Empire of Cotton Response

When we discussed Cronon’s Changes in the Land, we ultimately decided that he was talking about a capitalist market in a rather overlooked type of history while also being a microhistory.  Cotton and its market, like the environment, are histories that could be considered unusual, something history workers/historians do not consider writing or researching about but which have great influence on their surroundings, its place in history, and ultimately on the development of capitalism.  Cronon and Beckert while writing about certain aspects of history argue that it is the need of capitalism and materialism are what drive history and create change.  For both Cronon and Berkert the actors in their histories were only able to make so much change when they started to exercise complete control over their commodity.  For Berkert when the Europeans began producing enough to sustain themselves and ship it overseas to make surplus income.  For Cronon it was when the Europeans were able to control the land through farming, technology, the domestication of plants and animals, and the accumulation of land for wealth.  For both of the authors it was not a matter of the object (cotton or the environment) itself but the political and social power that comes from being able to control the object which moves history forward.  Those who were able to control more land or produce and sell the most cotton were the ones who controlled what happened in their environment.