Why didn't the Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico produce a vast trading network the way the Mediterranean did?

Why didn't the Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico produce a vast trading network the way the Mediterranean did? The size of the combined seas are almost identical to the Mediterranean.

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

Unattended Children Pitbull Club Shirt $21.68

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    The United States represents a power vacuum. Any industrialist in the region that wanted a shipping empire simply did so between US ports instead as that would've made more economic sense do to the size of the US economy and the lack of import duties and tarrifs.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I think OP means prior to Columbus.

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Pre-Columbus
    We know there were many trade networks between peoples on the mainland and islands, and between islands themselves of certain goods, and that many island or coastal peoples (Arawak, Kalinago/Carib, Taino) were fairly decent sailors.
    >Post-Columbus
    As resource extraction colonies, their only purpose was to export raw goods to the metropole, to then have manufactured ones from there imported back. Post-independence, you had all these places with virtually the same economy so they had nothing unique to offer, and little to no domestic manufacturing which could produce anything they wanted, and so relied on mainly Britain, the United States as time went by, and the remaining few ties to other former colonial powers left.
    Only Mexico, the DR, Colombia, and Cuba (but for differing reasons) really got away from raw goods. Mexico however, (especially El Norte) is so integrated with the US road and rail network that it doesn't need ports, the DR and Colombia have established manufacturing or information niches for themselves, and Cuba through its post-Cold War isolation, and mainly trades with China or Europe.

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    They didn't have the fricking horse. No cattle either. Hard to build trade networks when you don't have beasts of burden.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >what is a boat

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >what is a creature that allows for intensification of agriculture, thus increased land clearance, thus population growth, thus development, thus trade

        The Tainos and Caribs only had canoes and things slightly larger than that, no big ships like the Mediterranean. I know what you're looking for here, they were dumb lazy beaners before they got colonized, yada yada, but it's a bit more complicated than that. They simply lacked a lot of things that Eurasia (and the Med at its western terminus) had. The geography is way more spread out compared to the Med too.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >I know what you're looking for here, they were dumb lazy beaners before they got colonized, yada yada, but it's a bit more complicated than that.
          Didn't the Mississippi Valley Civilization have massive fields without livestock

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            So did the Aztecs, but loading and unloading a ship is backbreaking work. Then transporting the goods across thousands of miles of inland road networks with no horse or mule or camel or even a goddamn team of goats. Long distance trade did occur in the Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico but it was mostly small-scale and ad-hoc rather than organized large-scale regular Med trade. It's more comparable to the Pacific trade networks than the Med ones.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >but loading and unloading a ship is backbreaking work.
              The Greeks and Romans solved that using slavery so much so that agricultural implements only saw significant improvement in the Middle Ages. Maybe the Aztecs should have thought about using their captives for forced labor instead of sacrificing them so the sun doesn't go out

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        They had them

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      are you implying you need beasts of burden for trading across the seas?
      do you believe the romans navigated through dolphins or what?

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    American Indians are genetically inferior to Europeans

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      here OP, the response you wanted

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >spics
      >doing anything noteworthy
      anon, are you moronic?

      it's true because I hate shitskins

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    The Mediterranean is extremely calm for most of the year, it has many good beaches and negligible tides, making it very easy for craft to be pulled up on beaches to replenish food and water, rest crews overnight etc. The negligible tides also mean that there is very little danger of being caught on a leeward shore.

    The Caribbean has none of these things.

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >spics
    >doing anything noteworthy
    anon, are you moronic?

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    No beasts of burden slowed down the progress of native Americans.

    By the time Mexico and the andes entered the bronze age is exactly when Europeans showed up.

    Still I don't think Peruvians or Mexicans are bitter about it. Same way coptic Egyptians aren't bitter for their collapse.

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    No iron tools.

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    There wasn't anything worth trading with the islands. Trade went from Mesoamerica down the coast to Peru

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *