The Origins of the Modern World: A Global and Ecological Narrative from the Fifteenth to the Twenty-first Century

Marks describes various “analytic tools” that he uses to support his arguments. What are these tools? Are they effective in backing his thesis? Why or why not?

Marks writes, “[T]o understand our world, we have to understand not just how nation-states and industry came to shape the modern world, but how and why those European ways of organizing the world came to dominate the globe” (3). Does his book accomplish this goal? Why or why not?

Find two examples from the text of how the environment influences society and history. In what ways do these examples show how humans impact the environment and/or how the environment shapes societies? Using textual evidence, examine how these examples support Marks’s arguments.

One criticism of The Origins of the Modern World is that, instead of a “true” world history, it is “Asia-centric” and downplays the role of the Americas and Africa in shaping the modern world (Watrous-Schlesinger, Mary. “Book Review: Origins of the Modern World.” World History Connected, 2004). Is this criticism valid? Why or why not?

How did nation-states become the sole way of organizing a political state, according to Marks? What is the role of nationalism in the nation-state? Why might nationalism be harmful today?

What contingencies led to industrialization, according to Marks? How might a Eurocentric narrative about the origin of industrialization differ? Compare and contrast these two views.

Describe Marks’s explanation for the rise of the West. Write a paper agreeing or disagreeing with his theory and detailing why or why not.

Think of an example of globalization from your life, the news, or the media (the popularity of Korean pop music in the US, the spread of COVID-19 across the world, etc.). How might this example fit in Marks’s discussion of globalization?