Urgently looking for answers to American history! ! ! !

1. Price revolution

The performance of the price revolution is: a large amount of silver from America flows into Spain, then flows from Spain to Genoa, and finally even flows into the Ottoman Empire. When silver flows eastward through international trade channels, the following phenomena will inevitably occur in the places it passes: rapid price increases, currency depreciation, counterfeit currency, and active speculation. Over the course of a century, prices in Spain rose roughly fourfold, and other European countries, although not to the same extent, also suffered severe impacts on their traditional economic relationships. The sharp rise in prices had such a profound impact on the social development of European countries that it was called a price revolution.

The price revolution promoted changes in class relations in European countries. Due to the impact of the price revolution, there are two groups of people who have been seriously harmed. Some are feudal landowners who collect fixed monetary rents according to the traditional method. Their actual income has been reduced due to currency devaluation, and they have fallen into poverty and bankruptcy. The other part are wage workers in urban and rural areas. Since they are in the position of being employed, the state has to protect the employer's rights. In order to benefit, the government has repeatedly promulgated laws restricting wage increases, causing wage increases to fail to keep up with price increases. Those who profited the most from the price revolution were the operators of commodity production, that is, manual workshop owners, capitalist farmers, the new aristocracy who operated farms and ranches in a capitalist way, and wealthy tenant farmers who paid fixed monetary rents. They were able to buy labor more cheaply and had a lot of products waiting to be sold. At the same time, for countries such as Britain and France, the price revolution also had another effect, that is, it initially straightened out the price system during the period of transition from a natural economy to a commodity economy. Therefore, in countries such as Britain and France whose domestic economic systems were able to carry out capitalist transformation relatively smoothly, the price revolution effectively accelerated the decline of the feudal system and the rise of capitalism, and promoted the development of the commodity economy.

However, the price revolution played a different role in Spain. In the early 16th century, although Spain's domestic social economy once showed prosperity and capitalist relations in industry and commerce also grew, the feudal structure was still quite tenacious. Faced with the soaring prices of agricultural products, the feudal aristocrats only blindly strengthened feudal exploitation, and the guilds in the cities continued to control handicraft production. This makes it difficult to develop domestic industrial and agricultural production in Spain. The food produced is not enough to feed its residents. A large amount of wool is still exported to the Netherlands and Italy. The price of industrial and agricultural products is even higher than that of similar products in the United Kingdom, France, and the Netherlands. The product has lost its competitiveness in the market. In addition, the Spanish Habsburg dynasty pursued a policy of dominating Europe and spent huge amounts of wealth on military and political activities; the Spanish nobles squandered money in pursuit of a luxurious life, which caused the gold and silver shipped back from the American colonies to be quickly transferred to other countries. situation in the hands of the country's suppliers and creditors. Therefore, the colonial activities carried out by Spain were, to a large extent, just making wedding clothes for others. The colonial market it opened up was quickly occupied by goods from Britain, France and other countries; the wealth it plundered from the colonies was not absorbed by its own domestic industry, agriculture and commerce, but was transferred to Britain, France and other countries before being converted into capital. According to statistics, from 1492 to 1595, Spain shipped back gold and silver from the Americas worth approximately 4 billion pesetas, of which only 200 million pesetas were left in the country, accounting for only 5%.

2. Differences in the colonial methods of the metropolitan country

In the competition among European countries, the colony is only one of the bargaining chips, and its fate is closely related to the rise and fall of the metropolitan country. At that time, Britain was a resurgent country with initial industrial development, and its national power was becoming increasingly powerful, especially its maritime transportation and combat capabilities, which were second to none in Europe; France was in a period of declining autocratic monarchy, and relied on backward feudal agriculture to build its country. Basically, compared with the United Kingdom, one is rising and the other is declining. The gap in national strength can be imagined. This contrast in power between the sovereign states was also reflected in the North American colonies. There are 13 British colonies (except Nova Scotia). From the beginning, they have attached great importance to agriculture and manufacturing, made effective use of land and other resources, and formed a relatively reasonable economic system. Basic daily necessities can be Produced in North America; and with a population of more than 1.5 million, the social scene seems relatively prosperous. The economic and social conditions of New France were very different from those of the British colonies, and it was simply unable to compete with the British colonies in terms of strength. Therefore, during the Seven Years' War, New France could neither raise a strong militia nor obtain sufficient supplies in the colonies, putting the French army in a difficult situation. In addition, France's national strength was declining, and it felt that it was unable to cope with European affairs. It felt that the North American colonies were a heavy burden, both financially and militarily. Discussions of abandoning New France had already spread among the government and the public. This caused New France to lose the attention of the sovereign state. Once a heavy price had to be paid, France would of course have no choice but to retreat bravely. It can be seen that New France cannot compete with New England.

Attachment: The economic system of New France

The cornerstone of New France’s economic life is the Seigniorial System. This land system was also transplanted from France. According to this system, the lord acquired land from the king in exchange for various obligations; the lord then divided the land into small plots and enfeoffed it to lower-level lords or gave it to tenants for cultivation, who in turn assumed obligations to the lord , pay rent and taxes. Therefore, the feudal system established a typical feudal relationship.

The main purpose of France's implementation of the feudal system in New France was to stimulate immigration and settlement, and to cultivate a privileged class in the colony for easy control. Promoting the seigneurial system was a policy that France had determined at the beginning of its colonial activities in North America. A charter issued by the King of France in 1598 authorized the establishment of territories to those who agreed to support the defense of Canada. However, stimulating immigration in this way has not had much effect. Only three territories were established before 1627. The New France Company granted title to 60 territories, but the recipients were concerned only with their land rights and not with development. The result was a large territory, but the colony's population grew slowly. In response to this situation, the French government issued a proclamation in 1663, stipulating that if the land was not cleared within 6 months, it would be confiscated. In 1679, a new decree was promulgated, stipulating that one-twentieth of the granted area of ??undeveloped land should be recovered year by year. However, these laws have not been effectively implemented. The lords were keen on the fur trade and were unwilling to spend money and energy on developing the land. Sharecroppers also stayed away from farming because of the lucrative fur trade. In 1711, the King of France issued the Arrets of Marly, which established unified regulations for lords. Lords could not refuse to grant land to immigrants who were willing to settle, nor could they charge extra for granting land; in the above situation, immigrants could appeal to the authorities. , the authorities can place the immigrants on the lord's land according to their wishes, and the land rent will be paid to the treasury; if the lord does not develop their land, they will order it to be confiscated; if the tenant farmers do not cultivate, they will also lose their land. This policy is rarely implemented.

In the relationship between the lord and the tenants, the tenants had to bear various feudal obligations common in France to the lord, while the lord enjoyed many privileges for the tenants. The feudal obligations implemented in New France included corvee, usually 3 to 6 days per year, which could also be replaced by currency; in addition, tenant farmers also had to perform labor service for the authorities, but it was relatively minor. There are two forms of ground rent. One is monetary rent (cens), which is paid in cash on an annual basis; the other is real rent (rentes), but it can also be converted into currency. These two items constituted the main source of income for the lord. At first, land rents were set very low in order to attract immigrants. For example, in Montreal, an arpent (an old land unit, approximately 25-50 acres) usually only paid half a sous and half a pint of wheat ( 6). In addition, if the land is transferred or sold without inheritance, a land sales fee (Lods et ventes) must be paid, which is equivalent to one-twelfth of the land price. The lord's prerogatives included judicial power over tenant farmers, among other things. However, there are also many detailed changes. For example, the lord's hunting rights and pigeon raising rights on the tenants' land have no meaning in the colony; the habit of tenants having to bake bread in the lord's bakery also does not work; only tenant farmers are generally practiced The practice of grinding flour in the lord's mill.

The economic development level of New France is not high. Less land has been developed, agriculture has not made much progress, manufacturing is even weaker, and basic daily necessities rely on imports from France. The fur trade was the mainstay of the colonial economy and was something that most French people who came to Canada indulged in.

The fur trade preceded settlement development. It emerged as a by-product of French fishing in Newfoundland. Initially, those who went fishing in North America brought some tools and handicrafts with them to trade with the Indians, and the furs they exchanged were brought home for sale. At the end of the 16th century, Europeans discovered the value of furs, especially beaver skins, which were used to make fashionable clothes. The hats and shawls were very popular with the upper class, so the fur trade expanded rapidly and became the main part of France's colonial activities in Canada. Beavers mainly live in colder places, and the fur farther north produces higher quality fur. Furs abounded in much of North America from the Ohio River Valley through the Great Lakes to Canada. Therefore, Canada became the main base for the fur trade, and the fur trade formed the economic conditions for the establishment and existence of New France. For a long period of time, the fur trade was actually the basic source of New France's fiscal revenue and an important basis for maintaining the balance of import and export. By the 18th century, the fur trade volume amounted to 1.5 million livres per year, half of which was the beaver skin trade. In many years, such as 1754, the trade volume reached 4 million livres. According to this, some history books vividly say that it was beavers that "opened the map of Canada."

The fur trade relied to a large extent on the cooperation of the Indians. The hunting and taxidermy techniques of furry animals are what the Indians are good at, and white fur traders must obtain the source of furs from them; moreover, whether the trade channels are smooth or not basically depends on the attitude of the indigenous tribes. If they encounter some powerful The tribal blockade would bring disaster to the fur trade and thus to the entire colony. Initially, most of the fur trade outposts were located in the St. Lawrence Valley. Later, Montreal emerged as the largest fur trading post in North America. French traders did not deal directly with fur-hunting tribes, but the Huron and Ottawa tribes acted as intermediaries. These tribes took advantage of their intermediary status and played an important role in the fur trade. The French tried many ways to get rid of the intermediary tribes and contact the fur trappers directly. Later, due to the westward movement of fur production areas and the growth and decline of tribal power, the form of fur trade changed greatly.

The Hurons and Ottawas lost their intermediary status, and ordinary immigrants could no longer easily get involved. Because the origin was far away and transportation was very difficult, the transportation of furs was not a problem that ordinary people could solve. At this time, the fur trade was increasingly monopolized by a group of professional fur merchants. Based in Quebec and Montreal, they established a trading network connecting the western production areas, thus making the fur trade a large-scale enterprise that was highly organized and professional. economic activities.

Although the fur trade brought considerable wealth to the colonies and the mother country, it had a great negative effect on the development of New France. The fur trade attracted a large number of laborers, which restricted the development of other resources, especially the development of agriculture. The colonies failed to form the production capacity of daily necessities for a long time, and were highly dependent on the mother country in terms of economic and social life. The fatal weakness caused by the singleness and dependence of the economy put France in an extremely disadvantageous position in the competition between Britain and France for North America.