DBWI: England goes Protestant

Protestant England equals catholic ireland instead of Puritan Ireland. Without the rise of Irish Capitalism, do we ever have an industrial revolution?

Yes; we were already seeing proto-industrialism kicking off in the Netherlands, Denmark, and Sweden from the Protestant diaspora combining cheap timber, peat, and copper reserves and the woolens industry with their own mercantile connections, know-how, and efficient guild and corperate organization. Now, it could have very well faltered for a time in the gap between the Dutch running out their peat bogs and the rise of the efficient steam engine, but the ideas were still there and would have emerged in the Balkans and Northern Germany anyways.

What does this mean for Empire? After all it was the who Pope decreed that the Americas would only be split between Iberia, France and England. Maybe a protestant England breaks the mould and other Lutheran states could have empires. Who knows maybe the triple alliance between France, Spain and England wouldn't dominate the world.

OOC: This runs directly counter to my earlier post, which talked about the Catholic empires being mainly continental while the non-Catholics became sea/merchantile empires.
 
Protestant England equals catholic ireland instead of Puritan Ireland. Without the rise of Irish Capitalism, do we ever have an industrial revolution?

I think you're getting your terms a bit misplaced. Puritans are the ultra-Catholic English religious movement that arose in the 20th century due to the rise of Communism on the continent. There was an Irish religious movement which arose around the same time, known as Íomhá - which are often mistakenly called Puritans in the English language, because Íomhá can be translated as 'Purity'. However, the two movements are not related; Íomhá related to a desire to return to some of the penitent and devotional practices which were seen as having been present in the 6th century Irish Church, especially a revival of hermit monk traditions, which had been accepted but not emphasized by the Celtic Church during the 17th through 19th centuries.
 
Yes; we were already seeing proto-industrialism kicking off in the Netherlands, Denmark, and Sweden from the Protestant diaspora combining cheap timber, peat, and copper reserves and the woolens industry with their own mercantile connections, know-how, and efficient guild and corperate organization. Now, it could have very well faltered for a time in the gap between the Dutch running out their peat bogs and the rise of the efficient steam engine, but the ideas were still there and would have emerged in the Balkans and Northern Germany anyways.



OOC: This runs directly counter to my earlier post, which talked about the Catholic empires being mainly continental while the non-Catholics became sea/merchantile empires.
OOC first: I see nothing in the POD to block the Spanish empire, though, since that predates protestantism. Your earlier post and that historical fact can be combined by giving the Spanish Empire its historical "dead man walking" kind of operation where its trade and wealth are handled by others (i.e. the Dutch and Scandies). Would you agree that still fits?

IC:
Northern Germany, sure, but the Balkans were johnny-come-lately to industrialism in comparison. The Ottomans' tolerance helped to build the basic financial institutions, sure, but the Balkan was still a part of a vast empire ruled by power. They were an early follower, but by that time the English and French were also beginning to catch up (just because that was on the back of Dutch bankers funding foreign enterprises while the Balkan was mostly domestic capital... They could've funded coal mines just fine without industrialisation).
 
OOC first: I see nothing in the POD to block the Spanish empire, though, since that predates protestantism. Your earlier post and that historical fact can be combined by giving the Spanish Empire its historical "dead man walking" kind of operation where its trade and wealth are handled by others (i.e. the Dutch and Scandies). Would you agree that still fits?

IC:
Northern Germany, sure, but the Balkans were johnny-come-lately to industrialism in comparison. The Ottomans' tolerance helped to build the basic financial institutions, sure, but the Balkan was still a part of a vast empire ruled by power. They were an early follower, but by that time the English and French were also beginning to catch up (just because that was on the back of Dutch bankers funding foreign enterprises while the Balkan was mostly domestic capital... They could've funded coal mines just fine without industrialisation).

(OOC: Of course. England and France could also have some overseas colonies, being only PRIMARILY Continental. It was the extremely limiting statement that they were essentially dominating the world and had monopolized the Americas that caused me some concern.)

Agreed; though I mentioned them specifically because we were talking in the context of Irish industrialization and the rise of the "2nd" era of the merchantile economy, following the decline of the guild system with peat, timber, and windmills as the primary power source as Europe's marshes and the Baltic started tapping out the easist access supplies of the former two and the later proved to be too weak to power the next generation of machinary. That was when the Ottomans really stepped up as an basic manufacturing/market goods power along their Celtics counterparts, while the Dutch moved deeper into banking and heavy industry like shipbuilding and sucking in/refining colonial goods. There's a reason Geoctroyeerde Westindische Compagnie's still sticking around as one of the world's finest fur fashion companies even if they've lost most of their other components: they've had CENTURIES of experance, connections, and subsidaries around the world from the Dutch pelt trade out of Nieuw Sallan (OTL Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island), and so many of your home decor brands have Turkish names even if they're based in counteries like Mysore and Mughalstan.
 
Top