The Atlantic Slave Trade, the Indian Ocean Trade, the Ottoman Empire & World Trade

The Atlantic Slave Trade, the Indian Ocean Trade, the Ottoman Empire & World Trade

Introduction

In general, the historic events that usually occur over different periods possess a synthesized outcome over the contemporary global society. Usually, most of the situations that took place in past societies have similar interrelations based on the occurrences in modern epochs. For instance, events such as the Holocaust led to the spread of the Jewish population globally based on their attempts to escape the cruelty of the Nazi Regime in Germany. Based on this, it is certain that certain current situations arose from the relationships that existed from the occurrence of past ordeals. Ascertaining this presumption in this case involves determining the association between the Atlantic Slave Trade, the Indian Ocean Trade and the Ottoman Empire. Even though these events happened over different courses of history, their impact spread across international boundaries with respect to global trade. Nonetheless, a synthesis of these historical circumstances will allow an understanding of the various themes that they pose in contemporary history based on their connection to world trade.

Historical Context

The Atlantic Slave Trade, also known as the transatlantic slave trade, was the main precursor of slavery in the 15^th century. Most of the slaves transported across the Atlantic Ocean to the New World comprised Africans. The persons responsible for acquiring the African slaves constituted European slave traders who were responsible for relocating them to the Americas. Accordingly, the amounts of Africans undergoing transportation via slave trade were significantly large. Because of this, the number of immigrants traveling from the Old World to the New World was the largest especially in North and South America at the end of the 17^th century[1]. In addition, the slave trade was also important in altering Africans from a diminutive majority within the international populace of slaves in the 1600s to a significant majority in the 1800s.  The significance of the slave trade was exceedingly important to the point it faced alteration from being a marginal feature of the economies into a large sector in a comparatively short duration.

The increase in the number of slaves at that time also led to the augmentation of other sectors of the affected economies. For instance, the agricultural sector experienced a boost based on the considerable increase in agricultural plantations[2]. This proportionate amplification also provided a platform for the slave practices to undergo conventional distribution. Historically, the first Europeans to engage in the utilization and trade of slaves were the Portuguese. This is in accordance to their initial arrival at the Coast of Guinea. At that time, the Portuguese largely expressed interest in spices and gold and proceeded to create colonies on the unoccupied isles of Sao Tome[3]. In addition, these islands also proved fertile for sugar plantations. It is because of this reason that the Portuguese actually proceeded on acquiring significant numbers of African slaves. Other reasons for the Portuguese’s interest in African slaves comprised the disturbing heat, insufficient infrastructure and the hardship experienced in the islands at that time.

Other groups that engaged in the initial stages of the Atlantic Slave Trade constituted the Spanish. Accordingly, the Spanish were also among the foremost Europeans to take advantage of the enchained Africans. Normally, much of the slavery executed by these Europeans occurred in the New World, especially in islands such as Hispaniola and Cuba[4]. In general, the 18^th century characterized an incredible increase in slave trade. During this period, the largest amount of slaves faced captivity that resulted from raiding expeditions within the West African interior. Additionally, the increase in slave demand based on the extension of European colonial influence in the New World augmented productivity to the West African authorities. This instigated the creation of various West African realms that lived and profited from slave trade.

Slave trade was also eminent in the Ottoman Empire due to the occurrence of the Indian Ocean Trade. Accordingly, the Ottoman Empire during the 16^th century mostly attributed its expansion to the conventional and terracentric perspectives as well as the flexibility of the Indian Ocean Trade. The basis is due to the facilitation of Western and Eastern exchanges due to the Indian Ocean. However, there was competition between the Portuguese and the Ottomans concerning the control of the Indian Ocean trade[5]. Regardless of this, both empires had significant ambitions towards the control of the transactions taking place in the Indian Ocean. However, there were certain obstacles that prevented them from accomplishing this feat. For the Ottomans, the Mamluk traders from Syria and Egypt restricted them from obtaining a larger share of the trade[6]. However, the Ottoman Empire possessed considerable control over Arab traders who largely controlled the Indian Ocean trade.

However, during the late 16^th and 17^th centuries, the Ottoman Empire began facing negative modifications in its established system. Accordingly, the poise of power amid the hub and the periphery shifted towards the provinces. With the culmination of the empire’s extension, the State no longer possessed its military and organizational capabilities. In addition, the Ottoman Empire also faced regular rebellions, economic depression and military trounces. Most of these changes occurred due to the growth of European economic power. Accordingly, the Indian Ocean trade also faced implications from this realization. By the 17^th and 18^th centuries, the competition between the Portuguese and the Ottomans for control of Indian Ocean transactions receded. This is because of the removal of the Portuguese as the dominant authority in the Indian Ocean by the British and the Dutch.

Argument

Undeniably, the stated historical events provide certain conclusions based on the themes they pose on global history with respect to world trade. One of the conclusions based on these situations involves the permanent success of a civilization. Accordingly, it is certain that no civilization has ever possessed the capability of being permanently successful. An illustration of this predicament is the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman Empire was among the largest global empires of the 13^th century. In addition, by the 16^th and 17^th centuries, the empire was among the most authoritative and influential states across the globe. The reason for this comprised its dominance over North Africa, Southeast Europe and Western Asia. By the 17^th century, the state also constituted 32 provinces and several vassal states, which became part of the empire[7]. Moreover, the Ottoman Empire assumed the role of a hub between the Western and Eastern hemisphere for more than six centuries.

Indeed, it is certain that the Ottoman Empire was one of the most successful civilizations of the 13^th century. Regardless of its achievements and historical greatness, it was not permanent. By the end of the 17^th century, the success of the Ottoman civilization began depreciating. Foremost, insufficient leadership because of the weak Sultans led to an epoch of misrule for the Ottomans[8]. Such inadequate leadership led to the lagging of the empire regardless of the technological advancements that much of the world was adopting at that time. For instance, innovations in military technology by the Europeans restricted further extension of the empire based on scholarly and religious conservatism. Consequently, the Battle of Vienna ascertained the culmination of the Ottoman growth in Europe. In terms of trade, the Ottoman civilization also experienced certain difficulties.  The discovery of novel maritime trade paths by European states enabled them to avert the monopoly characterized by the Ottoman trade.

The discovery of the Cape of Good Hope created a sequence of conflicts between the Portuguese and the Ottomans within the Indian Ocean especially in the 16^th century[9]. Economically, the massive influx of Spanish silver created drastic currency devaluation for the Ottomans as well as unbridled inflation[10]. Moreover, the provinces that were once part of the empire began expressing their desire for autonomy and secession. This led to a series of disputes that practically crumbled the Ottoman Empire. Based on such illustrations, it is evident that the success of any civilization is indeed temporary. This is in accordance to certain uncontrollable factors that usually operate against the permanence of a situation. In addition, such factors usually lead to the origination of new situations that would have been impossible if it were not for them. In this respect, the division of the Ottoman Empire led to the creation of contemporary states such as Turkey, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Lebanon and Jordan.

Another conclusion from the mentioned events comprises the impact of a single cause on history. With respect to the mentioned circumstances, it is possible to assert that one cause may lead to certain occurrences in history. Usually, the modern events taking place all derive their foundations from historical causes and occurrences. In this respect, the spread of Negroids throughout the Eastern and Western hemispheres contemporarily derives its cause from the slave trade that occurred during the beginning of the 16^th century. Slave businesses such as the Atlantic Slave Trade facilitated the relocation of African slaves from Africa to various parts of the world. Accordingly, this slave trade comprised a major part of the world trade during its inception. This is because it facilitated cross-border interactions between Europeans, Asians, African merchants and the Americans as well. Based on this assertion, it is certain that international relations did not originate in the modern world, but rather in historical periods such as this.

Determining the best approach to evoke change is also another conclusion concerning the occurrence of these events. Accordingly, history dictates various periods in which change took place via revolution or gradual circumstances. With respect to world trade, it is possible to assert that change mostly took place over a gradual process. At that time, slave trade was one of the main sectors of economic success especially for Western empires. Even though it was highly exploitative for the enslaved Africans, it did not present a considerable issue at the time since most of them did not possess influence. In addition, the traders that participated in this situation comprised Western economic and military powers such as the Portuguese, the Dutch, the British, the Spanish and the Americans. However, after a considerable time, abolitionists occupying the major slave trading countries such as America, Britain, Portugal and various sections of Europe opposed the slave trade[11]. Such protests were the result of a gradual stance against slave imports especially in the colonial holdings.

In conclusion, the contemporary society derives its structure from events that occurred throughout history. Even though such events took place over different periods, the effect they posed highlights relationships that existed over time. In this context, the global trades played an important role in orchestrating the origination and downfall of certain civilizations and practices. Accordingly, trades such as the Atlantic Slave Trade and the Indian Ocean Trade facilitated the expansion and demise of the Ottoman Empire. Additionally, the trades also supported world trade between the Eastern and Western hemispheres. For instance, the Atlantic Slave Trade brought together various foreign countries to a single trading platform. Moreover, the occurrence of the trades also illustrated the production of change, which determines the existence of the contemporary society.

Bibliography

Parker, Philip. World history. London: Dorling Kindersley, 2010.

Smith, Bonnie G., Marc Van De Mieroop, Richard von Glahn and Kris Lane. Crossroads and Cultures Volume II: Since 1300: A History of the World’s Peoples. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2012.

[1] Bonnie G. Smith, Marc van de Mieroop, Richard von Glahn and Kris Lane, Crossroads and Cultures, Volume II: Since 1300: A History of the World’s Peoples (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2012), 405.

[2] Bonnie G. Smith, Marc van de Mieroop, Richard von Glahn and Kris Lane, Crossroads and Cultures, Volume II: Since 1300: A History of the World’s Peoples (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2012), 411.

[3] Bonnie G. Smith, Marc van de Mieroop, Richard von Glahn and Kris Lane, Crossroads and Cultures, Volume II: Since 1300: A History of the World’s Peoples (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2012), 424.

[4] Bonnie G. Smith, Marc van de Mieroop, Richard von Glahn and Kris Lane, Crossroads and Cultures, Volume II: Since 1300: A History of the World’s Peoples (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2012), 436.

[5] Bonnie G. Smith, Marc van de Mieroop, Richard von Glahn and Kris Lane, Crossroads and Cultures, Volume II: Since 1300: A History of the World’s Peoples (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2012), 447.

[6] Bonnie G. Smith, Marc van de Mieroop, Richard von Glahn and Kris Lane, Crossroads and Cultures, Volume II: Since 1300: A History of the World’s Peoples (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2012), 449.

[7] Bonnie G. Smith, Marc van de Mieroop, Richard von Glahn and Kris Lane, Crossroads and Cultures, Volume II: Since 1300: A History of the World’s Peoples (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2012), 456.

[8] Bonnie G. Smith, Marc van de Mieroop, Richard von Glahn and Kris Lane, Crossroads and Cultures, Volume II: Since 1300: A History of the World’s Peoples (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2012), 460.

[9] Bonnie G. Smith, Marc van de Mieroop, Richard von Glahn and Kris Lane, Crossroads and Cultures, Volume II: Since 1300: A History of the World’s Peoples (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2012), 463.

[10] Bonnie G. Smith, Marc van de Mieroop, Richard von Glahn and Kris Lane, Crossroads and Cultures, Volume II: Since 1300: A History of the World’s Peoples (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2012), 469.

[11] Philip Parker, World History (London: Dorling Kindersley, 2010), 178.