- This topic has 5 voices and 17 replies.
-
Posts
-
Spain had a large “head start” over England in its exploration and colonization of the New World. England, in fact, did not seriously engage in exploration here during the 16th century. With all the gold, silver, and resources extracted from the New World, Spain was undeniably in a good position from an economic standpoint. My query – why did Spain's development during the 16th century not allow it to consume England? The Spanish Armada aside, it must have been rather difficult for England to compete economically with Spain during this century, but somehow it pulled through. What advantages did England have to answer Spain's economic boom?
Spain embroiled itself in too many ventures at one time, plus the Spaniards couldn't keep themselves out of Continental politics and the expensive wars that resulted from such meddling. England, on the other, hand did not go into the New World to extract resources without developing their holdings abroad as well. The Spanish initially wanted a get rich quick scheme without reinvesting back into their acquisitions….again because they were too busy meddling in European Continental politics. The loss to England in 1588 did more damage to Spain's aura of invincibility than its infrastructure, but nevertheless, it still established England as the supreme naval power. Also, England had been practicing high sea piracy for many years. Many a Spanish Galleon was hijacked in the Carribbean. That gold lined the coffers of English sailors. 🙂
Right you are Don; big slow ships full of gold attract small, fast ships full of guns.Spain folded becasue they really needed the gold to support an economy that was headed downhill after running the Muslims (dryland ag experts) and Jews (general businessmen and bankers) out of town. When everyone left wants to be the rich landowner or is running off for adventure (second, third and so on sons) times get tight.
I just recently watched a TV show which made the claim that something like 90% of the Spanish treasure ships made it through. Thsi must be close to true, or how else could Spain finance the wars in the Netherlands for year after year. In fact, the start of the Spanish decline can be almost precisely dated to when the treasure fleets ceased sailing and Spanish riches dried up.
I don't doubt that; would be interesting to figure out how the time line of decline vs banishment (of the Muslims & Jews) correlates….
England kicked all the Jews out of their Kingdom in the Middle Ages and seemed to do just fine so I don't necessarily think that a correlation exists between banishment and economic decline. Unless your theory holds that Christians were held in a subjugated status during the Muslim occupation of the peninsula, which is certainly true, but the true flowering of Spanish power occurred in the centuries immediately after the completion of the Reconquista. I would more tend to agree with the theory that Spain simply had too many irons in the fire and was incapable of handling all their various enterprises at once.
The Spanish Reconquista was done over centuries and I believe the height of Muslim power ended with the Battle of Tours in southwestern France, sometime in the 8th century. The Reconquista of Iberia was completed in early 1492 under Ferdinand and Isabella when the Muslims were kicked out of Grenada, but that was a relatively small area and most of the Muslim holdings had already been gained back. Removing the Muslims was a gradual process.I'm not certain of the dates of Jewish banishment but I believe it took place in the centuries before the end of the Reconquista. My understanding is that it was undertaken so as to eliminate national security problems (when religion and political allegiance went hand-in-hand) which Spain faced through the Middle Ages. Spanish power, however, would continue to increase over the next century as wealth arrived from the New World and Hapsburg power was consolidated with the marriage of Philip of Austria and Juana of Castile. At the time of the Spanish Armada in 1588 Spain was quite strong, perhaps at its height.
The economic decline was due in part to the loss of people experienced in irrigated farming (the Moors) and in general business (the Jews) without a large group of native Spanish ready to take over these positions. Seemed like the Spanish didn't want to do these jobs (ethnic thing?) but rather be the rich land owners… the system by which the oldest son got the ranch didn't help… meant there were many second and third (and beyond) sons that could end up gov't minions, military adventure types, or church functionaries. None of these types produce food or other products necessary to everyday life. They get gold, manage the treasury, and save souls. Armies and navies are money pits unless they bring in resources. The saving of souls (at home or overseas) becomes an expensive priority to compete with the Protestants.My point was that Spain increased the amount of gold need by not having a solid domestic economy. When the English figured out that stealing the Spanish gold was easier than finding their own the decline accelerated.Does this make a bit more sense?
OK, now I get what you are saying, even though I dont necessarily agree with it. I havent read anything about the Spanish being reluctant to farm the land. I would guess that climactic conditions in Iberia would lead to a surplus population given average human fertility in the late middle ages early renaissance period. The land in Spain is not really suitable for much more than subsistence farming and irrigation is very dependent on two things, water and knowledge. The Spanish had the knowledge what they did not have was sufficient water to both feed themslves and their animals. If you have ever studied the reconquista you would know that most Spanish armies were infantry, not because they liked to fight as infantry but because Spain simply did not produce enough horses. That is why Spanish cavalry was so renowned, you had to be an excellent horseman to be accepted into the crown's service, and Spain had one of the strongest monarchies in Europe. This also explains why Spain was at the front in the development of infantry tactics in the 16th and 17th centuries.
By the late 1500's, American treasure made up 25% of Spain's revenue. All that gold expanded the money supply faster than the growth of goods could keep up which caused astronomically high inflation rates and weakened Spain's competitiveness in manufacturing.
By the late 1500's, American treasure made up 25% of Spain's revenue. All that gold expanded the money supply faster than the growth of goods could keep up which caused astronomically high inflation rates and weakened Spain's competitiveness in manufacturing.
So at the time Spain had a gold-based monetary system?
I meant all the riches brought back from the Americas, not just gold. I guess it created a false market in Spain.
How is that so? ??? The Spanish spent the money almost as fast as it arrived from the New World. Their armies in the Spanish Netherlands were money pits. The Spanish maintained the royalty of their mercenary armies because the New World gold allowed them to pay their armies on time. It was not lack of armies that caused the Spanish failure in Holland; it was mostly the terrain and partly the stubbornness of the Dutch people.What is your source for the claim that the Spanish economy was over-monetized? I am not saying you are wrong, you may be right; I have just never heard this particular argument.
That is very interesting; I had never heard that before. I guess that it makes sense because a higher money supply meant they could finance more on debt. It would work well while the gold and silver kept coming but would cause a crash when the money dried up. The inflation makes sense too as prices would go up as the money supply increased. It also makes sense that inflation would hit the peasantry hardest because they did not have access to the precious metals from overseas to offset the inflation that was cause by these same metals coming into the country.
