alternatehistory.com

Resolved:

From the period of about 1250 A.D. onward to the present, the odds of an enduring European-wide hegemony were never good.

Thesis 1.

However, in relative terms, finding a plausible PoD for an enduring European hegemony (defined as a hegemony lasting more than a century which dominates Europe to the degree the Ottomans dominated the Middle East and China dominated East Asia respectively) is easier within the earlier parts of the timeframe than in the later parts.

The plausibility of a Europe-wide hegemony begins to drop precipitously with the Reformation and Spanish Conquest of Mexico in the early 1500s. The decline of the odds of hegemony continues even further after the hundred years war (ending 1648), and drops more after the 7 years war and the beginnings of the industrial revolution in the 1750-1800 era. Hegemony is less plasuible and balance of power politics are much more firmly entrenched in all subsequent periods.

What this means is that the relatively famous and recent would-be hegemons like the Soviet Union, Nazi and Wilhelmine Germany, the Russian Empire and Napoleonic Empire had fairly poor odds of enduring continental dominance.

Earlier hegemonies based around royal France, the Habsburgs, Burgundians or HRE writ large are more plausible than later attempts

Thesis 2 -

Of the possible contenders, royal France is the most plausible hegemon. It's central position and unity, population and hybrid maritime and land capabilities make scenarios where it comes to dominate Europe between about with PoDs between 1300 through 1700 more plausible than Habsburg or Burgundian hegemonies. France stood a better chance than any other alternative European power center of replacing the European balance of power system with a unipolar system.


Thoughts? Counterarguments?
Top