For the past five centuries, Europe has dominated the world. European languages and culture have spread across the world and nearly ever country outside of Europe has been colonized by Europe before. But what if this never happened? With a POD no earlier than 1000 CE, how can I prevent Europe from dominating the world? How would this change the world? What would language, culture, politics and borders be like? Could some other region dominate the world? If so, what would it be like?
Europe never dominates the world
- Thread starter Siberian Tiger
- Start date
I think the biggest problem with discussing this is that there is no historical consensus around why Europe dominated the world to the degree it did. Or rather why Europe specifically (and parts of western Europe in particular) developed the military, technological, and governmental structures that allowed them to dominate in the why they did. And why no else did. There are lots of theories (ranging from racist "white man better" theories to geographic advantages and everything in between) but no consensus, at least to my knowledge.
Is there any reason to believe it wasn’t just because of the new world? The discovery and subsequent exploitation of two continent’s worth of resources with the people living there being unable to defend themselves on account of a devastating plague means those resources can be imported back to Europe, leading to the growth of manufacturing, leading to technological advancement, leading to industrialization, leading to a demand for more resources, leading to the imperialization of all the nations that haven’t yet gotten the same technological boost. That might be oversimplifying it but that’s what I believe
In that case the solution would be to have the colonization of the Americas be far less successful, or maybe the Americas are discovered earlier and the natives are given more time to resist disease and colonization
I'd go with Vinland not surviving but enduring enough to introduce beasts of burden and cattle as well as iron working, wheels and such
That alone would take away most(but not all) of Europe's tech advantage over them and reduce the amount of deaths by disease due to native americans having a stronger immunity by constant contact with eurasian animals
If you wanna go the extra mile maybe Columbus's expedition sunks and Portugal's attempt to reach India by sea end up in failure due to the multiple flashpoints where their voyages almost ended up being ended by muslim polities and the nobility wanting to cut funds from it
Not going to stop stuff like fishermen in Newfoundland in the long term, but would give America an extra century or two while Europe goes without it's colonial empire in the meanwhile and might nip the Great Divergence in the bud, making history continue to go the same route it had been going ever since Rome collapsed
What evidence is there of this? Surely than the biggest colonizer in the New World (Spain) would have become the dominant world power when European 'domination' of the rest of the world really started in the late 18th/19th centuries instead of becoming internationally irrelevant. Look at Britain, can we really say that the East India Company's ability to conquer India was a result of Britain new world colonies?
John Fredrick Parker
Donor
Thing is, Europe hasn’t been dominating the world the past few centuries; truthfully, European geopolitical pre-eminence only really became a thing in the 19th Century, and it was soon replaced by American pre-eminence in the 20th.
From the 15th Century up until the mid 18th Century, you basically had the Spanish Empire focused on the New World, Portugal’s Atlantic Slave Trade, and several other European powers with some combination of Caribbean colonies and trading outposts; the great Empires of the East (Qing, Mughal, Ottoman, etc) far surpassed Europe in economic power. Aside from the British East India Company doing their thing, “European dominance” just wasn’t really a thing until the Industrial Revolution blew the doors open in the mid 19th Century, resulting in things like the Scrambles for China and Africa. This was born the Age of Colonial Imperialism.
And, almost just as soon as the “European Age” got underway, it fell apart in the World Wars. Even as said conflicts and interwar period also represented the apex of European military domination of non- Europe (carving up the Ottoman remnants, occupying Iran, briefly taking Ethiopia, etc), it also saw the US emerge as the dominant financial power (during WWI), followed by the US and USSR dominating Europe outright militarily.
All told, the “rise of the West” narrative often gives an inaccurate picture of the 16th and 17th Centuries, at least in terms of how the global economy worked, who had influence over whom, and of the logistical and military capabilities of the relevant powers of the time. More troubling, the “decline of the rest” narrative -- whether talking about China, World Islam, Africa, or what have you -- often begins their take far too early, often resulting in very slanted and unhelpful readings on non-western history of this period. The periods we should want to look at here are far more narrow: the 18th and, especially, 19th Centuries.
Anyway, just thought I’d offer that.
From the 15th Century up until the mid 18th Century, you basically had the Spanish Empire focused on the New World, Portugal’s Atlantic Slave Trade, and several other European powers with some combination of Caribbean colonies and trading outposts; the great Empires of the East (Qing, Mughal, Ottoman, etc) far surpassed Europe in economic power. Aside from the British East India Company doing their thing, “European dominance” just wasn’t really a thing until the Industrial Revolution blew the doors open in the mid 19th Century, resulting in things like the Scrambles for China and Africa. This was born the Age of Colonial Imperialism.
And, almost just as soon as the “European Age” got underway, it fell apart in the World Wars. Even as said conflicts and interwar period also represented the apex of European military domination of non- Europe (carving up the Ottoman remnants, occupying Iran, briefly taking Ethiopia, etc), it also saw the US emerge as the dominant financial power (during WWI), followed by the US and USSR dominating Europe outright militarily.
All told, the “rise of the West” narrative often gives an inaccurate picture of the 16th and 17th Centuries, at least in terms of how the global economy worked, who had influence over whom, and of the logistical and military capabilities of the relevant powers of the time. More troubling, the “decline of the rest” narrative -- whether talking about China, World Islam, Africa, or what have you -- often begins their take far too early, often resulting in very slanted and unhelpful readings on non-western history of this period. The periods we should want to look at here are far more narrow: the 18th and, especially, 19th Centuries.
Anyway, just thought I’d offer that.
Last edited:
They would have if they didnt waste their potential, just look up the first developments of steampower in Spain that went nowhere and all the wealth wasted fighting France
If anything the Iberian conquests(mainly Portugal's) financed England instead, since the portuguese gave a foothold in India to the british as downry, introduced things such as tea to the english court and spent their new world wealth into cheap british products, building up their industry
All of this set up Britain to have its own Industrial Revolution and expand through India, though its conquest of the whole thing was a surprisingly feat as expectable as Cortez's conquest of Mexico
octoberman
Banned
The Military Revolution should be avoided to prevent European domination of the world
Last edited:
Europe already had an edge before the discovery of the New World. I think Europe got an edge on the Arabic World somewhere between11-12th century, while they likely came ahead of China around 1500. Of course at the time it was a relative small technological edge. It was really through the 17th century, Europe see significant development and its relative unconnected to colonialism. The big benefits of the discovery of New World comes in the 18th century, when potatoes begins to fuel mass armies and growing urban populations. But even without potatoes Europe was going through a agricultural revolution.
Earlier discovery of America would be worse for the rest of the Old World, New World crops making it to Europe without spreading to rest of the world (a lot of New World crop made it to Asia and Africa before Europe thanks to European trading routes) would result in European booming population without a similar booming population in the rest of the Old World, and the crops making it to Europe would be the best cold climate adapted American crops, instead of hot climate crops being the first to spread.
IMO, “European penetration” is often being taken as a synonym to “European domination” but it is not the same. In the terms of being present in India, China, Ottoman Empire but not vise versa, the Europeans had their footprint quite early but they did not dominate any of these places until, in the case of India, end of the XVIII, China, depending upon point of view, either 1840s or early XX, and the OE being a really tricky issue but probably not before the 1830s. “Economic power” was one of the factors but it is rather hard to define prior to the late XIX.
Yes, but the clear “Western” domination in the case of China is really an issue of post-Boxer Rebellion and real Scramble for Africa “officially” started only in 1884, even if colonialism began decades earlier.
In the case of China, China was pretty much “ordering the music” at least until 1830s because, as far as the global economy was involved, it wanted very little from the rest of the world (except for the furs) while the rest of the world wanted a long list of the Chinese goods.
In India, France in mid-XVIII (before British takeover) had a negative trade balance by the same reasons as European trade with China, heavily one-sided, not in the European favor, demand for the goods.
Very good points. I think that it would make more sense to talk about “Europe-originated” culture and technology with an assumption that the US basically fits the same category. “European trade” may be suitable but it did not mean “domination” until much later.
octoberman
Banned
No it was actually the Start of
Britain and France even occupied China's capital in the second opium war decades before the Boxer Rebellion
Last edited:
Second A-M war happened in 1803, which is XIX century.
Did I say otherwise?
Did I mention the Marahta war? In mid-XVIII the Brits kicked the French out ending up as the main colonizing power but I did not say anything about them controlling most of India by that time. The process lasted for many decades.
Read what is written carefully. Formally, declaration of the spheres of interest started in 1895, well after the Opium Wars, and it was finalized after the Boxer Rebellion.
Last edited:
I actually disagree with some of the posters here. I think people tend to date too late the rise of Europe. Large-scale territorial largely didn't happen until 1700s/1800s, but Europeans were really getting around before then and establishing a grip on the coasts of Africa and Asia and influence inland. In 1300 Europe was still clearly the recipient of technology, by 1500s it was clearly ahead. There was a clear advantage in naval technology, cannon technology, and while smaller the Portuguese seem to have had an advantage over the Indians in field combat too. I'm sure the unlucky Sultan of Gujarat who wanted Portuguese support, freaked up when 5,000 men showed up, got thrown overboard when negotiating with the Portuguese, who then repulsed a siege and ruled Diu for the next 400 years was glad the Europeans weren't meaningfully ahead. There is also research suggesting by the 1500s Western Europe was pulling ahead in per capita wealth of even the richer parts of India and China. China of course was able to resist European influence quite late thanks to its size and unity.
Basically Europe by 1000 was already on the rebound, which would accelerate as urbanization, especially away from the Mediterranean soared in the 1100s/1200s. Still behind by 1300s, ahead by 1500s, cripplingly ahead by 1800s. Question of course is when this became uncontrollable. I think the simplest way might be to have a large, dominant realm. China seems more vibrant technologically in divided periods. India with decline of Mughals was doing nicely economically. A much more successfully centralizing Holy Roman Empire (which started more centralized by far than France) might be helpful as that will stifle the rise of the bourgeois in both the Low Countries and Northern Italy.
Basically Europe by 1000 was already on the rebound, which would accelerate as urbanization, especially away from the Mediterranean soared in the 1100s/1200s. Still behind by 1300s, ahead by 1500s, cripplingly ahead by 1800s. Question of course is when this became uncontrollable. I think the simplest way might be to have a large, dominant realm. China seems more vibrant technologically in divided periods. India with decline of Mughals was doing nicely economically. A much more successfully centralizing Holy Roman Empire (which started more centralized by far than France) might be helpful as that will stifle the rise of the bourgeois in both the Low Countries and Northern Italy.
Quite agree about the late dates but big land grabs had been happening prior to the 1700: the Tsardom of Moscow already expanded all the way to to the Pacific by mid-XVII (port Okhotsk was established in 1650). By that time Tsardom was, of course, lagging behind the advanced western-European states but it was not isolated and borrowed extensively, especially in the military area.
All this is true but, IMO, there is a difference between having an edge and accomplishing a “dominance”. The edge was definitely there but it took a while for it to grow into something giving a clear overwhelming advantage allowing to dictate the terms and crush any resistance.
The point of the early European rebound is, indeed, often overlooked.
I wonder if it's possible for some other region of the world to dominate the planet like Europe did.