Read Online (Free) relies on page scans, which are not currently available to screen readers. To access this article, please contact JSTOR User Support . We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
With a personal account, you can read up to 100 articles each month for free.
Get StartedAlready have an account? Log in
Monthly Plan
- Access everything in the JPASS collection
- Read the full-text of every article
- Download up to 10 article PDFs to save and keep
Yearly Plan
- Access everything in the JPASS collection
- Read the full-text of every article
- Download up to 120 article PDFs to save and keep
Log in through your institution
Purchase a PDF
Purchase this article for $34.00 USD.
How does it work?
- Select the purchase option.
- Check out using a credit card or bank account with PayPal.
- Read your article online and download the PDF from your email or your account.
journal article
Portuguese and Chinese Maritime Imperialism: Camoes's Lusiads and Luo Maodeng's Voyage of the San Bao EunuchComparative Studies in Society and History
Vol. 34, No. 2 (Apr., 1992)
, pp. 225-241 (17 pages)
Published By: Cambridge University Press
//www.jstor.org/stable/178944
Read and download
Log in through your school or library
Alternate access options
For independent researchers
Read Online
Read 100 articles/month free
Subscribe to JPASS
Unlimited reading + 10 downloads
Purchase article
$34.00 - Download now and later
Journal Information
Comparative Studies in Society and History (CSSH) is an international forum for new research and interpretation concerning problems of recurrent patterning and change in human societies through time and the contemporary world. CSSH sets up a working alliance among specialists in all branches of the social sciences and humanities as a way of bringing together multidisciplinary research, cultural studies, and theory, especially in anthropology, history, political science, and sociology. Review articles and discussion bring readers in touch with current findings and issues. Instructions for Contributors at Cambridge Journals Online
Publisher Information
Cambridge University Press (www.cambridge.org) is the publishing division of the University of Cambridge, one of the world’s leading research institutions and winner of 81 Nobel Prizes. Cambridge University Press is committed by its charter to disseminate knowledge as widely as possible across the globe. It publishes over 2,500 books a year for distribution in more than 200 countries. Cambridge Journals publishes over 250 peer-reviewed academic journals across a wide range of subject areas, in print and online. Many of these journals are the leading academic publications in their fields and together they form one of the most valuable and comprehensive bodies of research available today. For more information, visit //journals.cambridge.org.
Read Online (Free) relies on page scans, which are not currently available to screen readers. To access this article, please contact JSTOR User Support . We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
With a personal account, you can read up to 100 articles each month for free.
Get StartedAlready have an account? Log in
Monthly Plan
- Access everything in the JPASS collection
- Read the full-text of every article
- Download up to 10 article PDFs to save and keep
Yearly Plan
- Access everything in the JPASS collection
- Read the full-text of every article
- Download up to 120 article PDFs to save and keep
Log in through your institution
journal article
Europe and China ComparedReview (Fernand Braudel Center)
Vol. 25, No. 4 (2002)
, pp. 401-449 (49 pages)
Published By: Research Foundation of State University of New York
//www.jstor.org/stable/40241745
Read and download
Log in through your school or library
Alternate access options
For independent researchers
Read Online
Read 100 articles/month free
Subscribe to JPASS
Unlimited reading + 10 downloads
Abstract
Pomeranz's study "The Great Divergence" is a major contribution in historical social science insofar as it informs us why Europe and China experienced different trajectories of socio-economic development during the Early Modern period. What is unfortunately lacking is an assessment to what extent the diverging path dependencies of these two historical systems were to a certain extent already determined in the preceding period, c. 1200-1500 CE. In comparing the different social structures within the political economy of Europe and China during this "medieval" period, the author attempts to shed a new light on the "transition" debate which has remained insufficiently explored in Pomeranz's otherwise excellent and thought-provoking book.
Journal Information
Review was founded in 1976 by Immanuel Wallerstein as the official journal of the Fernand Braudel Center for the Study of Economies, Historical Systems, and Civilizations. Richard E. Lee took over as editor in 2006 Review is committed to the pursuit of a perspective which recognizes the primacy of analyses of economies over long historical time and large space, the holism of the socio-historical process, and the transitory (heuristic) nature of theories. The journal addresses mainly a readership in the social sciences and the humanities, and this is an international readership extending to six continents. Review also edits special issues. These may be put together by a guest editor around a specific theme or publish the results of a research project. In general, articles are in English, but Review does sometimes publish articles in other scholarly languages.
Publisher Information
The Research Foundation for The State University of New York (RF) is the largest comprehensive university-connected research foundation in the country. It exists to serve the State University of New York (SUNY) by providing essential administrative services that enable SUNY faculty to focus their efforts on the education of students and the performance of life-changing research across a wide range of disciplines including medicine, engineeering, physical sciences, energy, computer science, and social sciences.
Rights & Usage
This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our Terms
and Conditions
Review (Fernand Braudel Center) © 2002 Fernand Braudel Center
Request Permissions