Post 1700, What countries could become as wealthy/industrialized as Germany by the 21st century?

Exactly as it says on the tin. What countries have the resources and ,with an alternate history, the education/skills to become as wealthy and industrialized as Germany? Let the POD be 1700. Britain, France, and USA break offs don't count, but otherwise go wild.

Bonus points if you manage to get a country on Germany's level with an earlier POD, and by Germany's level, I mean by however industrialized and wealthy Germany was at that moment.

As a bonus, with the same rules, what countries could become as wealthy and industrialized as...
  1. Italy
  2. Britain
  3. France
By the 21st century?
 
Last edited:
Not trying to be a dick, but can you offer some measurabilities for industrialization? I'm interested in what you're asking here, but it's a bit hard to pin down w/o knowing how to really compare. Like GDPish?
 
Last edited:
Not trying to be a dick, but can you offer some measurabilities for industrialization? I'm interested in what you're asking here, but it's a bit hard to pin down w/o knowing how to really compare. Like GDPish?
Sure like GDP, in that the country is the fourth richest country in the world. When I say industrialized, I mean that they have the same ability to build as much stuff as Germany. Like to provide an example, the country should be able to build up a military around Germany's level in the first world war. They should be great power like Germany was in that time. They are able to be at the forefront of science and technology like Germany was. With lots of scientists working on advanced technology, like the German rocket scientists.
 
Exactly as it says on the tin. What countries have the resources and ,with an alternate history, the education/skills to become as wealthy and industrialized as Germany? Let the POD be 1700. Britain, France, and USA break offs don't count, but otherwise go wild.

Bonus points if you manage to get a country on Germany's level with an earlier POD, and by Germany's level, I mean by however industrialized and wealthy Germany was at that moment.

Nations I could imagine being able to be seen as able to manage to be on parr with Germany with a POD of 1700, are:
- Austria-Hungarian Empire.
- Kingdom of Portugal and the Algarves
 
Nations I could imagine being able to be seen as able to manage to be on parr with Germany with a POD of 1700, are:
- Austria-Hungarian Empire.
- Kingdom of Portugal and the Algarves

These were exactly the first 2 I thought of. I'll add Japan and Sweden.
 
I think the most obvious candidates would be countries that got knocked down a tier by sheer misfortune in OTL. For example Czechslovakia was one of the leading industrial powers before it got screwed over by the German and Soviet conquests.
 
Last edited:
These were exactly the first 2 I thought of. I'll add Japan and Sweden.

Sweden/Denmark-Norway are always easy to raise up given the best opportunities, although sometimes it seems that they need a clean sheet of good luck, which as we know doesn't always happen.

I though of Japan, but it is always a dance with lady luck when it comes to Japan, if they were able to have an Emperor, who could gain European support, Japan could go far, but there is always a chance that the European support will turn around and screw the poor people over, for example:
- Britain and China
- France and Vietnam
- Spain and the Philippians

With Portugal, I was imagining giving them more of Mexico as well as Brazil during the Treaty of Tordesillas, while Spain is left with the rest of North America. Similar to what happened to England, when they thought they could match Spain's Aztec gold by landing in Virginia. The Portuguese could push for the meridian 370 leagues being placed west of the Canary Islands rather then the Cape Verde islands.
 
Italy level:

Egypt - Keep the Burji Mamluks in power by butterflying the Portuguese incursions in the Red Sea and keeping the Burji-Ottoman alliance. The Burji while somewhat ineffective, were a net positive for population growth. Having a large population and then later with certain cotton improvements, makes leaps into the cotton trade. Unlikely however. But still, GDP wise, I can see Burji bringing an Egypt with Syria & Palestine + Hijaz to being roughly Italian level.

Iran
Poland
Lithuania
Vietnam
Etc

French level:

Japan
Qing China
Spain
Portugal
Brazil
Mexico
Etc

Germany/British

Portugal (with Brazil)
Spain (with a myriad of colonies)
Russia
Japan
Mughals ( pure GDP not industrial)
Qing/Ming (same^)
 
By the 21st Century? With four centuries to play with you have a lot of time. You also have the fact that modern 21st C economies are mostly service-based, and success here can be created anywhere with the right policy mix, if you look at places like Dubai, Hong Kong and Singapore. You're not limited to being by natural resources. That's if we're talking about being "wealthy".

If you're also talking about building up a large military, then you need not just wealth but also scale, so places like Sweden, New Zealand etc would be excluded.
 

Deleted member 67076

Iran with Iraq, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Baluchistan, and Afghanistan could do this with little difficulty.

Similarly, a Mexico that's more stable, developed and focused on ESI could do this as well even if it only has its post 1848 borders. (Butterfly the Mexican Revolution or at least anything after 1912, given that it killed 10% of the Mexican population and prompted a decade of negative growth).
 
How do you get Portugal/Brazil to German or even close levels considering the extremely poor levels of literacy there, the backwardness, and then the horrible infrastructure in Brazil itself? It had the same issues as Spain.

And didn't Austria-Hungary have pretty poor conditions outside of the Austrian core of the empire? You'd have to have some major changes in the 18th century to fix these problems.

Iran with Iraq, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Baluchistan, and Afghanistan could do this with little difficulty.

Depends how well it modernises. Probably can be at least Italy tier, even if large parts of the region will suffer from backwardness for a long time. Still better than either OTL Persia or their rivals the Ottoman Empire for that matter.
 
How do you get Portugal/Brazil to German or even close levels considering the extremely poor levels of literacy there, the backwardness, and then the horrible infrastructure in Brazil itself? It had the same issues as Spain.
Dude, I gave POD of 1700. This is ALTERNATE history. Brazil isn't even independent ,yet. A lot could change, like Portugal making it's administration better , so it could form a state or some other change, that changes Brazil for the better. I also said that the challenge could be met by the 21st century, so that's three hundred years in which Portugal/Brazil's path can change. Not even America rising to be the hyperpower is guaranteed. What more of an earlier POD would you think would be needed, Portugal/ Brazil being Germanic!!!! :p...:mad:
 
Dude, I gave POD of 1700. This is ALTERNATE history. Brazil isn't even independent ,yet. A lot could change, like Portugal making it's administration better , so it could form a state or some other change, that changes Brazil for the better. I also said that the challenge could be met by the 21st century, so that's three hundred years in which Portugal/Brazil's path can change. Not even America rising to be the hyperpower is guaranteed. What more of an earlier POD would you think would be needed, Portugal/ Brazil being Germanic!!!! :p...:mad:
Hell, even Germany isn't guaranteed to form, with a POD of 1700.
 

Deleted member 67076

How do you get Portugal/Brazil to German or even close levels considering the extremely poor levels of literacy there, the backwardness, and then the horrible infrastructure in Brazil itself? It had the same issues as Spain.
Brazil theoretically can get to industrialize much faster and better than it did historically if its constituent regions were linked up earlier than they were historically in order to magnify economic growth. Before the 1880s, Brazil might as well been 3 countries, economically speaking. You had the south being their major industrial sector (granted limited in scope given the low population and relatively low railroad milage compared to the US or Argentina), the north being nothing but major plantations and mines, and the vast hinterland of the state dominated primarily be subsistence agriculture and artisanal production which doesn't bring in any money at all. These places weren't really dependent on each other for much and the lack of connection really hurt the potential of Brazil's ISI style industrial policy during the period.

If you were to link the country up much earlier, than you can get the south more of the workers it needs and a bigger market (as better transportation will lower the cost of goods thus making the Brazilian domestic market more competitive) and in turn, improve the north as the wages earned by northerners will go to their families up north and west, who will in turn invest in their homes. Greater production and wealth will mean higher wages after a while, which improves rates of immigration, that cause the feedback loop of industrialization. Basically, what happened between the 1930s-50s, but instead in the ~1850s-1900s.

How do you kick off the rush for more railroads, better roads and better ports?

That I have no idea. Nor do I know if that could lead it to being Germany tier, but can certainly get it better than today as industrial development were to be in a better place.

Depends how well it modernises. Probably can be at least Italy tier, even if large parts of the region will suffer from backwardness for a long time. Still better than either OTL Persia or their rivals the Ottoman Empire for that matter.
Persia in the 1700s is in a good spot for better developing due to the rise of the Afsharids forming a modern army in Iran, and Nader Shah's military genius allowing him to win over much needed territories. If he doesn't go insane, doesn't murder his son and continues his string of victories (this is doable given he started to lose it after some disease gotten apparently by a mosquito bite; just need to butterfly away his disease) than Iran is in a much better, much more stable position, critically with regards to its tax base and economy.

Mainly this is due to a much larger population, and because of a dynasty that isn't formed by and beholden to nomadic tribal interests. In around 1700 the Safavid realm had 7 million people, more or less. Taking Iraq from the Ottomans brings with it another million, as does taking the Central Asian states. The parts of Afghanistan and Baluchistan not under Safavid control (east of Herat more or less) give another 2-3 million, which grants you a state that with around 11-12 million people by his death. Almost a 50% increase. Additionally, the lack of control by a nomadic dynasty means the state no longer has to care about its nomadic population as much and won't give off vast tracks of perfectly good agricultural land to as pasture for tribes. Nor will nomads be needed by the army; Iran's got a mass gunpowder army to enforce its will. Instead, a greater emphasis in settlement and investment in agriculture will follow.

The impact of this means that Persia will enter a population boom as agricultural production goes through the roof, particularly in Mesopotamia where Iraq once more returns to former glory (thanks to not being an Ottoman frontier march and instead a key strategic region). Settlement and stability will create an economic boom, and that in turn improves urbanization and of course, increase population. Probably not 20 million by 1800, but pretty close. A vast labor force and a realm that includes the needed coal and mineral reserves to start industrialization in the coming decades.

Alternatively, you can somehow get the Safavids to bounce back. But the Afsharid route is easier I think.
 
Piedmont-Sardinia
Lombardy-Venetia

Without the rest of Italy, these countries/proto-countries could have developed a similar level within themselves
 
Brazil theoretically can get to industrialize much faster and better than it did historically if its constituent regions were linked up earlier than they were historically in order to magnify economic growth. Before the 1880s, Brazil might as well been 3 countries, economically speaking. You had the south being their major industrial sector (granted limited in scope given the low population and relatively low railroad milage compared to the US or Argentina), the north being nothing but major plantations and mines, and the vast hinterland of the state dominated primarily be subsistence agriculture and artisanal production which doesn't bring in any money at all. These places weren't really dependent on each other for much and the lack of connection really hurt the potential of Brazil's ISI style industrial policy during the period.

If you were to link the country up much earlier, than you can get the south more of the workers it needs and a bigger market (as better transportation will lower the cost of goods thus making the Brazilian domestic market more competitive) and in turn, improve the north as the wages earned by northerners will go to their families up north and west, who will in turn invest in their homes. Greater production and wealth will mean higher wages after a while, which improves rates of immigration, that cause the feedback loop of industrialization. Basically, what happened between the 1930s-50s, but instead in the ~1850s-1900s.

How do you kick off the rush for more railroads, better roads and better ports?

That I have no idea. Nor do I know if that could lead it to being Germany tier, but can certainly get it better than today as industrial development were to be in a better place.


Persia in the 1700s is in a good spot for better developing due to the rise of the Afsharids forming a modern army in Iran, and Nader Shah's military genius allowing him to win over much needed territories. If he doesn't go insane, doesn't murder his son and continues his string of victories (this is doable given he started to lose it after some disease gotten apparently by a mosquito bite; just need to butterfly away his disease) than Iran is in a much better, much more stable position, critically with regards to its tax base and economy.

Mainly this is due to a much larger population, and because of a dynasty that isn't formed by and beholden to nomadic tribal interests. In around 1700 the Safavid realm had 7 million people, more or less. Taking Iraq from the Ottomans brings with it another million, as does taking the Central Asian states. The parts of Afghanistan and Baluchistan not under Safavid control (east of Herat more or less) give another 2-3 million, which grants you a state that with around 11-12 million people by his death. Almost a 50% increase. Additionally, the lack of control by a nomadic dynasty means the state no longer has to care about its nomadic population as much and won't give off vast tracks of perfectly good agricultural land to as pasture for tribes. Nor will nomads be needed by the army; Iran's got a mass gunpowder army to enforce its will. Instead, a greater emphasis in settlement and investment in agriculture will follow.

The impact of this means that Persia will enter a population boom as agricultural production goes through the roof, particularly in Mesopotamia where Iraq once more returns to former glory (thanks to not being an Ottoman frontier march and instead a key strategic region). Settlement and stability will create an economic boom, and that in turn improves urbanization and of course, increase population. Probably not 20 million by 1800, but pretty close. A vast labor force and a realm that includes the needed coal and mineral reserves to start industrialization in the coming decades.

Alternatively, you can somehow get the Safavids to bounce back. But the Afsharid route is easier I think.

I would disagree on the Iran point. I find the Safavids to be the ones with the proven credentials in terms of rule and sustainable success.

Do not easily forget that it was the Safavid which created the modern state of Iran and solidified it as opposed to being ruled by Turkish tribes such as the Aq Qoyunlyu or the Qara Qoyunlyu. Without the Safavid, Iran would not exist, it wove near the entirety of Iran together. Keeping the strong in my opinion has more merit than making the Afsharids, aka the dynasty of shirt unsustainable conquest the powerhouse of the world. For one, I count having Afghanistan to be a net negative. Iran and Iraq, parts of west Afghanistan, Khursan and western Baluchistan is all that's needed.
 
Top