Poll: Which civilization other than Europe was most likely to conquer the world?

Which civilization was most likely to conquer the world?

  • China (East Asia)

    Votes: 15 30.6%
  • India (South Asia)

    Votes: 4 8.2%
  • Islam

    Votes: 18 36.7%
  • Mesoamerica

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Only Europe could have done it

    Votes: 12 24.5%
  • Other

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    49
I doubt that any other civilisation would conquer the world as Europe. Others hadn't any reason for this.

China had already enough resources so it hasn't any needing expand its influence outside of East Asia. And colonisation of America, Africa and Europe would be logistically too difficult and expensive.

India had that problem that it rarely had strong enough empire which could do that. And there is Hindu taboo about sea travelling.

Muslims would have good changes conquer world with good POD. But even then it would be quiet difficult.

Mesoamerican civilisation was too weak colonising anything beyond Caribbean. And Aztecs were only who controlled more than some cities.

Incas had already enough doing with controlling their territories. And had them even good ships for colonising Pacific Islands?

Japan was too isolationist and it didn't care about colonisation. And it had anyway same troubles than CHina.

South East Asia: Probably only Srivijaya had changes colonising Pacific, parts of India and East Africa.

Polynesians were good sea travellers but they probably can colonising only Pacific area.

Some Western African empires could colonise South America.
 
Last edited:
I would think that Europe has a unique set of characteristics that gave it a reason and the means to launch onto the world.

Not that it's inevitable, just that if somebody is going to do it, it's probably them.

The Indian Ocean civilisations lack an actual reason to go around, they have everything they want/need through trade.
The African civilisations just seem to hit a treshold in term of tech and population
The American civilisation, although strong contenders, lack iron and some tech that could be useful (the whole iron casting for stronger weapons)

However, my bet for a non-European would be the Ottomans, if they count as non-Europeans. They had their own age of exploration, were very rich and started creating a web of alliances in the Indian Ocean in the XVIth century. If they had been more lucky against the Portuguese they could have become the hegemon
 
I doubt that any other civilisation would conquer the world as Europe. Others hadn't any reason for this.

China had already enough resources so it hasn't any needing expand its influence outside of East Asia. And colonisation of America, Africa and Europe would be logistically too difficult and expensive.

India had that problem that it rarely had strong enough empire which could do that. And there is Hindu taboo about sea travelling.

Muslims would have good changes conquer world with good POD. But even then it would be quiet difficult.

Mesoamerican civilisation was too weak colonising anything beyond Caribbean. And Aztecs were only who controlled more than some cities.

Incas had already enough doing with controlling their territories. And had them even good ships for colonising Pacific Islands?

Japan was too isolationist and it didn't care about colonisation. And it had anyway same troubles than CHina.

South East Asia: Probably only Srivijaya had changes colonising Pacific, parts of India and East Africa.

Polynesians were good sea travellers but they probably can colonising only Pacific area.

Some Western African empires could colonise South America.

About Western Africa was that it already had a lot of its own resources and a good connection to Muslim merchants. Europe had lost this with the Fall of Constantinople and Muslim rulers increased taxes which made trading for Asian and African products more and more expensive. The Portuguese tried to find a way to bypass all this tax and buy directly, by going around Africa. The Spanish tried to copy the Portuguese to go to East Asia, the centre of world trade, but ended up in the New World. The New World, from then, was the vicinity of Europe, despite the Natives who mostly died of disease. Europe did this, because the conditions forced them to do this. If they hadn't, I really doubt anyone else would be forced to do that.
 
No one else had the geographic proximity to the Americas AND advanced ships AND most importantly the incentive to fund risky trade expeditions. The rest of the Old World had good trade networks and better domestic industry.

I think the next likely would be the Dar al- Islam. They already controlled Sahelian and Indian Ocean trade, and had countries close to the Americas. The ship deficit and total lack of incentive for a land focused Morocco are problems though...
 
A strong Western Mediterranean Islamic state (owning from Tangiers to Tunis at the very least, and probably the trade routes to Mali, and bits of Andalusia) might be able to pull it off, if it have a sufficiently strong alliance and support from the Ottomans (Or successful Mamluks), so they have the option of resupplying out of the Red Sea ... but i guess then the question is, how much not-european would the be considered? and how much disunited Iberia would be needed (at the very least I'd say that Leon, Castile and Aragon should be kept apart from each other, and Portugal should probably also splinter off the northernmost parts to Galicia) ...
 
Top