When was the first time a 'world war' was possible?

'world war' is in quotes here since a truly global world-war was only viable from the late modern age forwards. when was the earliest period a war could happen which involved the vast majority of the world, and the greatest powers? what PoD's could produce this as early as possible?
 
Surely the Seven Years War in the 18th century was a global affair? There were battles in Europe, North and South America, India and Africa.
 
Surely the Seven Years War in the 18th century was a global affair? There were battles in Europe, North and South America, India and Africa.

You can go back a lot earlier than that - the Second Anglo-Dutch War had fighting (or at least military operations) in Africa and North America as well as the main theatre in the narrow seas.
 
You can go back a lot earlier than that - the Second Anglo-Dutch War had fighting (or at least military operations) in Africa and North America as well as the main theatre in the narrow seas.

The Dutch revolt against Spain (and Elizabeth I's war at the same time) might be considered one as well considering that Dutch and English privateers fought the Spanish in the Caribbean and South America and the Dutch captured some islands.
 
Pretty much during the Age of Exploration. Anytime before that, the world was bisected between East and West. With the Islamic Caliphates, and earlier Persian empires holding the middle.
 
The Portuguese Ottoman war of the Early XVIth century was fought over most of the world with different front answering each other and worldwide strategic stakes
 
'world war' is in quotes here since a truly global world-war was only viable from the late modern age forwards. when was the earliest period a war could happen which involved the vast majority of the world, and the greatest powers? what PoD's could produce this as early as possible?
Sometimes in the forum the Trent affair is brought up regarding the possibility of a world wide war. A real world war would mean official alliances and vague modern communications Like the telegraph at least. The Crimean War set some of the trends If modern wars. Maybe 1880es-1890es could have seen a disatrous world war of unseen qualities.
 
I think a world war needs to be more than just a global war between 2 states.
My minimum points would be:
  • Several theatres of conflict across the world
  • At least one side an alliance of powers rather than a combatant with outside assistance
 
Fourth Crusade? Crisis of the Third century?


The latter saw fighting over a very wide geographical area--from Ctesiphon to Spain, even North Africa saw conflict. There was at least one big naval battle in the eastern Mediterranean. But the third century crisis--its military aspects--was a series of separate wars involving several enemies, not a single big one between two sides.
 
I think a world war needs to be more than just a global war between 2 states.
My minimum points would be:
  • Several theatres of conflict across the world
  • At least one side an alliance of powers rather than a combatant with outside assistance
That Portuguese Ottoman war qualifiés.
Portugal obviously part of the Christian front, allied with local powers in the Indian Ocean against a coalition led by Aceh and the Ottoman
 
The latter saw fighting over a very wide geographical area--from Ctesiphon to Spain, even North Africa saw conflict. There was at least one big naval battle in the eastern Mediterranean. But the third century crisis--its military aspects--was a series of separate wars involving several enemies, not a single big one between two sides.

By this metric, the Second Punic War would qualify as a world war, having distinct theatres in Spain, Sicily, Italy, Macedonia, and finally Africa
 
"World War" doesn't have an exact definition. The Eighty Years War was a war between two ountries with global reach, while WWII was effectively two wars going on at once. Also, "World War" often gets associated with the sort of apocalyptic total war that only really applies to WWII and maybe WWI.
 

Vuu

Banned
Legitimately, you need a system of getting information across the world fast in order to have a genuine world war that isn't just fought all over the world, but involves nations all over the world
 
You can go back a lot earlier than that - the Second Anglo-Dutch War had fighting (or at least military operations) in Africa and North America as well as the main theatre in the narrow seas.

Good point but a number of the participants was limited and this probably matters more than just a theater.

However, if we manage to combine War of the Spanish Succession with the Great Northern War (time line and political affiliations of the participants even if the purposes were not directly related), then perhaps we have the early version of it (even the Ottomans were involved).
 
Top