Keeping Mediterranean dominance?

What, in your view, is the latest it's possible to keep the most powerful states of the Western world Mediterranean based, rather than Northern European based? Or is it impossible to do this once the inevitable discovery of the Americas takes place?
 
I don't want to say its impossible, but it seems improbable that the states with access to the New World will remain behind those without it, particularly as the former are also able to tap the wealth of the East.
 
If North Africa remained part of Christendom, or if Islam took all of Southern Europe, then maybe. Like they say, in times of peace, rivers unite states, in times of war, rivers divide them. This applies to the Mediterranean as well. Either way, you need a PoD around the rise of Islam. By the year 1000, the Mediterranean is a virtual lake, wholly enclosed by one civilisation or another.

But the Northern European Plain is fertile when it is worked well, and potatoes just multiply that. So after the New World, there may be no avoiding the center of power moving north in Europe. I understand that Spain and France were powerful in their days, and certainly Mediterranean, but by the time we get to that stage the horse has already bolted, as I said earlier.

If the Mediterranean states are strong, they could keep Central Europe from organising effectively for centuries, perhaps in a tacit alliance with a Scandinavian state. Competition between eastern and western Mediterranean powers would allow the one to try and exploit the spice trade via the Silk Road and the Indian Ocean, while the other tries to find an alternate route, as in OTL. Unlike in OTL, this would not be the bitter struggle between rival civilisations, because they would be held together just as Catholicism or the Caliph was able to hold OTL civilisations together. In this model, the power is centered around Gibraltar, Constantinople and the Suez, as the choke points on trade, while Italy still functions as the pivot.

So powerful states around Spain, Italy, (and southern France), Anatolia/Balkans, and Egypt. Weak states on the Northern European Plain, kept unstable by hordes from the east, and the predations of the powers to the north and south. While around Scandinavia, the Baltic and possibly in Britain, we have the rival civilisation. Whichever civilisation controls the Mediterranean, these are something they just don't get along with. If it's Islam, Scandinavia is still Christian. If it's Christianity, Scandinavia is either heretical or pagan.

After we get the New World, rivalry between the eastern and western Mediterranean might seem to be lopsided, but it would remain more even than OTL. There would be greater transmission of ideas than in OTL, for one thing. The western power dominates in the New World, while the eastern power probably has a grip on trade to the east. I think we'd still see some overlap, they can both still get around Africa. South Africa is going to be interesting here, since they both want it badly. Maybe the Pope/Caliph makes a Tordesillas style agreement on how they can divvy it up. The Scandinavian power will dominate in the northern parts of North America, pretty much by default.


Well, that was a lot. I have been mulling over a map or timeline about this lately, though.
 
Nixing the invention of the compass would do it. But I don't know how long one could plausibly put that off. If you believe the Portolan Charts are the work of the Romans, Greeks, or Phoenecians (like I do), then preventing their rediscovery by Europeans may delay the discovery a good century or so.
 
Well Spain was the main power in Europe until around 1670-1700 when France which was only succeeded by Britain during the Seven Years War. So in one sense you can say if it took until 1760's in OTL its easy to delay.
But for both of them despite having a Mediterranean shoreline the discovery of the Americas had caused them to cease being Mediterranean powers and they had reorientated towards the Atlantic, this was encapsulated in Spain by the decline of Valencia and rise of Cadiz.
To have the Mediterranean remain the centre of the world you need to butterfly away the European conquest of the Americas. They are simply so rich that any power bar Italy or the Ottomans that can gain sufficient foothold and become the greatest power will cease to be Mediterranean and will become Atlantic focused.
 
You'll need to keep the route to the East open. The implicit power of the Mediterranean basin was its geographic position at the center of an East-West trade. If Europe remains in contact and regular trade with Asia, the Mediterranean can only benefit.

Specifically a Mediterranean - Red Sea - Indian Ocean route would be the most viable. Perhaps the reconstructed Tāriqu Canal stays open, or is once again cleared of silt. Even after the discovery of the Americas trade with Asia would still be more profitable than sending expeditions and colonists across the Atlantic.
 
Easy. Keep Spain in possession of Naples and Sicily - while Castile was the one that took the New World, Aragon focused on the Mediterranean.
 
The Atlantic powers can do both, though. That's going to be rather handy.

France and Spain certainly can, but if your argument is that England/Britain, or a German power, could do the same then logically a Mediterranean power could also send ships past the Gates of Hercules and across the Atlantic to the Americas.

Its not that Mediterranean-based polities had an exclusive purview in East-West trade, but they would have an advantageous position that favors their strengths there.
 
Earlier Suez Canal. Then if one of the Mediterranean powers seizes Suez or most of Egypt, there's little reason to go across the Atlantic or around the Cape of Good Hope, since you can simply cut through the Levantine Mediterranean.
 
France and Spain certainly can, but if your argument is that England/Britain, or a German power, could do the same then logically a Mediterranean power could also send ships past the Gates of Hercules and across the Atlantic to the Americas.

Its not that Mediterranean-based polities had an exclusive purview in East-West trade, but they would have an advantageous position that favors their strengths there.

England/Britain or a German power can sail around Africa and get to the (East) Indies that way. They don't need to develop a different type of ship.

* Byzantines+Ottomans - they share the same geographical position and some other things that don't change over time so when referring to "a power in that part of the world", its my shorthand for "whichever one happens to be around at the time".

Thespitron 6000: https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=178725
 
England/Britain or a German power can sail around Africa and get to the (East) Indies that way. They don't need to develop a different type of ship.

* Byzantines+Ottomans - they share the same geographical position so when referring to "a power in that part of the world", its my shorthand for "whichever one happens to be around at the time".

The African Loop is the (very) long way. A Mediterranean power, especially one on the Asian shore, could trade more in terms of volume and revenue generated, more rapidly, then the Northern Europeans could ship around Africa if the East-West trade had remained open and free (as per my original comment).

A reconstructed Tāriqu Canal or an 'earlier Suez' means Mediterranean powers based in Italy, the Balkans, North Africa, France, or Spain could also out-compete the (Northern) Europeans in terms of Asian trade.
 
The African Loop is the (very) long way. A Mediterranean power, especially one on the Asian shore, could trade more in terms of volume and revenue generated, more rapidly, then the Northern Europeans could ship around Africa if the East-West trade had remained open and free (as per my original comment).

A reconstructed Tāriqu Canal or an 'earlier Suez' means Mediterranean powers based in Italy, the Balkans, North Africa, France, or Spain could also out-compete the (Northern) Europeans in terms of Asian trade.

If it's built early enough then does Portugal declines earlier than OTL?
 
The African Loop is the (very) long way. A Mediterranean power, especially one on the Asian shore, could trade more in terms of volume and revenue generated, more rapidly, then the Northern Europeans could ship around Africa if the East-West trade had remained open and free (as per my original comment).

Its the "very long way", but its also easier in some senses. Even if the East-West trade is open, Atlantic powers can go to India or Mexico without any new inventions.

A reconstructed Tāriqu Canal or an 'earlier Suez' means Mediterranean powers based in Italy, the Balkans, North Africa, France, or Spain could also out-compete the (Northern) Europeans in terms of Asian trade.

Certainly possible, yes.
 
Top