3), pp. 589-591.
19. FRANK, A.G. (1998), ReOrient: Global Economy in the Asian Age, Berkeley: Univer- sity of California Press.
20. HALL, J.A. (1986), Powers and Liberties: The Causes and Consequences of the Rise of the West, Oxford, Basil Blackwell.
21. HILTON, R. (ed.) (1978), The Transition from Feudalism to Capitalism, London: Verso Books,.
22. HOBSON, J.M. (2005), “Eurocentrism and Neorealism in the ‘Fall of Mann’: Will the Real Mann Please Stand Up”, Millenium: Journal of International Studies, 34 (2), pp. 517-527.
23. ISSAWI, C. (1980), “Europe, the Middle East and the Shift in Power: Reflections on a Theme by Marshall Hodgson”, Comparative Studies in Society and History, 22 (4), pp. 487-504.
24. JONES, E.L. (1981), The European Miracle, Environments, Economies and Geopolitics in the History of Europe and Asia, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25. LANDES, D. (1998), The Wealth and Poverty of Nations: Why Some Are So Rich and Some So Poor, New York, W.W. Norton.
26. MANN, M. (1986), The Sources of Social Power, Vol. I, A History of Power from the Begin- ning to A.D. 1760, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
27. MANN, M. (1993), The Sources of Social Power, Vol. II, The Rise of Classes and Nation
28. States 1760-1914, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press,.
29. McDOUGALL, W.A. (1986), “ Mais ce n’est pas l’historie : Some Thoughts on
30. Toynbee, McNeill, and the Rest of Us”, The Journal of Modern History, 58 (1), pp. 19-42. McNEILL, W., The Rise of the West: A History of Human Community, Chicago, Univer- sity of Chicago Press, McNEILL, W. (1990), “The Rise of the West After Twenty Five Years”, Journal of World History, 1 (1), 1-21.
31. McNEILL, W., (1998), A World History, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
32. NORTH, D., The Rise of the Western World, Cambridge University Press, 1972.
33. PARKER, G. (1988), The Military Revolution: Military Innovation and the Rise of the West, 1500-1800, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34. POMERANZ, K. (2001), The Great Divergence: China, Europe and the Making of the Modern World Economy, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
35. RALSTON, D.B. (1996), Importing the European Army: The Introduction of European
36. Military Techniques and Institutions in the Extra-European World, 1600-1914, Chicago:
37. University of Chicago Press. RICHARDSON P. (1999), Review of “China Transformed: Historical Change and the Limits of the European Experience”, The Economic History Review, 52, (1), pp. 198-199.
38. ROBERT, J.M. (1985), The Triumph Of The West, London, British Broadcasting Corporation.
39. SAID, E. (1979), Orientalism, New York: Vintage.
40. SPENGLER, O., (1932), Decline of the West, Vol. I: Form and Actuality, Alfred A. Knopf.
41. SPENGLER, O., (1932), Decline of the West, Vol. II: Perspectives of World-History, Alfred A. Knopf.
42. SWEEZY, P.M. (1986), “Feudalism-to-Capitalism Revisited”, Science & Society, 50 (1), pp. 81-84.
43. TELLIS, A. et. al. (2000), Measuring National Power in the Postindustrial Age, Santa
44. Monica, California: RAND. THOMPSON, K.W. (1955), “Toynbee’s Approach to History Reviewed”, Ethics, 65 (4), pp. 287-303.
45. WALLERSTEIN, I. (1974), The Modern World-System, Vol. I: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century, New York: Aca- demic Press.
46. WALLERSTEIN, I. (1980), The Modern World-System, Vol. II: Mercantilism and the Con- solidation of the European World-Economy, 1600-1750, New York: Academic Press.
47. WALLERSTEIN, I. (1989) The Modern World-System, Vol. III: The Second Great Expan- sion of the Capitalist World-Economy, 1730-1840’s, San Dieg: Academic Press.
48. WEBER, M. (2002), The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism: and Other Writ- ings, Penguin Classics.
49. WONG, R.B. (1997), China Transformed Historical Change and the Limits of the Euro- pean Experience, Ithaca, Cornell University Press.